Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Sheridan perjury trial opens on Monday

I recommend following James Doleman's extraordinary blog which offers by far the most detailed and perceptive coverage of the trial, and which surely deserves an award of some kind.

When court reconvened this morning Lord Bracadale, the presiding judge addressed the jury. He advised them that he had allowed further amendments to the indictment and asked them to remove a number of sections. (You can find a copy of the Indictment Here ) Deleted were all sections of the first charge except A, B and C and all charges from the second section except A, B ,C and M, N, and O. This indictment, which began with 19 charges has now been reduced to 6. There has also been an ammendment to Part N of the second charge which did read "that you had an affair with said Anvar Begum Khan in late 1992 for six months only and that you did not have a sexual relationship with her from 1994 to 2002;" The second date has been altered from 2002 to August 2003. We will post a full updated indictment later today.


The court then heard from the Advocate Depute, Alex Prentice QC who began his summing up of the case on behalf of the Crown. Full report to follow.

The final indictment, and the first and second parts of the advocate-depute's speech to the jury are now available.
 
GUILTY!!!!!!!
bbc

The 46-year-old former MSP was found guilty of lying during his successful defamation case against the News of the World newspaper in 2006.

Sheridan, who once led the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP), now faces a prison term when he is sentenced.
 
No matter what the verdict it was defeat for us. A defeat brought on by Sheridan and his arselickers. I take it you're fucking off for the duration of his sentence dexter?

What a mess.
 
Before the jury was sent out to consider its verdict yesterday, Sheridan appeared to have reduced several jurors to tears after claiming they were the only people he was scared of.

During his four-and-a-half hour long summing up speech, he said he was not scared of anyone else: not the NoW nor the police, who raided his home and scared his daughter, and pursued a "vendetta" against him.

But in a moment which capped all the drama which this case has seen, he paused, to hold back tears with a choking note on his voice. "I'm frightened of you. I'm frightened of you because you can do something that the NoW will never be able to do. You can separate me from my wife. You can make me break a promise to my daughter that I would spend Christmas with her," he said.

What a rat
 
Given some of the texts i've already seen and remarks i've already heard it may have been turned off yes.
 
Butchersapron said:
Before the jury was sent out to consider its verdict yesterday, Sheridan appeared to have reduced several jurors to tears after claiming they were the only people he was scared of.

During his four-and-a-half hour long summing up speech, he said he was not scared of anyone else: not the NoW nor the police, who raided his home and scared his daughter, and pursued a "vendetta" against him.

But in a moment which capped all the drama which this case has seen, he paused, to hold back tears with a choking note on his voice. "I'm frightened of you. I'm frightened of you because you can do something that the NoW will never be able to do. You can separate me from my wife. You can make me break a promise to my daughter that I would spend Christmas with her," he said.

What a rat

And a stupid rat. Had I been on that jury I'd have been tempted to convict just for that.

If, on the other hand, he'd simply said "Go home and look up 'perverse acquittal', cunts" I might have done that :)
 
What with the millions pounds of public money was spent investigating him - Lovely folk like Alan McCombes who gave an affidavit to the Herald, then denied it, and went through the pantomime of going to jail for contempt of court when he had already handed over the information that was demanded and the wonderful George McNeilage who created the tape and was rewarded with £200,000 by the News of the World.

Strange bedfellows you lot lie with - you must all be very proud of yourselves
 
What with the millions pounds of public money was spent investigating him - Lovely folk like Alan McCombes who gave an affidavit to the Herald, then denied it, and went through the pantomime of going to jail for contempt of court when he had already handed over the information that was demanded and the wonderful George McNeilage who created the tape and was rewarded with £200,000 by the News of the World.

Strange bedfellows you lot lie with - you must all be very proud of yourselves
i've never liked the man. and i wasn't impressed with his defence. perhaps a better and more principled line might have been 'yeh. and so the fuck what? the murdoch press don't like my politics and all they can find is some story about swingers. i think it's a non-story and i hope you agree'.
 
From the moment the silly arse decided, against the wishes of his much more sensible comrades, to sue the News of the Screws for publishing some tittle-tattle about his sexual antics, there was never going to be a good outcome. His conviction now is the least bad outcome of his trial. He will have to go to prison, just like Aitken and Archer. His problems may not be over even when he's served his sentence. The News of the Screws will, I suppose, now win their appeal and Big Tommy will have to pay back a lot of money.
 
From the moment the silly arse decided, against the wishes of his much more sensible comrades, to sue the News of the Screws for publishing some tittle-tattle about his sexual antics, there was never going to be a good outcome. His conviction now is the least bad outcome of his trial. He will have to go to prison, just like Aitken and Archer. His problems may not be over even when he's served his sentence. The News of the Screws will, I suppose, now win their appeal and Big Tommy will have to pay back a lot of money.

and he'll publish his Prison Writings
 
One of his leading supporters has already said-months ago-that he would appeal if found guilty.

But he doesn't believe in the corrupt machinery of the state so why would he appeal to a load of judges who are clearly in the pocket of the right wing press?

What grounds can he use? (apart from that he was utterly incompetently represented in court).

Oh noes - aaaah's bin dun - Ah woant a brief - gonny no gies' a ton o' leegul aid?

Oh, well, at least Gail anna' wean (*stifled sob*) will have the pleasure of his company for Christmas (which, as a committed Marxist/Leninist/loony leftist, he doesn't believe in).
 
Back
Top Bottom