Jump to content

 

 

The Great Salmond Sex Scandal


Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Bill said:

Is there just a possibility this is turning into an existential threat to Sturgeon. Nothing else I can think of justifies the desperate cover up being conducted in plain sight.

Could well be, but i'm not close enough. Is this being headlined in the press and media daily, is there any pressure building or are the SG/SNP being allowed to set the pace and agenda?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

Not really.  The press, like Scottish Labour and Scottish Conservatives, aren't doing their jobs properly. 

The unionist parties in Scotland are such feckless disappointments, all of them. Sturgeon is ripe for humiliation but no one seems capable of grabbing the limelight long enough to be noticed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another day, another Lord Advocate caught with his pinstriped bespoke breeks down. First Mulholland, now Wolffe.

I do hope that there is a box of them in Sturgeon's press. 

This time Woolfe has to admit that the Government was terminologically inexact in  its dealings with The Court of Session. 

At best incompetence, at worst, barefaced chicanery.

 

From today's Times

 

Alex Salmond inquiry: SNP gave false promises over documents

Kieran Andrews

Wednesday November 18 2020, 12.01am, The Times

UK politics

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/alex-salmond-inquiry-snp-gave-false-promises-over-documents-20d9fbs3b

 

James Wolffe admitted that the government made ­“embarrassing” and incorrect promises to the country’s highest court

 

Scotland’s most senior law officer has admitted that the government made “embarrassing” and incorrect promises to the country’s highest court over documents related to its unlawful investigation of Alex Salmond.

James Wolffe, QC, the lord advocate, confirmed that collections of papers had to be handed over during a judicial review between Mr Salmond and the government he used to lead.

They were delivered after the Court of Session had been told by the SNP-led administration that it held no more material relevant to the case.

Disclosures in the documents formed the basis for the government’s concession in the case, which left taxpayers with a bill of £630,000 in external legal fees.

It is understood that Roddy Dunlop, QC, who was acting for the government, had to apologise to the court at least five times after being instructed to say there were no more documents available, only for additional material to appear.

Giving evidence under oath yesterday to a Holyrood inquiry into the affair, Mr Wolffe refused to deny suggestions that Mr Dunlop, who is the dean of the Faculty of Advocates, threatened to quit during proceedings. He also confirmed to Alex Cole-Hamilton, the Liberal Democrat MSP, that Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, had the final decision on how to act on legal advice related to the case.

Although he said that prior contact between the official investigating the case and the complainants — the point over which the government conceded the case — had been identified as an issue in October 2018, it was decided that December that a defence could be made after a review of the legal position.

A commission of documents ordered by Lord Pentland, who was overseeing the judicial review, led to more material being disclosed on December 19, Mr Wolffe said. This included a meeting the day before a formal complaint was made and an email chain indicating arrangements to meet with the other complainer.

“The point is, the government should not be in a position of having given assurances about full disclosure, and then for those to turn out to be inaccurate,” he said. “That is not an appropriate outcome from a government point of view. It’s certainly not from my point of view as the senior law officer.

“Against the background where a government had determined to be, and was determined — as it ought to be in litigation — to be candid and transparent, to find itself in the position that it found itself in the course of the commission and subsequently in terms of the additional documents coming to light was embarrassing. That should not happen.”

The court ruled that the government’s investigation of harassment allegations against Mr Salmond was unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias. The former first minister was awarded £512,000 in costs.

Murdo Fraser, the Scottish Conservative MSP, said: “Any lingering hope of this SNP government doing the right thing was dashed today.”

Edited by Uilleam
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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.