Jump to content

The Trial of Alex Salmond


Trapper John McIntyre

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

This is what I just can’t understand either. 
Why? It doesn’t make any sense. 
That’s not to say I don’t believe something has went on here but its all very bizarre. 

You not think it could make it more interesting seeing how this plays out? 

Withholding  the evidence for the committee prevents the complete benefit of the doubt.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Trapper John McIntyre

    108

  • Space Mackerel

    75

  • Justin Z

    63

  • Beast Boy

    55

12 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

This is what I just can’t understand either. 
Why? It doesn’t make any sense. 
That’s not to say I don’t believe something has went on here but its all very bizarre. 

 

I've been sort of following it. From what I can understand from CM, wings and others posts online it seems to have been some sort of attempt to prevent a come back that has gotten badly out of hand, i.e to ruin his reputation rather than jail him.

 

Although tbf those sources are about as biased as they come too. So its all kinda murky. Something is definitely off though. 

 

One thing that always struck me as odd was that all of the accusers seem to originate in a 5 year span. Typically when you think of men in power that abuse female subordinates they typically have a reign of terror that lasts decades and is very much an open secret - Saville and his type, Weinstein or Epstein for example, likewise, Clintons antics have dogged his career. It was very much established in their pattern of behaviour and an open secret. I find it very hard to believe that someone like Salmond who is hardly a friend of the british establishment would have been gotten away with that for decades with no one being the wiser. If you're in opposition to him, thats absolute political gold and would have broken the SNP years ago. To me, it doesn't sound like something in his character. (I completely accept the idea that people are great until they're not, but nonetheless when you pair him up against other people to have abused their positions it doesn't seem correct). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

Not too sure on that either and can't see them going that far to prevent him making a comeback.  All that so the Murrells stay relevant?  

I'd like to know if there are other reasons for it, but not a clue.   

You giving any kudos to his claims of emails and vicious circles at nikki's house?  

Just thought it looks piwderkeg stuff if any of it is true. 

 

Agree with you, but just can't see the motive behind the alleged huge operation to convict him.

 

11 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

You not think it could make it more interesting seeing how this plays out? 

Withholding  the evidence for the committee prevents the complete benefit of the doubt.  

 

 

 

But the implication and Murray's allegatiuon is:  a  group of politicians & civil servants were prepared to conspire, to put an innocent man in jail, or at least give him a sexual misconduct record. Why ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

This is what I just can’t understand either. 
Why? It doesn’t make any sense. 
That’s not to say I don’t believe something has went on here but its all very bizarre. 

 

2 minutes ago, felix said:

 

Agree with you, but just can't see the motive behind the alleged huge operation to convict him.

 

 

But the implication and Murray's allegatiuon is:  a  group of politicians & civil servants were prepared to conspire, to put an innocent man in jail, or at least give him a sexual misconduct record. Why ?

 

In the affidavit Murray says that when he met Salmond, Salmond told him that he had gone to see Sturgeon and had complained to her that independence was not being progressed quickly enough. Shortly afterwards Salmond had a whole lot of other things to think about, not least staying out of jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, felix said:

 

Agree with you, but just can't see the motive behind the alleged huge operation to convict him.

 

 

But the implication and Murray's allegatiuon is:  a  group of politicians & civil servants were prepared to conspire, to put an innocent man in jail, or at least give him a sexual misconduct record. Why ?

Is that not what the committee are looking for?  

Withholding stuff only adds to those who will now think Murray might have something valuable.  

What do you think?   Him just upset at the perceived lact of support during that period?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, coconut doug said:

 

 

In the affidavit Murray says that when he met Salmond, Salmond told him that he had gone to see Sturgeon and had complained to her that independence was not being progressed quickly enough. Shortly afterwards Salmond had a whole lot of other things to think about, not least staying out of jail.

You think his frustration at her not going for it sooner is a pivotal point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

 

In the affidavit Murray says that when he met Salmond, Salmond told him that he had gone to see Sturgeon and had complained to her that independence was not being progressed quickly enough. Shortly afterwards Salmond had a whole lot of other things to think about, not least staying out of jail.

 

Yes, but why the alleged conspiracy to put him in jail ?

Murray quotes Salmon as saying something like: they wanted to drive a stake through his heart !?  What's he done to upset some people so much ?

 

31 minutes ago, Auldbenches said:

Is that not what the committee are looking for?  

Withholding stuff only adds to those who will now think Murray might have something valuable.  

What do you think?   Him just upset at the perceived lact of support during that period?  

 

I've no idea. Just wondering why, if Murray's right, what's behind Eck being tarred & feathered by his own party/ex colleagues ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Auldbenches said:

You think his frustration at her not going for it sooner is a pivotal point? 

 

He was getting involved again. He was critical. Its not about going sooner imo it's about articulating the case and doing it robustly. Most of the current lot cannot or will not engage properly and there are very few counters to UK attacks. Again IMO Salmond met these attacks head on and won most of them. 

    Sturgeon too was very capable of making a robust counter or case but hasn't really done so in a long time. She seems happy with her current position and doesn't want to jeopardise her grip on power. She has advisers who are not persuaded by independence and at least one has said so. They are Labour all over again, rammed with careerists they don't want to give their positions up for independence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, felix said:

 

Yes, but why the alleged conspiracy to put him in jail ?

Murray quotes Salmon as saying something like: they wanted to drive a stake through his heart !?  What's he done to upset some people so much ?

 

I've no idea. Just wondering why, if Murray's right, what's behind Eck being tarred & feathered by his own party/ex colleagues ?

 

I dont think the original intention was to put him in jail. They just wanted to discredit him and remove him from the fray. They trawled around for incriminating stories hoping that they could sanction him in some way through their disciplinary procedure for ministers. This wasn't going to work though as he was no longer a minister so they changed their procedures to make them retrospective. This does seem incredibly stupid of them but it is true and they were found out when their attempt at retrospective action was declared unstateable by the SG lawyers. This is where Salmond was given £500,000+ for his legal costs. Salmond had spent this money trying to defend himself against their unlawful procedure. He and his lawyers even told them this but they did not buckle until the day of the hearing to determine the legality of their procedure against him.

 

   Somewhere around this time the government hatched a plan to save face by making the allegations criminal. This could only be done with the support of the Lord Avocate. They took it to court even though at least one of the alphabet women did not want to do so and even though the police said they did not have enough evidence. They coerced others into making statements and according to Murray they expected Salmond to be found guilty on some of it as a compromise outcome. No smoke without fire etc. If that happened then last man frees all and the end justifies the means and the SG are off the hook for their collusion and incompetence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
1 hour ago, OTT said:

 

I've been sort of following it. From what I can understand from CM, wings and others posts online it seems to have been some sort of attempt to prevent a come back that has gotten badly out of hand, i.e to ruin his reputation rather than jail him.

 

Although tbf those sources are about as biased as they come too. So its all kinda murky. Something is definitely off though. 

 

One thing that always struck me as odd was that all of the accusers seem to originate in a 5 year span. Typically when you think of men in power that abuse female subordinates they typically have a reign of terror that lasts decades and is very much an open secret - Saville and his type, Weinstein or Epstein for example, likewise, Clintons antics have dogged his career. It was very much established in their pattern of behaviour and an open secret. I find it very hard to believe that someone like Salmond who is hardly a friend of the british establishment would have been gotten away with that for decades with no one being the wiser. If you're in opposition to him, thats absolute political gold and would have broken the SNP years ago. To me, it doesn't sound like something in his character. (I completely accept the idea that people are great until they're not, but nonetheless when you pair him up against other people to have abused their positions it doesn't seem correct). 

Yeah he doesn’t really fit the profile of a sex case imo. You never know though but the minute I read the charges I honestly laughed they sounded ridiculous and jumped up. It honestly didn’t surprise me when he was cleared. 
Seems like this has some way to run. 
I was laughing last night too that a real hun type Jambo mate of mine who is obsessed with the snp was posting on Facebook last night about Sturgeons apparent super injunction. Now I’ve heard rumours that her marriage is of convenience and tbh I don’t care much but he was saying that’s it’s all common knowledge and she has a french lover and Murrell is well known on the gay scene as well? 
Is this common knowledge??
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

Yeah he doesn’t really fit the profile of a sex case imo. You never know though but the minute I read the charges I honestly laughed they sounded ridiculous and jumped up. It honestly didn’t surprise me when he was cleared. 
Seems like this has some way to run. 
I was laughing last night too that a real hun type Jambo mate of mine who is obsessed with the snp was posting on Facebook last night about Sturgeons apparent super injunction. Now I’ve heard rumours that her marriage is of convenience and tbh I don’t care much but he was saying that’s it’s all common knowledge and she has a french lover and Murrell is well known on the gay scene as well? 
Is this common knowledge??
 

Ive seen lots of folk on twitter referring to her her liking a french fancy. A diplomat by all accounts.

 

Whether there is any truth in it ive no idea. Dont think folk would be that bothered if it was true TBH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
1 minute ago, Candy said:

Ive seen lots of folk on twitter referring to her her liking a french fancy. A diplomat by all accounts.

 

Whether there is any truth in it ive no idea. Dont think folk would be that bothered if it was true TBH

Oh really? Lol oh well mibbe that’ll come out at some point as well. 
Like you say I don’t care much for what she gets up behind closed doors but I do care if she’s been up to no good with this AS malark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
11 minutes ago, Candy said:

Ive seen lots of folk on twitter referring to her her liking a french fancy. A diplomat by all accounts.

 

Whether there is any truth in it ive no idea. Dont think folk would be that bothered if it was true TBH


Big Ruth loves a bit of  Gillian Anderson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

 

He was getting involved again. He was critical. Its not about going sooner imo it's about articulating the case and doing it robustly. Most of the current lot cannot or will not engage properly and there are very few counters to UK attacks. Again IMO Salmond met these attacks head on and won most of them. 

    Sturgeon too was very capable of making a robust counter or case but hasn't really done so in a long time. She seems happy with her current position and doesn't want to jeopardise her grip on power. She has advisers who are not persuaded by independence and at least one has said so. They are Labour all over again, rammed with careerists they don't want to give their positions up for independence.

I can see why you make comparisons with labour.  Though Scottish labour are still when it comes to careerists.   

Look at the leadership contest last week...

If it isn't timing that these advisers are worried about? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nucky Thompson
53 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

 Now I’ve heard rumours that her marriage is of convenience and tbh I don’t care much but he was saying that’s it’s all common knowledge and she has a french lover and Murrell is well known on the gay scene as well? 
Is this common knowledge??
 

It sounds like something out of Dynasty or Knots Landing :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

 

I dont think the original intention was to put him in jail. They just wanted to discredit him and remove him from the fray. They trawled around for incriminating stories hoping that they could sanction him in some way through their disciplinary procedure for ministers. This wasn't going to work though as he was no longer a minister so they changed their procedures to make them retrospective. This does seem incredibly stupid of them but it is true and they were found out when their attempt at retrospective action was declared unstateable by the SG lawyers. This is where Salmond was given £500,000+ for his legal costs. Salmond had spent this money trying to defend himself against their unlawful procedure. He and his lawyers even told them this but they did not buckle until the day of the hearing to determine the legality of their procedure against him.

 

   Somewhere around this time the government hatched a plan to save face by making the allegations criminal. This could only be done with the support of the Lord Avocate. They took it to court even though at least one of the alphabet women did not want to do so and even though the police said they did not have enough evidence. They coerced others into making statements and according to Murray they expected Salmond to be found guilty on some of it as a compromise outcome. No smoke without fire etc. If that happened then last man frees all and the end justifies the means and the SG are off the hook for their collusion and incompetence.

 

Thanks for the explanation.  Still can't believe (or understand) how initial allegations of sexual harassment, possibly designed to discredit someone, suddenly turns in to attempted rape, and serious jail time.  Surely can't be revenge from the government, for their humiliation in the first court "battle" ?

 

What's undeniable, is the Scottish Government were  "unlawful" first time around, and no one's been held to account (as far as I know). Instead, a blogger who reported the trial , apparently accurately ...is now in the dock !

 

Something smells of shite here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
9 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

Who wouldn't have a bash at that :yas:


More chance you have than Fat Ruth. 
 

Imagine tagging her too. ****s sakes. Embarrassing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
23 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

It sounds like something out of Dynasty or Knots Landing :lol:


Was Dynasty and Knots Landing a documentary?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
5 minutes ago, Weakened Offender said:

 

The fat mess can but dream. 😁


Oor Nic has KB’ed Fat Ruth hunners of times 😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
1 hour ago, jack D and coke said:

Yeah he doesn’t really fit the profile of a sex case imo. You never know though but the minute I read the charges I honestly laughed they sounded ridiculous and jumped up. It honestly didn’t surprise me when he was cleared. 
Seems like this has some way to run. 
I was laughing last night too that a real hun type Jambo mate of mine who is obsessed with the snp was posting on Facebook last night about Sturgeons apparent super injunction. Now I’ve heard rumours that her marriage is of convenience and tbh I don’t care much but he was saying that’s it’s all common knowledge and she has a french lover and Murrell is well known on the gay scene as well? 
Is this common knowledge??
 

 

Not sure if it's common knowledge but I've heard it's a marriage of convenience and she has a woman on the go in the Borders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
On 28/01/2021 at 05:36, manaliveits105 said:

LOOK ! Gonna gee me wan oan the lips Eck ? 

 

I assume you mean the set below as she has got feck all lips to kiss on her coupon 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Space Mackerel
18 minutes ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

Not sure if it's common knowledge but I've heard it's a marriage of convenience and she has a woman on the go in the Borders


‘Not sure’

 

😁😁😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

manaliveits105
51 minutes ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

Not sure if it's common knowledge but I've heard it's a marriage of convenience and she has a woman on the go in the Borders

When’s the Schofield moment ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

Not sure if it's common knowledge but I've heard it's a marriage of convenience and she has a woman on the go in the Borders

 

Charlie Dimmock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The old saying, the lies catch up with you seems to fit in with the current Salmond, Sturgeon saga.

 

What comes out in the next few weeks will be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
2 hours ago, Australis said:

The old saying, the lies catch up with you seems to fit in with the current Salmond, Sturgeon saga.

 

What comes out in the next few weeks will be interesting.

 

Trouble is these two could fall in a barrel of shit and still come up smelling of roses.

 

Claim then counter-claim - Mexican stand off then a quick kiss and make up and move on as if nothing has happened with both reputations intact.

 

Both charlatans with massive ego's

 

 

Edited by Maroon Sailor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

Not sure if it's common knowledge but I've heard it's a marriage of convenience and she has a woman on the go in the Borders

I have a relative who lives down south.  He has heard rumours too.  Her heterosexuality may not be all it appears, allegedly.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

Yeah he doesn’t really fit the profile of a sex case imo. You never know though but the minute I read the charges I honestly laughed they sounded ridiculous and jumped up. It honestly didn’t surprise me when he was cleared. 
Seems like this has some way to run. 
I was laughing last night too that a real hun type Jambo mate of mine who is obsessed with the snp was posting on Facebook last night about Sturgeons apparent super injunction. Now I’ve heard rumours that her marriage is of convenience and tbh I don’t care much but he was saying that’s it’s all common knowledge and she has a french lover and Murrell is well known on the gay scene as well? 
Is this common knowledge??
 


He admitted he was a sex case but just a friendly one that was misunderstood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no evidence of the wider public, let alone the SNP, turning on Nicola Sturgeon over this. This is wishful thinking from opponents. There is no smoking gun - only he said, she said. It is true to say events can sink even the most charismatic of leaders but this event has whimpered along for a long time now, with little impact.

 

The idea that Nicola Sturgeon conspired against Alex Salmond is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't even justify any further thought or consideration. From my reading, he wanted this sorted out through arbitration at an early stage. Guess what Sturgeon's opponents would have said if she supported him with this?

 

The handling of the internal investigation was clearly a mess and tainted with some bias, against Alex Salmond. He was vindicated on that, to an extent, but now wants to resurrect his standing in politics and is happy to throw anyone under the bus on the way to that. To me, he just comes across as yesterday's man who has little else to offer other than bitter conspiracy theories.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jambogaza said:

There is no evidence of the wider public, let alone the SNP, turning on Nicola Sturgeon over this. This is wishful thinking from opponents. There is no smoking gun - only he said, she said. It is true to say events can sink even the most charismatic of leaders but this event has whimpered along for a long time now, with little impact.

 

The idea that Nicola Sturgeon conspired against Alex Salmond is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't even justify any further thought or consideration. From my reading, he wanted this sorted out through arbitration at an early stage. Guess what Sturgeon's opponents would have said if she supported him with this?

 

The handling of the internal investigation was clearly a mess and tainted with some bias, against Alex Salmond. He was vindicated on that, to an extent, but now wants to resurrect his standing in politics and is happy to throw anyone under the bus on the way to that. To me, he just comes across as yesterday's man who has little else to offer other than bitter conspiracy theories.

 

 

This wins the Naive post of the decade award. Politics is a nasty game and the Sturgeon camp wanted rid of the claw because of the damage he caused during the referendum campaign, with the likelihood he would do it again. If you put your grown up pants on, the murky world of party politics and power will make a lot more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Des Lynam said:


He admitted he was a sex case but just a friendly one that was misunderstood. 

 

I remember him admitting he wasn't a saint, but can't recall him owning up to being a sex case ?

 

21 minutes ago, jambogaza said:

There is no evidence of the wider public, let alone the SNP, turning on Nicola Sturgeon over this. This is wishful thinking from opponents. There is no s

 

 

 

Have you read Kenny MacAskill's comments to Sky News , posted earlier ?

 

1 minute ago, SE16 3LN said:

This wins the Naive post of the decade award. Politics is a nasty game and the Sturgeon camp wanted rid of the claw because of the damage he caused during the referendum campaign, with the likelihood he would do it again. If you put your grown up pants on, the murky world of party politics and power will make a lot more sense.

 

What damage was that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SE16 3LN said:

This wins the Naive post of the decade award. Politics is a nasty game and the Sturgeon camp wanted rid of the claw because of the damage he caused during the referendum campaign, with the likelihood he would do it again. If you put your grown up pants on, the murky world of party politics and power will make a lot more sense.

 

This post wins foil tin hat of the year post, congratulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, felix said:

 

I remember him admitting he wasn't a saint, but can't recall him owning up to being a sex case ?

 

 

Have you read Kenny MacAskill's comments to Sky News , posted earlier ?

 

 

What damage was that ?

 

Kenny MacAskill is a Salmond Ally. Always has been. Sure,the Salmond camp is noisy but it's on the fringes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jambogaza said:

 

Kenny MacAskill is a Salmond Ally. Always has been. Sure,the Salmond camp is noisy but it's on the fringes.

 

She has broken the ministerial code by forgetting about when she first learned about the Salmond allegations. 

Nobody believes her on that.

 

MacAskill may be a Salmond ally but why would he defend a sex pest if he believes that's what Salmond is? Nobody wants to be associated with that.

 

Who is in this noisy Salmond camp? Those who oppose NS are not necessarily Salmond supporters. His days in frontline politics are over. The Salmond v Sturgeon thing is a media construct imo.

 

It's not just Sturgeon though others are seriously implicated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

 

She has broken the ministerial code by forgetting about when she first learned about the Salmond allegations. 

Nobody believes her on that.

 

MacAskill may be a Salmond ally but why would he defend a sex pest if he believes that's what Salmond is? Nobody wants to be associated with that.

 

Who is in this noisy Salmond camp? Those who oppose NS are not necessarily Salmond supporters. His days in frontline politics are over. The Salmond v Sturgeon thing is a media construct imo.

 

It's not just Sturgeon though others are seriously implicated. 

 

I think that's right. I'm guessing a few senior civil servants and SNP members will be emptied because of the Salmond affair, whilst Sturgeon remains intact. The party won't want to see her go, especially during her current wave of popularity. Could be wrong of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, felix said:

 

I think that's right. I'm guessing a few senior civil servants and SNP members will be emptied because of the Salmond affair, whilst Sturgeon remains intact. The party won't want to see her go, especially during her current wave of popularity. Could be wrong of course.

 

She probably does need to let people fall on the sword, for sure. She might be waitinf for the inquiry to conclude. But the idea she wanted to see him jailed/ruined is tin foil hat stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jambogaza said:

 

She probably does need to let people fall on the sword, for sure. She might be waitinf for the inquiry to conclude. But the idea she wanted to see him jailed/ruined is tin foil hat stuff.

 

But if Kenny MacAskill's right - Nicola's husband "encouraged a prosecution" of Mr Salmond and he's got the texts to prove it.

Difficult to believe she was blind to this.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, felix said:

 

But if Kenny MacAskill's right - Nicola's husband "encouraged a prosecution" of Mr Salmond and he's got the texts to prove it.

Difficult to believe she was blind to this.   

 

Or perhaps he believed there was a case to answer and wanted it pursued. Each side will have their own explanation. Anyone looking for a moment of truth might be disappointed. When you think there is a conspiracy though, instantly everything looks suspicious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon Sailor
1 hour ago, felix said:

 

I think that's right. I'm guessing a few senior civil servants and SNP members will be emptied because of the Salmond affair, whilst Sturgeon remains intact. The party won't want to see her go, especially during her current wave of popularity. Could be wrong of course.

 

Why is she popular ?

Link to comment
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.




×
×
  • Create New...