Salmond disgrace

[Fulmar]

Ok, I'll take a look.

[aqua]

I have been perusing the identity of the ‘celebrity’ ever since he first appeared in court. Will we ever know who he is? Are we allowed to speculate in public?

I have since discovered that the celebrity didn’t make a personal appearance in court. Videoed evidence was shown in court instead.

[aqua]

That video on the train, filmed by a passenger, from AS's own QC is absolutely shocking and disgraceful in what it reveals. I truly am very shocked and I am glad that the women have spoken out today.

Me too.

Jackson’s behaviour on the train was unacceptable, and his comments on Salmond are telling.

Meanwhile, Craig Murray claims the whole anti-Salmond case was a conspiracy, supported at the highest levels of the Scottish government and by MI5!

Who filmed Jackson on the train? How did they do it without being spotted? Did they use a concealed camera? Were they following or even ‘stalking’ him, as some have claimed?

[The Horseman]

I never saw that video, but in the end....
Twelve Good Men and True found him not guilty! Phrase coined from the 1700’s!
Pls excuse the number and I think two thirds were women!

[aqua]

You should watch the video:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/salmond-s-not-a-sex-pest-says-his-lawyer-gordon-jackson-tsfb7j0gv

I accept that AS was found not guilty of attempted rape and other crimes by a jury. That doesn’t imply his behaviour was acceptable. We all know workplace bullies and ‘tactile’ creeps who go a touch too far without attracting criminal charges.

[The Horseman]

I agree, but he was discharged.....found Not Guilty.
Then find an appropriate action to take against him.
And......did he do what you are suggesting.......or was he ‘stitched up’?
Time will tell.
Yes, people in power can be Objectionable! Many are......

And I just read that they may be taking another ‘run’ at him!

[Corky Smeek]

You should watch the video:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/salmond-s-not-a-sex-pest-says-his-lawyer-gordon-jackson-tsfb7j0gv

I accept that AS was found not guilty of attempted rape and other crimes by a jury. That doesn’t imply his behaviour was acceptable. We all know workplace bullies and ‘tactile’ creeps who go a touch too far without attracting criminal charges.

Is that not an argument for anonymity for all in such cases? Here we are, a week after he has been cleared of all charges, and yet still the press and others are continuing with the insinuations. The fact remains, AS was cleared. Despite this his reputation has been ruined and his name continues to be dragged through the mud.

The people charged with examining the evidence and making the decisions as to innocence or guilt did so honestly and faithfully, I am sure. These continued attempts at character assassination actually impugn the integrity of both judge and jury. Surely it is wrong to suggest any impropriety on the part of either/both, but that is what these insinuations imply.

The defendant's reputation will never recover from this despite the verdict. Yet the people whom the jury did not believe get to walk away and resume their lives. Is it not time that we protected the identities of all concerned until innocence or guilt is established?

[Gronnuck]

The press, the civil servants, the politicians who continue to defame Alec Salmond are doing a sterling job of undermining the Scottish Judicial system, the Jurors and all women. The women who made these allegations do a great disservice to the women who have a genuine case in need of prosecution.
Alec Salmond might be a bit of a creep but he’s been proven to be an innocent creep.

[Fulmar]

As a woman, I can't imagine how it must feel to be described in public as 'flaky' and that all the defence counsel needed to do was to put a 'smell' on her.

[Oddquine]

As a woman, I can't imagine how it must feel to be described in public as 'flaky' and that all the defence counsel needed to do was to put a 'smell' on her.

As a woman, I wouldn't have had the dimwittery to put myself in the position where I could be called "flaky" or had Counsel able to put a "smell" on me. Anyway, it isn't as if the whole world knows the identity of who was being talked about.....I certainly don't know who she is. However, even if we did know her identity, any reaction to her would be nothing compared to the effect on a person in public life who was deemed innocent but is still being traduced all over the place because she won't accept the verdict. Where is the equality in that state of affairs?

[Fulmar]

From the Guardian, admittedly England and Wales but doubt it is much different in Scotland:
The figures show women are five times more likely than men to have experienced some type of sexual assault, including unwanted touching or indecent exposure, in the previous 12 months.

England and Wales police record highest number of violent sexual crimes in EU




Read more



The Office for National Statistics said the scale of sexual assaults against women, as measured by the crime survey, had changed little since 2005. More than 80% of victims did not report their experiences to police, the ONS said.

The vast majority of these involved unwanted touching or indecent exposure rather than rape or assault by penetration.
The figures, which come after a string of allegations against Harvey Weinstein and others, show women are overwhelmingly the victims of sexual assault.
Less than 4% of men have experienced sexual assault in their adult lives, meaning women are five times more likely to have experienced it.

[aqua]

Is that not an argument for anonymity for all in such cases? Here we are, a week after he has been cleared of all charges, and yet still the press and others are continuing with the insinuations. The fact remains, AS was cleared. Despite this his reputation has been ruined and his name continues to be dragged through the mud.

The people charged with examining the evidence and making the decisions as to innocence or guilt did so honestly and faithfully, I am sure. These continued attempts at character assassination actually impugn the integrity of both judge and jury. Surely it is wrong to suggest any impropriety on the part of either/both, but that is what these insinuations imply.

The defendant's reputation will never recover from this despite the verdict. Yet the people whom the jury did not believe get to walk away and resume their lives. Is it not time that we protected the identities of all concerned until innocence or guilt is established?

I have often thought courts should impose anonymity for those accused of sexual crimes on the basis that they’re deemed to be innocent unless they are (eventually) proved guilty (or not). On the other hand, it could be argued that there’s a big difference between the accused and the accuser. I don’t have a firm opinion at present, I’m open to persuasion in either direction.

In legal terms, AS has been found innocent of all charges, and we must accept that decision, although I read somewhere that the jury wasn’t unanimous in any of its decisions. I speculate some jurors thought he was guilty, although it’s conceivable (but unlikely?) that all the dissenters went for ‘not proven’.

Given all we’ve heard about his behaviour, I certainly wouldn’t work for AS!

[aqua]

As a woman, I can't imagine how it must feel to be described in public as 'flaky' and that all the defence counsel needed to do was to put a 'smell' on her.

Me too.

Despite being found innocent, AS has had a ‘smell’ put on him. Some would deem it a stink, some can’t smell it at all, but it’s there, rightly or wrongly.

[aqua]

From the Guardian, admittedly England and Wales but doubt it is much different in Scotland:
The figures show women are five times more likely than men to have experienced some type of sexual assault, including unwanted touching or indecent exposure, in the previous 12 months.

England and Wales police record highest number of violent sexual crimes in EU

The Office for National Statistics said the scale of sexual assaults against women, as measured by the crime survey, had changed little since 2005. More than 80% of victims did not report their experiences to police, the ONS said.

The vast majority of these involved unwanted touching or indecent exposure rather than rape or assault by penetration.
The figures, which come after a string of allegations against Harvey Weinstein and others, show women are overwhelmingly the victims of sexual assault.
Less than 4% of men have experienced sexual assault in their adult lives, meaning women are five times more likely to have experienced it.

I find these figures surprising. I would have guessed the imbalance would be at least a factor of ten, or significantly higher than ten, and certainly not as low as five.

[Corky Smeek]

Given all we’ve heard about his behaviour, I certainly wouldn’t work for AS!

In a way this is my point. Where are people hearing about his behaviour? Mostly from a MSM who had him tried and guilty before the trial even started and still guilty after it had finished. I think the fact that the jury could not have avoided the news coverage beforehand yet still cleared him speaks volumes for the quality of evidence presented against him.

[Fulmar]

But he has admitted to 'behaviours', Corky that I for one find utterly repulsive, even if not criminal which I accept. Also, before all this happened and when AS was FM, I'm sorry but he came across as utterly arrogant and unpleasant in attitude and many judged him to be such in the court of public opinion. I can only go on the judgements that friends/ neighbours- whoever used to openly say. You can't change that- people will form opinions.

[aqua]

In a way this is my point. Where are people hearing about his behaviour? Mostly from a MSM who had him tried and guilty before the trial even started and still guilty after it had finished. I think the fact that the jury could not have avoided the news coverage beforehand yet still cleared him speaks volumes for the quality of evidence presented against him.

Agreed on all counts.

A lot of the evidence was contradictory, one person’s word against another person’s word. Some of the accusers’ claims were contradicted by defence witnesses, and so on.

Did woman H really make up the entire attempted rape accusation against AS? He says she wasn’t at Bute House that night. Samantha Barber, who attended the dinner at Bute House, says she didn’t see Woman H that night. So AS was found not guilty because there was no convincing evidence against him. Faced with that evidence, I think I would have made the same decision. But I still I find it hard to understand how Woman H could have taken the witness box and told a pack of lies so convincingly. Do you think that’s what she did?

[Corky Smeek]

Just been out for my HMG sanctioned daily exercise so a lot to catch up on.

Fulmar, I completely get what you say but justice is (or should be) based upon verifiable facts. We cannot condemn someone just because we don't like them. The court of public opinion should have no say when someone's liberty is at stake. Make no mistake, AS would have probably spent the rest of his life in prison if found guilty.

If AS's admissions have been reported accurately and not spun out of all recognition by the MSM then, of course, I condemn him wholeheartedly. The problem is our media is far from impartial and will publish news in a manner that best serves its agenda. Can you be absolutely sure that your views on AS have not been coloured by what you have been presented with by a media intent upon bringing him down?


The MSM smeared him before, during and after the trial. They have continued to paint him in the worst possible light at every opportunity. His head on a stick was what they wanted and despite not getting it their pursuit of him continues with a dogged relentlessness that I find disturbing. Sure, the press have a role to play but surely it's not to try to get a man sent to prison.


But, let me say again. I condemn any behaviour of the type reported. My worry is, has the reporting been honest. I don't feel it has.

Aqua, I agree that this case has left us pondering many wider issues. It appears that AS intends to make sure his side of the story becomes public once we are free of Covid19. I get the feeling we will be hearing about the trial and its fall-out for quite some time.

As for Woman H, you wonder how she "... told a pack of lies so convincingly.". I don't think she could have been convincing otherwise the verdict would have been different. I have no idea what to believe about her testimony for the reasons outlined above but certainly I would not wish anything from this trial to discourage anyone coming forward with allegations of sexual misconduct or worse. My fear is that is what is going to happen and the MSM must accept a significant share of the blame for that.

[The Horseman]

Agreed on all counts.

A lot of the evidence was contradictory, one person’s word against another person’s word. Some of the accusers’ claims were contradicted by defence witnesses, and so on.

Did woman H really make up the entire attempted rape accusation against AS? He says she wasn’t at Bute House that night. Samantha Barber, who attended the dinner at Bute House, says she didn’t see Woman H that night. So AS was found not guilty because there was no convincing evidence against him. Faced with that evidence, I think I would have made the same decision. But I still I find it hard to understand how Woman H could have taken the witness box and told a pack of lies so convincingly. Do you think that’s what she did?

Aqua...Sent a PM..

[Oddquine]

From the Guardian, admittedly England and Wales but doubt it is much different in Scotland:
The figures show women are five times more likely than men to have experienced some type of sexual assault, including unwanted touching or indecent exposure, in the previous 12 months.

England and Wales police record highest number of violent sexual crimes in EU




Read more



The Office for National Statistics said the scale of sexual assaults against women, as measured by the crime survey, had changed little since 2005. More than 80% of victims did not report their experiences to police, the ONS said.

The vast majority of these involved unwanted touching or indecent exposure rather than rape or assault by penetration.
The figures, which come after a string of allegations against Harvey Weinstein and others, show women are overwhelmingly the victims of sexual assault.
Less than 4% of men have experienced sexual assault in their adult lives, meaning women are five times more likely to have experienced it.

And that excuses women being economical with the truth in a court of law, does it? Really? At any rate most of the accusations were more sexual harrassment than violent sexual crimes or even sexual assault. I don't think the women in this instance have done other women, with a geniuine case to pursue; any favours at all.

If any of them had been me, I'd have made their actions public when they occurred in public by complaining loudly,or clouted him on the face if in private, walked out and never worked with him on my own again, and/or taken it to a grievance procedure within the employment set-up and if nothing was done and I was genuinely aggrieved, I'd have, resigned and taken it to an industrial tribunal as constructive dismissal.......and only if that failed, would I even have considered involving the police.

I wonder why nine intelligent women,some of whom had seemingly been agonising over their treatment since before 2014, didn't follow the route which existed before 2018, but waited until a change in the "company" procedures was instituted and within a month of that were there chapping at an open door.