Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
shull

Alex Salmond Arrested and Charged

Recommended Posts

Guest TPAFKATS
Prosecution must think they have a strong case due to him being charged. I will wait till the court case before passing judgment. 
Mibees but not necessarily so given how cases of sexual assault are taken forward or were in recent years.

As you say though, better to wait and see given contempt laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:

Prosecution must think they have a strong case due to him being charged. I will wait till the court case before passing judgment. 

We don't even know if the charges will ever see the light of day, they might never go to trial. Just because someone is charged in Scotland is zero indicator of their being a strong prosecution case. About 13% of all cases are dropped before trial and of those that do go to trial almost 25% see charges reduced. Salmond will have a top legal team and will know the system inside out. It's an uphill battle from day 1 for the alleged victims unfortunately.

Edited by Ayrshire Saints

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely, I have mentioned previously 'cant remember if this or another thread' that Politicians (in my opinion) should be excluded from becoming one by virtue of the fact that they wish to become one.  All Politicians should be chosen  for the good they can do for the public and not the good they can do for themselves.  I appreciate this does not universally apply .... but to many are self serving and simply there for the glory or the dosh and don't give a hoot about poor Joe / Josephine public.


I’m sure Billy Connolly won’t mind that you stole his quote and didn’t credit him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:
5 hours ago, jaybee said:
Absolutely, I have mentioned previously 'cant remember if this or another thread' that Politicians (in my opinion) should be excluded from becoming one by virtue of the fact that they wish to become one.  All Politicians should be chosen  for the good they can do for the public and not the good they can do for themselves.  I appreciate this does not universally apply .... but to many are self serving and simply there for the glory or the dosh and don't give a hoot about poor Joe / Josephine public.

Seriously! did I? which bit .........totally unintentional, quite clearly great MINDS think alike and we shall ignore the expected retorts of 'fools seldom differ, THANK YOU kindly


I’m sure Billy Connolly won’t mind that you stole his quote and didn’t credit him.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2019 at 11:05 PM, Ayrshire Saints said:

We don't even know if the charges will ever see the light of day, they might never go to trial. Just because someone is charged in Scotland is zero indicator of their being a strong prosecution case. About 13% of all cases are dropped before trial and of those that do go to trial almost 25% see charges reduced. Salmond will have a top legal team and will know the system inside out. It's an uphill battle from day 1 for the alleged victims unfortunately.

You've already discredited any not guilyt verdicts that might might result from the proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

You've already discredited any not guilyt verdicts that might might result from the proceedings.

Eh ? Merely pointing out that just because someone is charged doesn't mean he will stand trial for those particular allegations is discrediting any possible not guilty verdict. Not following you at all here. It will be extremely difficult for the prosecution to get a guilty verdict but that is statistically the case in most cases if this nature which is difficult for the alleged victims as I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, smcc said:

Why should she? I don't remember her being one of the women involved.

Quote

 

 

https://news.sky.com/story/alex-salmond-trial-scotlands-former-first-minister-acquitted-of-all-sexual-assault-charges-11962184

 

The investigations and court case have widened a rift between Mr Salmond and his successor, current First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

The pair were once close friends and political allies, but their relationship has deteriorated over time.

Sources close to Mr Salmond have told Sky News he believes she played a role in conspiring against him, something Ms Sturgeon has denied, telling the Scottish Parliament in January 2019: "It seems to me that I am being simultaneously accused of being involved in a conspiracy against Alex Salmond, and also of colluding with Alex Salmond.

"Nothing could be further from the truth in both of those - neither of those things are true."

Image:Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond were once close friends and political allies

However, an SNP party source close to Mr Salmond has told Sky News that he believes a "conspiracy" against him could not have happened without her blessing.

The source said: "I think he saw it as Nicola Sturgeon having been involved in the conspiracy, if not at the heart of it, very near to the heart.

"Alex thinks that Nicola thought he was going to make a comeback and she and her husband (SNP chief executive Peter Murrell) were out to stop that happening.

"He claims, though, it was the furthest thing from his mind. The only reason he can think that they wanted to throw him under a bus is that they feared he would want to be first minister again.

"He'll certainly re-join the party and will want to stand in the Holyrood elections next year. I don't think he'll make a play to be first minister but I do think he will try to complicate Nicola's efforts to carry on."

The sources added: "He's suffered financially, this has cost him hundreds of thousands of pounds. His reputation has suffered because of a lot of stuff that came out during the course of the trial but I don't think it's terminal damage."

Nicola Sturgeon will face questions from a Scottish Parliamentary inquiry the Salmond affair.

She has previously told the Parliament that she first knew of sexual assault allegations being submitted to the Scottish government during a meeting with Mr Salmond himself on 2 April 2018.

During the court case, Mr Salmond's former chief of staff Geoff Aberdein gave evidence that she had attended a meeting with him five days earlier, on 29 March 2018.

The parliamentary inquiry will explore what Ms Sturgeon knew and exactly when she knew it - and how that squares with what she previously told Parliament.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without corroboration there was never going to be any other verdict. Very very difficult to prove anything in a he said, she said . Also no forensics at all. He's finished and touted himself as a lecherous perv but he will probably take that over prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shull said:

Women chancers. 

Kiddy on ME TOO brigade on the make for a bumper payout. 

I think you may be right, Shull.

I always feel sorry for John Leslie. The tabloids were literally paying people for their stories and women came forward and accused him of all sorts. One of his victims claimed she had been raped repeatedly over a period of six weeks, yet kept meeting up with him. He was never convicted of anything, though I believe still has a case outstanding. His career was utterly destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point never was too strong, very highly unlikely is more suitable but it would have been a difficult approach in this sort of case. You can bet there will be more calls for change to corroboration requirements in Scottish law from some quarters. The whole affair leaves a sour taste either way.

That's not true, the use of the Moorov Doctrine can be used in cases like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

Without corroboration there was never going to be any other verdict. Very very difficult to prove anything in a he said, she said . Also no forensics at all. He's finished and touted himself as a lecherous perv but he will probably take that over prison.

Did it never occur that he was found innocent because he WAS innocent and the main reason for no forensics or corroboration was simply due to the fact he was just a typical chauvinistic asshole who never overstepped the mark?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, stlucifer said:

Did it never occur that he was found innocent because he WAS innocent and the main reason for no forensics or corroboration was simply due to the fact he was just a typical chauvinistic asshole who never overstepped the mark?

No really, he's got "power crazed old letch" written all over him.............................................IMO. 

Too much smoke.........................etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, stlucifer said:

Did it never occur that he was found innocent because he WAS innocent and the main reason for no forensics or corroboration was simply due to the fact he was just a typical chauvinistic asshole who never overstepped the mark?

Whether he is innocent or guilty only he and the alleged victims know. Point I was making was more general that it is nigh on impossible to get a guilty verdict in cases like these as there is simply not enough evidence to convict. That is fact as is proven by the conviction rates reported. It's a hellish situation all round one that does seem to favour the accused rather than the victim but he was found NG so is innocent in the eyes of the law.  Imagine how any of those women feel if there was any truth in the allegations but equally if they did make it all up they should hang their heads in shame. None of us will ever know for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether he is innocent or guilty only he and the alleged victims know. Point I was making was more general that it is nigh on impossible to get a guilty verdict in cases like these as there is simply not enough evidence to convict. That is fact as is proven by the conviction rates reported. It's a hellish situation all round one that does seem to favour the accused rather than the victim but he was found NG so is innocent in the eyes of the law.  Imagine how any of those women feel if there was any truth in the allegations but equally if they did make it all up they should hang their heads in shame. None of us will ever know for sure.
Does Scotland not have the "not proven" verdict available?

It wasn't "not proven", he was found not guilty.

I have no time for the man.

I find him sleazy and manipulative.

However... We have courts of law for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Does Scotland not have the "not proven" verdict available?

It wasn't "not proven", he was found not guilty.

I have no time for the man.

I find him sleazy and manipulative.

However... We have courts of law for a reason.



Not guilty for all but one of the charges, not proven returned for that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...