Some observations on Thursday night’s events

I’ve only just heard that Alex Salmond is taking the Scottish Government to court over their handling of two allegations of sexual misbehaviour made against him. I know no more about the details of the allegations than you do, which is no more than has been revealed in the press, but allow me to make a couple of observations.

Firstly, Alex Salmond is taking legal action against the Civil Service because of the way in which they have handled this matter, not Nicola Sturgeon or her cabinet, who have – rightly – no role in this. It’s also important to point out that anyone accused of an offence has the right to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law.

That said, we cannot make judgements about the guilt or innocence of anyone who is accused of a sexual offence on the basis of our sympathies with their political views on the Scottish constitution. That applies equally to the political views of the person or persons doing the accusing. If we weaponise this incident for the purposes of point scoring in Scotland’s constitutional debate, we are not taking the issue of sexual aggression seriously. We would not be taking the issue of sexual abuse seriously.

Victims of sexual aggression deserve better than our wild and uninformed speculations, and so do those who are wrongly accused. People who have been subjected to any form of sexual abuse need to feel that if they come forward to report their abuse to the authorities, that they will be treated sympathetically, appropriately, and they will not become pawns in wider topics which are unrelated to the abuse they allege they have suffered. The importance of that cannot be stressed enough.

Finally, and most importantly, while I sincerely hope that further investigation proves that Alex Salmond has done nothing wrong, this incident should have precisely zero influence on the question of whether Scotland should become an independent country. Scottish independence is not predicated on the personal behaviour of any individual.

Resist the temptation to rise to British nationalist taunting. This is not a time for wild conspiracy theories. It is not a time for lashing out. It is most certainly not a time for speculating on the motives or identities of those involved. This is a time to be calm, to be respectful, and to respect the due process which is now taking place. The truth will come out in the end.

Update: Friday 24 August, 8.45pm

I wrote this article in order to counsel calm, to appeal for moderation.  I wrote it to advise people not to indulge in conspiracy theories, yet too many are doing exactly that. Please refrain from this or I will, sadly and reluctantly, be forced to close down comments on this article.

93 comments on “Some observations on Thursday night’s events

  1. […] Wee Ginger Dug Some observations on Thursday night’s events I’ve only just heard that Alex Salmond is taking the Scottish Government to court […]

  2. Margaret Hamilton says:

    An excellent observation. Don’t condemn till more information available

  3. benmadigan says:

    “This incident should have precisely zero influence on the question of whether Scotland should become an independent country. Scottish independence is not predicated on the personal behaviour of any individual”.

    That’s the main point Paul.

    Whether Mr Salmond is guilty or innocent has no bearing on the Independence movement

    • Phyllis says:

      absolutely right….what the hell is going on because what I seen first is and was horrendous to me…so thank you for enlightening us….

  4. Andrew braes says:

    There will be a goon media frenzied on steroids about this who cares indy or bust!

  5. susan says:

    Calm and reasoned observations Paul.

  6. Well said, Paul.

    Meanwhile, Northern Ireland may be powered by off-shore generators swiped from Afghanistan on floating barges in 6 months time.

  7. cluthab says:

    Very well put. My question, 5 years delay in proceeding with case? How so?

  8. Scott Cameron says:

    Agree 100% Paul, but we should still expect a re-run of antics from SMSM similar to what Michelle Thomson had to endure.

  9. Macart says:

    Well said Paul.

  10. Meanwhile, in other news, Aberdeen airport is the worst airport in Scotland.
    And that’s it, that’s the news from Scotland, for your 120 seconds of BBC TV News from Pacific Quay; oh, and it will be raining.
    Back at Salford, in the ‘national news’, some UK businesses are booming,so Brexit is not all doom and gloom.
    As examples, a Cheshire ice cream manufacturer gleefully reports sales rose by 40% during the English heat wave, and a mail order company selling clothing made in China, India, and Turkey saw sales increase.

    This is England; this is interpreted as business ‘booming’.

    Cheap clothes made in sweat shops by workers with no rights or protection, outside the EU, and sold for indecent profits by a few Flim-Flam carpetbaggers in England, is the model for future post Brexit trade.
    So much for British Jobs for British workers.

    Ice cream and T shirts made for 10p in Third world sweat shops, and sold to Brits at 1000’s% mark up.
    This is No Deal, this is the UK when EngWaland leave the EU.

    Keep the eye on the ball, guys.

    But hey, it’s Bank Holiday week-end, but not Where We Are.

    It is getting murkier on cue.

    Also on BBC Breakfast, a Tory MP praising perspiring Dominic Raab’s presentation of HM Government’s No Deal Contingency Plans, actuallty accused his own Chancellor, Spreadsheet Phil, and HMG Treasury, you know that ‘respected’ body which underwrites the GERS guesstimates, of Remoaners’ Scare Mongering.

    There will be five mile traffic jams today on the A30 from Exeter to the Cornwall seaside Bank Holiday getaways.
    On the 30th March next year England will be in a perpetual Bank Holiday traffic jam; but there will be plenty of ice cream and Made In China T shirts.
    The time is now; rise up, Scotland.

  11. deelsdugs says:

    It is all very convenient though…just like the other ‘happenings’…

  12. Sooz says:

    Perfectly sensible response. Plus, I’m not going to reply to the offensive tweets I’ve already seen – just see, eyeroll and block.Let them foam and froth and open themselves up to libel all on their own.

    • Hazel says:

      I will ‘report’ any of the more salacious personal attacks on Alex Salmond. If so many did this Twitter might wake up? Feels better than letting it just ride.

  13. Leswilson013@sky.com says:

    How can someone be accused of “something” and (A) not be informed of exactly what the accusation is? ) (B) How can prepare a defence if they do not have this information?

    I suspect that this is designed to smear Alex and by connection, the Indy movement. Thus it will be dragged on as long a the Unionist can get away with it. Once the are happy the damage is done it will be dropped or disproved in court.

    I will stick with Alex. As for Indy, our movement is far bigger than this, and this shows how things are going to be fought. We should expect much more of this as the Westminster cabal gets more desperate.

    • scotsmanic says:

      If it has been designed to smear Salmond, you might want to ask why it’s the SNP itself doing the smearing…

    • Richard James Robertson says:

      From the disciplinary code. 11. If the Permanent Secretary considers that the report gives cause for concern over the former Minister’s behaviour towards current or former civil servants the former Minister should be provided with details of the complaint and given an opportunity to respond. The former Minister will be invited to provide a statement setting out their recollection of events to add to the record. They may also request that statements are taken from other witnesses. If additional statements are collected the senior officer will revise their report to include this information and submit this to the Permanent Secretary and share with the staff member. The Permanent Secretary will consider the revised report and decide whether the complaint is well-founded. The outcome of the investigation will be recorded within the SG. The Permanent Secretary will also determine whether any further action is required; including action to ensure lessons are learnt for the future.
      I just leave this here for others to comment on whether they have followed the correct procedure in this case?

    • Absolutely agree with you. And I do not understand why he not allowed to know the nature of the allegation.

    • Molly McC says:

      I agree. The “Better Together” sure as hell won’t work this time,so “let’s use wedges to pry them apart”.
      It won’t work! We won’t let it!!

  14. crabbitgits says:

    So, Salmond’s not on trial. He’s not been charged with any offence. The Police are not involved. Yet Salmond’s been found guilty and the Scottish Independence Movement will be full of sexual predators and perverts today. Ah well, what do we expect. It’s just going to pile up from now on. I for one am getting ready to quit. I’ve already dumped Facebook due to it’s manipulating connivery.

  15. xsticks says:

    Aye, Paul. Cool heads called for. Looks like Alex is forcing an issue into the open so it can’t be used at a future date. It is not for us to pre-judge anything and we need to wait until we have more information before jumping to conclusions. I suspect it will turn out to be a storm in a tea-cup but let’s just wait and see. Let the unionists rant and rave (and hopefully get themselves into legal trouble) but do not rise too the bait.

  16. Macart says:

    O/T

    This is a familiar non answer.

    HERE

    Also?

    THIS

  17. When people complained, both during the last independence referendum, and more recently when the notion of a second independence referendum became more likely, that the British Establishment, via their incessant propaganda channels, the M.S.M, were becoming even more vitriolic, I repeatedly pointed out that they hadn’t really started yet, and that much worse was to come, and it will.
    We must learn to expect much, much worse, whether there is any morsel of truth in the allegations and smears that will emanate from every, and any, outlet of Westminster. This is a fight to the death, and the corpse will be the people of Scotland if we do not win, and gain our freedom.

    • robert harrison says:

      This does sound like they are trying to turn us against each other the incident was supposed to be December 2013 there’s no way the britnats would of noticed it in 4 years not something that juicy which untill evidence says otherwise looks fake to me.

  18. Waiting for Scotland says:

    The court will decide the issue of the competence of the Permanent Secretary.

    Accusing the former First Minister of Scotland of sexual harassment better be backed up with irrefutable evidence. Otherwise, we may see the concept of permanence being tested.

    You can be damn sure the BBC and the Murdoch press et.al. will be weaponizing it. They’ve already started. The “street of shame” has plenty of form with sex scandals. As do most of the rags that pass as “newspapers” on these benighted islands. There will be a special circus on Sunday as Marr and co pile in.

    There is a bit of a silver lining though. At least we’ll know what the lead story will be on every Misreporting Scotland, GMS, Express, Record, Mail, Herald and Hootsman for the next six months,

    Saves us the need of wondering what they’ll be using to distract people on the shit show that is the UK.

    • robert harrison says:

      The BBC has no right they covered up Jimmy Savile sex attacks all the time plus then they helped keep the Westminster pedo ring out of public knowledge which is full of conservative members two faced hypocrites.

  19. Mark Russell says:

    Och by tea-time there’ll be Russian collusion, novijeck (pronounced no-wi-eck) and a video of the former FM dressed in a SS uniform walking an Alsatian past a synagogue in Buckie. Just you wait….

  20. mumsyhugs says:

    Wonder if Alex is highlighting this as a piece of fake news at this point so it can’t be used later when indyref 2 is underway – spiking their cannon before they can fire it?

  21. diabloandco says:

    if memory serves , which it may well not ,was there not a hint of this some years ago from the honest , genuine, truthful , never to be contradicted , trusted press of the first indy ref?( and my! how they’ve improved since then!)

    Or has my memory left the building again?

    • J Galt says:

      Yes and if there had been any truth in it do you not think we would have been fed it morning, noon and night in 2014?

      They’ve used their powers of delay to keep it on the back burner as a slow dripping roast of innuendo. Salmond is right to call the swine out.

      Research Charles Stewart Parnell.

  22. One_Scot says:

    To be honest this type of mud slinging and running is all the unionist have left in their case against Scotland becoming Independent.

    It really is a measure of how low, sad and desperate the British State and the BritNat media have become in the void of having anything positive to maintain their corrupt and damaging union.

    It really is time for Scotland to move on from this hate fulled UK and create a better future for all her citizens.

  23. JSM says:

    Reblogged this on Ramblings of a 50+ Female and commented:
    As usual, well said, Paul.

  24. sexual aggression can go both ways..ie being accused when innocent..the system isn’t right from whatever angle you look at it.
    As others have said above, this feels political

  25. epicyclo says:

    Sounds like an attempt was made to blackmail him, and he’s bringing it out into the light of day.

  26. Dan Huil says:

    Of course we’re not surprised by such “developments”. We’ve been expecting them since we know they way the britnat establishment works. The very able and intelligent Alex Salmond can look after himself. Once again this will backfire on the britnat media.

  27. George Paterson says:

    Just ask yourselves, what is the greatest danger to this union? In my book, it’s Independence for Scotland, aligned to Brexit. Reflect now, how the British Establishment protects its power and influence. Take a look at the deaths of Willie McCrae, Dr John Kelly, the trial of Shirley McKie, the novichok poisoning of the Skipal family in Salisbury and the other Russian who died. To all of these incidents some believe there could be nefarious actions going on behind the scenes. I’m sure there are more issues many can equate to this “suspicion”..

  28. This is just SO obviously a put-up job! Three words – “dirty tricks campaign”. #Disgusted

    • scotsmanic says:

      Yes…from the SNP. 😉

      • Not the SNP / Scottish Government … the Civil Service, which is the rUK and has little or nothing to do with Holyrood or the SNP. Concentrate, please!

        • weegingerdug says:

          The Scottish Civil Service is answerable to Holyrood, and ultimately to the Scottish Government. That’s why Alex Salmond is suing the Scottish Government. The Scottish Civil Service is the administrative organisation of that government. However, Scottish Government ministers take no part in investigations carried out by the Civil Service regarding allegations made by staff members.

    • chicmac says:

      A statement from Nicola Sturgeon

      Nicola Sturgeon said:

      “Complaints were made in January relating to Alex Salmond by two individuals.

      “These complaints have been considered since then under a procedure covering ministers and former ministers that was agreed by me in December 2017 in the wake of public concern about harassment.

      “Although I have been aware for some time of the fact of the investigation – initially from Alex Salmond – I have had no role in the process, and to have referred to it before now would have compromised the integrity of the internal investigation, which I was not prepared to do. However, I was informed by the Permanent Secretary earlier this week that she had completed her investigation and that she intended to make the fact of the complaints public.

      “Alex Salmond is now challenging the Scottish Government’s procedure in court. The Scottish Government refutes his criticisms of its process and will defend its position vigorously.

      “However, this focus on process cannot deflect from the fact that complaints were made that could not be ignored or swept under the carpet.

      “I have been clear on many occasions that all organisations and workplaces must make it possible for people to come forward to report concerns and have confidence that they will be treated seriously. For that principle to mean anything it cannot be applied selectively. It must be applied without fear or favour, regardless of the identity, seniority or political allegiance of the person involved.

      “My relationship with Alex Salmond obviously makes this an extremely difficult situation for me to come to terms with. I am also acutely aware how upsetting this will be for my party. However the over-riding priority must be to ensure fair and due process. I would also ask that the privacy of those who have complained be respected.”

      • robert harrison says:

        That’s taking the moral high ground not like labour forcing members who complained to shut up or the Conservatives who would cover it up if it was them.

  29. chicmac says:

    Just had a massive hail storm and flash flood in Kirrie, weird.

    • chicmac says:

      Now the sun has come out, 10 mins ago Glengate was a river.

      • weegingerdug says:

        It’s probably a conspiracy. It will either all be the nefarious doings of the British secret services, if you’re a Yes voter. But if you’re a No voter it’s a climate change conspiracy cover up by Thatessempee.

        Glad to have cleared that up.

        • chicmac says:

          It only lasted about 10 mins but the noise was deafening, the gutters temporarily blocked with hail stones which caused back flooding through the living room ceiling, pots and pans out to catch the drips. In August!!!. I am definitely a Yesser so probably the RAF seeding the clouds with silver iodide? erm mibbee.

  30. Kenzie says:

    Craig Murray also has some interesting observations re the apparent witch hunt against Eck.

  31. scotsmanic says:

    The SNP come more and more to look like the People’s Front of Judea every day. Tragic and disgusting and depressing.

  32. paul mccormack says:

    Everything Jack Collatin says

  33. Tony L says:

    Well, the Herald is making the most of this. No less than seven articles on its online edition at the moment. Now at least they have disabled comments, though not before the usual suspects were venting.

    I have no idea about the case, what is charged, who said or did what, so let the process take its course.

    • Steven Gerrard and Brendan Rogers will be peeved.
      The Herald Britland is the ‘Let’s All Laugh At the OBFA’J ames Kelly Knuckledraggers’ Gazette now.
      Has anyone opened a book yet on how many months David Clegg and Tom Gordon will drag this smutty wee scoop out?

  34. Dan Huil says:

    Just a thought: the Scottish civil service is responsible for collating the falsehood called GERS. IF Alex takes on the civil service and wins… no more GERS?

  35. Fran says:

    Spot on Paul

  36. Three Words-
    Charles Stewart Parnell

  37. stewartb says:

    Too many here and elsewhere online today unfortunately not taking your advice Paul. To repeat what your wrote if I may:

    “.. we cannot make judgements about the guilt or innocence of anyone who is accused of a sexual offence on the basis of our sympathies with their political views on the Scottish constitution. That applies equally to the political views of the person or persons doing the accusing. If we weaponise this incident for the purposes of point scoring in Scotland’s constitutional debate, we are not taking the issue of sexual aggression seriously. We would not be taking the issue of sexual abuse seriously.

    Victims of sexual aggression deserve better than our wild and uninformed speculations, and so do those who are wrongly accused.”

    I strongly agree with this. I understand the hurt at what is happening to Alex Salmond. I understand that based on past events there will be suspicion of motivations and conspiracies. But frankly until there is evidence to the contrary such views when expressed in public are bunkum! I’d urge cool heads: OK be sceptical, but avoid jumping to any conclusions about anything … for now. (Probably too late given what I’ve read online today!) There needs to be a clear, fair and effective process to sort all this out – one that serves well all the parties to this. Let’s first hear what the Court of Session decides. And let’s save our efforts for now to point up the hypocrisy and lynch-mob tendency of some Unionist opponents.

    And if and when it becomes known that Police Scotland (and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service) become involved, they need to avoid repeating the drawn-out silence on the status of their involvement (or lack of it) that was so damaging in the Michelle Thomson ‘non-case’.

    The one thing that stands out for me so far in this sorry episode is the impressive, straightforward, measured and in my view wholly correct public statements of our FM today. Let’s join her in occupying the ‘high ground’.

    • weegingerdug says:

      Yeah, it’s upsetting that I write a piece in which I urge people not to speculate, and not to indulge in conspiracy theories, and then they do precisely that. I am seriously considering preventing any more comments on this article – something I’ve never done before.

      • stewartb says:

        I understand people’s concern, suspicion, loyalty etc but some of what’s emerged from too many individuals in the Yes movement writing on this issue today has ‘not been a good look’.

        And candidly its neither necessary or helpful. Alex Salmond has this in hand. Now that this has blown up – fairly or not – we need to let the legal process work its way through. In the meantime, we can call out loudly the hypocrisy of some Unionist opponents and support our FM’s principled stance.

  38. Robert Graham says:

    A fair reasoned assessment by Paul of what is actually known ,

    Now here is a question ,are the civil service totally independent of government re- Paules assertion of Alex v The civil service ,or is this is contradicted by Nicola Sturgeon’s e/mal printed above by ” Chickmac ” and sent to all members this afternoon,

    It states the procedures were set out and agreed by her government therefore the civil service are and have been acting with her government’s approval ,

    So we actually have Alex Salmond V the Scottish Government .

    Shades of the Michelle Thomson political and character assassination where the SNP were outmaneuvered and effectively ambushed into dropping a talented MP , by all means the Moral high ground might be very comforting , but when your opponents are using every dirty trick in the book to land a blow it’s a losing tactic .

    Who knows if Alex was set up ,he might well be a frothing at the mouth molester of anything that moves thats not the point ,yes protection of any worker or employee must be observed , but the oldest trick in the book that has been used to trap unwary politicians throughout history has just been enacted and no one was on the case , is everyone asleep over at SNP HQ , our best leader by far has just been tossed under a bus , it was one thing showing disapproval of him hosting a show on RT but joining in the rants of the opposition was going a bit far when the BBC are openly going for the throat of the SNP at every opportunity and we get mostly silence from the SNP .

    • Robert Graham says:

      I was looking for the delete piss comment button of my previous post but there aint one ,

      I watched interviews with Alex and he gave a clear account of what has been going on , it would appear we have two governments one led by the SNP and an other parallel one answering to Westminster , this Permanent secretary position needs a bit of clarification on who exactly are they answerable to and who gives them instructions .

      So apologies Paul it is indeed – Alex Salmond – V – the Civil Service .

      PS maybe a idea to include a delete embarrassing post button just a thought .

  39. weegingerdug says:

    I wrote this article in order to counsel calm, to appeal for moderation, and to advise people not to indulge in conspiracy theories. Sadly, too many are indulging themselves in the wildest speculation, conspiracy theorising, and mud slinging. Please refrain from this or I will, sadly and reluctantly, be forced to close down comments on this article.

    • Robert Graham says:

      eh tried to delete my previous well for the want of a better word my piss poor comment , your statement was exactly right it is indeed Salmond V the Civil Service .

      So i stand corrected but still a bit confused as to the function of the Civil Service and who it answers to , it might explain Nicolas reluctance to offer any support to Alex because she looked a bit ill at ease when interviewed ,a distinct contrast to Alex’s calm and collected interviews

      • weegingerdug says:

        The Scottish Civil Service answers ultimately to Nicola Sturgeon, but it carries out internal investigations into reports of sexual harrassment made against staff members. No member of the cabinet or Nicola Sturgeon is involved in these investigations.

  40. Iona says:

    Well said, Paul, as ever.

  41. Contrary says:

    Is Alex actually taking the civil service to court? The way I read it is he is taking legal action against the complaints system itself, and therefore the Scottish government have to defend that system. He says it is an unfair system, as there is no method in it for the person who has been complained about to make a defence during the investigative process – I have read Craig Murray’s blog and can see how it could cause a huge amount of distress. But, the process is there to protect the complainer, and that should be the priority, it is no easy thing to make such accusations. The FMs statement seems right and proper, and the process needs to run its course.

    It will be interesting to see what the justice system makes of the procedure though – has it been analysed by legal minds at all, or is it just like a work place grievance procedure? As Alex said, there was no recourse for any defence, and this was what led to Craig’s breakdown in his case; not being allowed to talk about it or even allowed to know what the allegations are. So you have to wait until it is referred to the police, wait for charges to be made, then wait until it goes to court before you can mount a defence. Meanwhile, if you are high profile, your career and name are in tatters, whether or not you deserved it.

    I think an analysis by the courts on the procedure would be good move anyway – it is a new one after all, brought on by the Hollywood abuses scandal (which also explains the January timing of the complaints) – and should give us a clear decision on whether the process they are employing is fair to all parties. Too much abuse of power over the centuries might have led to an overcompensation (which might also be the only way to deal with it), so I think the legal action is a good move. I believe the Scottish courts will deal with the matter fairly, and that this is a separate thing from the accusations themselves.

    I also believe that Alex would never knowingly cause another person harm, and that this is causing him a fair amount of distress, but I would also like to know he sees the importance of allowing any complaints to take place, it is the investigation that needs to be faulted never anyone that makes an accusation. Let’s see if the police decide to prosecute (I think the matter has been referred?), and hope the justice system gives everyone a fair hearing. The media certainly won’t.

    • weegingerdug says:

      He is taking the Scottish Government to court because of actions of the Scottish Civil Service.

      • Contrary says:

        Oops, yes, sorry, didn’t read your reply properly, thank you. I also see that in the quotes I have given below, Alex specifically says it is the WAY in which the permanent secretary carried out the procedures he is objecting to. Time for bed eh?!

    • Robert Graham says:

      in his interviews Alex said it was because the Civil Service in the name of the Scottish Government were about to release details of the case to the public and that was contrary to the whole essence of security and protection offered to the complainants by the complaint procedure .

    • Contrary says:

      Ah, I was taking my information on it from a comment by ‘republic of Scotland’ on Craig’s blog, where he quotes the Guardian: ““In his statement, Salmond indicated he had been in protracted and intense negotiation with Evans, and suggested he had sought to avoid taking formal action.”

      “He said: “The permanent secretary chose to deny me contact with any current civil servant, many of whom wished to give evidence on my behalf, and access to documentation to allow me to properly challenge the complaints, all of which I refute and some of which were patently ridiculous.”

      “Claiming the actions were grossly unfair, Salmond said he had launched the judicial review with reluctance: “The procedure as put into operation by the permanent secretary is grossly unfair and therefore inevitably will lead to prejudicial outcomes.”

      “He added: “[If] the court of session finds in my favour then the administration at the senior levels of the Scottish government will have the most serious questions to answer.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/24/alex-salmond-takes-holyrood-to-court-over-sexual-misconduct-claims

      So, to me, he was initially going to start an interdiction (?) to stop it being made public, but when it was anyway, started a judicial review. I am assuming the quotes by Alex are fairly accurate!

      Anyway, I am just saying my comment was based on understanding the judicial review is on the process, not legal action against the people (though, obviously that could come into it,,, ). If I’ve totally misunderstood, just say. Sorry about the guardian link, I didn’t click on it myself!

  42. markrussell20085017 says:

    Aye well, I did predict Russian collusion earlier on and sure enough…..Ca’ canny big man, cool heids are required. Let it roll on by…

  43. trish young says:

    team Alex, also team Craig. stay strong, I love Scotland x

  44. Hmph. I don’t see how seeking a judicial review of actions by a civil servant can rightly be called “taking the Scottish Government to court”: the Executive, which is what we normally think of as the Government, is not being taken to court. In other, civil law, jurisdictions, such matters are handled by an administrative court – because the action relates to the administration, i.e., the Civil Service, not the Executive.

    In other words, ignore the screaming headlines. I am very annoyed with the National for mindlessly following the SNPBAAAAAAD spin put on it by the BritNat press: it is bl*oody poor journalism.

  45. Marianne Gibson says:

    Completely agree with the article – we don’t know what happened, and we don’t speculate, we don’t get drawn into debate. We haven’t got time and it will not serve us well. We focus our efforts on the fight for independence, because the time for that fight is right now.

  46. Ghillie says:

    Thank you Mr Kavenna.

    The truth will hopefully come out in the end. But what a horrible trial for all involved.

    I do wish Rhoda Grant, Labour spokesperson, had read your wise words before publicising her inflammatory words.

    As for the MSM – Business as usual.

    The i front page calls it ‘Sexual assault’ which IS on a different scale to ‘harassment” – and utterly incorrect in terms of what the accused is accused of – both horrendous but all folk ARE innocent until proven guilty. Unless instantly tried and judged by the press.

    And being a man I can respect, Mr Salmond, while challenging the bones of this new procedure, did express his concern that while HIS name has been made public, that the names of the complainants should be kept confidential.

    Aye, in time the truth will hopefully come out.

    In the mean time, we have a Country to win back.

  47. Gavin C Barrie says:

    I wonder if the two complainers considered their contribution to Scottish politics by progressing these 5 year old allegations, of aggravation, not assault. Are they still busying away at Holyrood? Meantime, on Twitter a blogger has posted that Alex Salmond has donated £400,000 of his earnings to charity during his career.I know where my support lies.

    And up pops Monica Lennon – who had stated some time back of sexual assault on her by a senior Labour party member – to demand that the SNP eject Alex Salmond.

    Stand firm folks.

Leave a Reply to robert harrison Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s