Alex Salmond – and his faith in our justice system
We congratulate Alex Salmond on his acquittal of a number of serious charges, involving multiple complainers. Our client Jimmy Boyle offers the following comment on this case, and its wider context. Many of you will know of Jimmy’s own experience, and his particular qualification to offer these views. For those who do not, Jimmy was himself the victim of false accusations of sexual assault. Wrongfully convicted, he spent 5 years in Scottish prisons before his ultimate exoneration. The implications for Jimmy were recently published on this website, in an article that can be found HERE.
Congratulations are due to Alex Salmond, having successfully defended himself against what he characterised as “false allegations”- and therefore false charges.
There is no novelty in innocent persons being arraigned in Scotland’s courts.
Following upon his acquittal, Mr. Salmond declared that his faith in the judicial system, earlier expressed, has been, “much reinforced”. I assume he was referring to the entire process from complaint to acquittal, rather than simply praising the trial judge and her colleagues.
I cannot be the only person who finds it peculiar, at the very least, that someone who insists the complaints against him are false, and that therefore the indictment he faced was equally false, can have faith “reinforced” in a system that he asks us to believe made common cause with dishonest complainers, acting in concert in order to cause him serious harms. Very peculiar.
It is even more startling when one bears in mind that Mr. Salmond was not the least concerned for the victims of such false allegations when he was First Minister. In fact, he was content to ignore the complaints of the victims of these criminal designs because it did not matter to him on a personal or political level.
Now, understanding just how close he came to becoming another designed miscarriage of justice victim, will he throw his considerable weight and use his platforms to campaign for justice for such victims and changes to the law to prevent police, Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service and court personnel from continuing with the ways and means they employ to fit up their victims?
Among these ways and means are sections 274 and 275 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, that enable the Crown and courts to refuse defendants and jurors evidence – jurors later told they are masters of the facts when they have no idea what evidence has been denied them by this convicting device.
The Rule in Moorov is used promiscuously as a means of manufacturing corroboration – a requirement the Scottish Government may seek to do away with.
Mr. Salmond advises he plans to release information denied him and the jurors at a later date.
Was this information the subject of a section 275 ruling?
If so, is it lawful to release this information to the community or would such a course comprise contempt of court?
The Advocate Depute, prosecuting, resorted to what appears to be a habitual, standard Crown Office device, relied upon to achieve convictions whether relevant or irrelevant to the matter at hand, that has it that man has power, woman has not, therefore criminal misconduct is a given. The absence of investigation and evidence no longer relevant, if it ever was. The fact the victim accused has not committed a crime and the fact there is no crime, an irrelevance to Crown Office personnel.
This fabrication, this misandrist prejudice, is wholly unacceptable. It must be exposed for what it is: a means to convict only, and thereafter outlawed.
Victims of fabricated indictments, miscarriage of justice victims and victims acquitted of false allegations and charges, will be surprised by the current First Minister’s apparent belief that complaints of crime are “thoroughly investigated”. The bitter irony of this fantasy will not be lost on our justice system’s victims, viz. the victims of the men and women who conspire to ruin their lives by way of false allegations, fabricated indictments and designed miscarriages of justice.
Either the First Minister is ignorant of the facts or, as her predecessor, indifferent to the crimes perpetrated upon such victims.
Scotland’s sheriffs and judges allow our courts to be employed as instruments of abuse without regard to the community’s view of this essentially criminal practice.
Speaking at the conclusion of the Salmond trial, Johanna Cherry QC MP is reported as saying there are, “serious questions about the background to these cases”.
Whether speaking in the particular or expressing a concern at the endless stream of miscarriages of justice designed by Scotland’s corrupt justice system and its barbaric personnel, the fact of the matter is that there are indeed serious questions to be asked of this system and its defenders who are content to see lives ruined just because.
Can we hope that lessons will be learned? I doubt it. Such is the arrogance and absence of empathy that characterises the legal profession, including judicial office holders, and the cowardice that characterises our politicians when confronted with the facts of this manner of crime.