I know I'm looping back a bit but it's on topic so forgive me, not derailing as such it's just taken me a while (damn children needing fed!) to finish looking at it!
I'm just skimming the Craig Murray judgement. I've also looked at archived versions as a) his blog is down and b) he probably edited stuff.
The "yes minister" fan fiction I read for the first time a few days ago and I think it does sail too close to the wind on at least one of them if not two. I probably wouldn't have been entirely sure who he was referring to at the time (from what I recall of what was going on then) but I think anyone who follows Scottish politics would have been able to get an identity from it later on. Which was essentially his intention (which he admits)
I'm also looking at some of the other articles and at least some of them do enable identification - I won't say which or what specifically but his articles plus google did give me names. It actually gave me some I did not know, as well as some I did.
So, I think he is guilty; I think the verdict is correct.
The separate question - why was he prosecuted but others not - remains and there may be a political element. But, that said, when I have taken the time to read the judgement and the articles in question he has repeatedly enabled identification of several women. So I have changed my view in that I think the prosecution was correct.
Apologies for going slightly off the current line of chat, which I will now catch up on!