Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Alex Salmond accused (and then cleared) of sexual misconduct.

From looking on Twitter the pro independence Scots are celebrating long and hard.
The people like me without a dog in this fight think it's well suss 🤔

Irvine Welsh has tweeted that 9 women all getting together are lying is highly dubious and the aggressive Scots with the Saltire as their picture are tearing him to pieces currently
 
DexterTCN said:
Yup...that was an allegation made by a prosecution witness that was not backed up by any evidence or any person.

You understand that? It was an allegation by a prosecution witness and it was not believed by the jury. /taps Poot on the head

In your wolrd headlines from newspapers may be facts though but fortunately not in the Scottish legal system. I've posted a factual link, best you toddle off and read it. Or post something factual. Or just call me something so I can file you under half-wit and ignore you :)

Here's a breakdown of one of the trial days from an ex UK ambassador (who is pro-independence). Your Man Finally in the Public Gallery. The Alex Salmond Trial Day 8 - Craig Murray
Click to expand...

You are quoting Craig Murray as a credible source?

The guy that spread the conspiracy theory that Israel was responsible for the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal?

:facepalm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
spanglechick said:
There are limits tbh.
But it’s statistically an odd choice to categorically say that a not guilty verdict proves innocence, or further, that the accusers were lying.
Click to expand...
It’s not ‘statistically odd’ it’s just plain wrong. He has been found not guilty and not proven. Anyone saying he has had his innocence proven is wrong, although the verdict gives him the absolute right to say he is.

and I see the idiot wings is assuring us that perjury charges are about to be brought against the nine. Which is rather unlikely.
 
spanglechick said:
I’m surprised so many posters here seem to think there’s been no miscarriage of justice.
The testimonies were highly credible, and the fact that Salmond used to be a very powerful politician with a great deal of feeling against him from the “establishment” doesn’t mean that he isn’t one of the significant minority of men who assault and harass subordinates in the workplace.
Click to expand...
I agree, i heard the testimonies and think legal procedure has prevailed over what really happened. Can all those women concoct such a compelling body of evidence when the burden on them in a court case is so high?
 
cupid_stunt said:
You are quoting Craig Murray as a credible source?

The guy that spread the conspiracy theory that Israel was responsible for the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal?

:facepalm:
Click to expand...
I don't give a bubbly fart what you think about anything :)

It would be nice if you could post on topic, though. Keep your Skripal posts to the releant thread. Post about the Salmond trial on this one.
 
The judge was a woman too, seeing as how it seems to be relevant.

Second highest one in the country, if I'm right.
 
Joanna Cherry, QC, MP said

Some of the evidence that has come to light both in the judicial review and at this trial raise very serious questions over the process that was employed within the Scottish government to investigate the alleged complaints against Mr Salmond, and I am sorry to say some of the evidence also raises serious question marks over how these complaints were handled
Click to expand...
 
Indeed.

But I just want to say that you can't have it both ways. Either the verdict was based on the facts that the jurors had in front of them, in which case their sex is irrelevant, or they were basing it on the fact that he's creepy, in which case it's not a safe verdict. He is creepy, by the way, but that's my view based on a real life interactions and not relevant here. But wittering on about female jurors, judge or anyone else is neither here nor there, because they were there to do a job based on the facts of the case. Which they did.

I engaged didn't I :facepalm:
 
Yeah I think that is actually a pretty good piece.
Obviously Scottish posters have a better view of the situation than me but I do get the feeling that while Salmond has a body of nutcase supporters backing him, out in the wider community things have moved on.
 
redsquirrel said:
Yeah I think that is actually a pretty good piece.
Obviously Scottish posters have a better view of the situation than me but I do get the feeling that while Salmond has a body of nutcase supporters backing him, out in the wider community things have moved on.
Click to expand...
Salmond has always split opinions. I had the impression he was admired rather than loved by his party while he led it. The wider public had a marmite reaction to him. I always viewed him as an extremely capable but flawed performer.

But since he left office, I’d say you’re right. The general public have moved on. He’s not got the relevance now, unless you’re a hardcore fan in that sort of social media bubble, or conversely a hater in the hardcore unionist version of the bubble. For most people he’s yesterday’s news.

A couple of my closest and oldest friends are SNP members. The husband is a very left independence type. Critical (to a degree) of the SNP leadership. Had been SSP, but stung by Tommy and therefore I think reluctant now to admire charismatic leaders. He had no trouble believing Eck was guilty. The wife, though, is much more conspiracy minded, and thinks Eck might have been set up by the state. She cites the state’s use of Roger Casement’s purported diaries to undermine his character. The husband thinks the state just made use of what was there in both cases.

I don’t think anyone outside the SNP gives it a great deal of thought. It’s certainly been utterly eclipsed. It would have been a huge story at any other time. But how much damage it would have done to the SNP is unclear. I suspect not much. The people who already hated Eck would feel vindicated. But the damage done to the SNP will come I think from his supporters in the bubble rather than the general public.
 
cupid_stunt said:
I've hardly ever engage with you, I certainly don't follow you around, you loon. :D
Click to expand...
If you had, you may have known that Craig Murray is funded by indy supporters and is known worldwide for grassing up the UK govt for torture and is respected for it. Guess who doesn't respect him and shits on him at every opportunity?

And a notable number of indy supporters don't really believe a word of the whole UK govt Skripal thing, or give a shit about it, either. So all you did was come in with your UK boots and show your absolute ignorance of the people you're talking about. There was no depth or challenge to your post, it was a bottom of the barrel shit-throw which is the current level of debate here these days. I'm a loon, a mysoginist, don't respond to me...that's the level of debate here.

Your post about Murray merely shows that you're entirely uneducated as to all the intricacies involved. And I assume (more than suspect) that you're quite happy to go along with that. So tell me...

What happens next?
 
[QUOTE="danny la rouge, post: 16458894] I don’t think anyone outside the SNP gives it a great deal of thought. It’s certainly been utterly eclipsed. It would have been a huge story at any other time. But how much damage it would have done to the SNP is unclear. I suspect not much. The people who already hated Eck would feel vindicated. But the damage done to the SNP will come I think from his supporters in the bubble rather than the general public.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not so sure this is true. Salmond intends to sue the Scottish government according to the Guardian.

The coronavirus will merely delay the forthcoming SNP civil war rather than bury it. Whenever normality returns this spat will again be front and centre in Scottish politics.

Cherry’s charmless grandstanding on the subject immediately after the verdict was announced was a taste of what will come later on down the line.

Any hopes that Salmond would just retire quietly seem forlorn. Politically he may be yesterday’s news but he can still extract a pretty ruthless vengeance on those whom he thinks tried to bring him down.

A lot of skeletons to come tumbling out the closet. No surprise that, with the SNP so utterly dominant in Scottish politics since 2007, their end looks likely to come from within rather than without.
 
Incidentally, none of the verdicts were unanimous, all were by a majority. Not all the jurors were convinced of his innocence, and they had heard all of the evidence.
 
Teaboy said:
Dodgy creep had a decent brief.
Click to expand...

Gordon Jackson QC, Dean of the Faculty of Advocates. Who has probably blown up his career by being filmed on a train discussing the case, including naming two of the plaintiffs, and being rather unflattering about his client. It's a Sunday Times story, so paywalled unless you have a login.

www.thetimes.co.uk

Alex Salmond’s QC Gordon Jackson described him as a ‘sex pest’

Alex Salmond, Scotland’s former first minister, was referred to as “a sex pest” and an “objectionable bully” by his own QC before being acquitted of all charges in his sex offences trial last week.The Sunday Times has viewed footage of an indiscreet conversation that Gordon Jackson, Scotland’s most
www.thetimes.co.uk www.thetimes.co.uk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sparkling
Scottish shows and Highland Games
Replies
16
Views
648
iona
I
danny la rouge
The Sleepy Cuddles Party, Creepy Eck, and a sad struggle for relevance
Replies
18
Views
1K
Wilf
Wilf
danny la rouge
Daft Dougie buys a toy gun and gets it sent to Scottish Parliament.
Replies
6
Views
484
danny la rouge
danny la rouge
Fedayn
Glasgow and it's slavery past.....
Replies
2
Views
445
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Fedayn
Edinburgh Hogmanay and the ownership/access to public spaces
Replies
2
Views
549
equationgirl
equationgirl
Back
Top Bottom