Thursday 25 February 2021

Something is rotten in the Fish-tank of Scotland


 Our readers who have attained the years of maturity and discretion may remember Joe Friday. He was a fictional detective in the LAPD, in a radio and TV drama from 1949–1959 and again from 1967–1970. 
Would that we had Joe to assist us in understanding  the alleged conspiracy by the Scottish Government up to and including the First Minister. The tangle of facts, allegations and obfuscations has been deliberately spun, one suspects, by the SNP,  ably assisted by the media whose covering of one of the greatest political scandals has been partial, to say the least. 
Fact Number 1:
The Scottish government opened an investigation in 2018 into claims of sexual misconduct against Salmond. He sought a judicial review, which  ruled  that
the investigation had been unlawful and 'tainted by apparent bias'. Mr Salmond was awarded more than £512,000 in taxpayer cash for his legal fees.
Fact Number 2: 
On the 23rd March 2020, Alex Salmond was found
not guilty of 12 charges of attempted rape, sexual assault and indecent assault after about six hours of deliberations, following almost nine days of evidence. One further charge of sexual assault with intent to rape was found not proven. The nine women involved in the charges were all current or former Scottish government officials, or SNP politicians.
Fact Number 3:
The standard of proof in the criminal court is defined as the quantum of evidence that must be presented before a Court before a fact can be said to exist or not exist. The standard of proof to be followed in a criminal case is that of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. This means that Alex Salmond didn't commit the offences of which he stood accused.
Fact Number 4:
The Committee on the Scottish Government Handling of Harassment Complaints was set up to look into the Scottish Government investigation of the allegations against Alec Salmond. It has taken witness evidence and expects to take evidence tomorrow from Salmond and next week from Sturgeon. Salmond has twice rescheduled his appearance because he had not been allowed to present his full written submission, on legal grounds that have subsequently been found to be spurious.

Now we stray into the territory of allegations, of which there are many - here are some choice morsels -

Allegation 1: Salmond states that " the evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned. That includes, for the avoidance of doubt, Peter Murrell (Chief Executive), Ian McCann (Compliance officer) and Sue Ruddick (Chief Operating Officer) of the SNP together with Liz Lloyd, the First Minister’s Chief of Staff. There are others who, for legal reasons, I am not allowed to name."
Allegation 2: A fishing expedition was conducted by Nicola Sturgeon to invite anyone who had been sexually harassed to come forward. Surgeon's husband, Peter Murrell, gave evidence of the letter sent by the First Minister, Sturgeon,  to all SNP members on 27th August 2018. The email was sent to 100,000 members but did not yield one complaint about Salmond.
Allegation 3: A senior member of the SNP administrative team at Westminster refused to supply names to HQ, expressing the view that she was not prepared to take part in an obvious “witch-hunt” which would be incompatible with her professional responsibilities as a lawyer. That staff member has submitted an affidavit for use in evidence by the Committee. It demonstrates that at the time of the initial trawl for individuals, there was profound disquiet about the ethics and legality of the approach.
Allegation 4: "there were 17 meetings of the Committee formed to monitor and plan the Scottish Government defence of the Judicial Review between August 2018 and January 2019. Paul Cackette in his evidence said that there were daily meetings while Ms Mackinnon suggested three times a week. Despite this information being offered at the evidence session of 1st December no information has been received by the Committee of any of these meetings. I believe there have to be such emails which show the Lord Advocate’s advice on the possibilities of sisting (pausing) the Judicial Review behind the criminal case. The advantage of doing so in a context where the Judicial Review was likely to be lost was clear. Any adverse comment or publicity about the illegality of the Scottish Government actions would be swept away in the publicity of my arrest and subsequent criminal proceedings."
The full text of Salmond's submission, (link kindly provided by mr mike), can be found at: 
This is Salmond's own summary:

"The procedure was devised when the Permanent Secretary, as decision maker, had knowledge of emerging complaints against me. From the outset the Permanent Secretary was compromised and should not have taken on that role.

The procedure was unsound not just in its implementation but in its genesis. It was devised “at pace”, probably with the purpose of progressing complaints against me and certainly without proper care or regard to its legality or effective consultation with the unions.

The documents disclosed to the Committee demonstrate further serious abuses of process by both the Investigating Officer and the Permanent Secretary.

In a further breach of the duty of candour the Government owed to the Court, those documents were not made available at Judicial Review.

The Investigating Officer had not just “prior involvement”, but subsequently regular contact with the complainants of a nature and level which was self-evidently inconsistent with that of an impartial official.

The Permanent Secretary who in her own words “established” the procedure met or spoke to both complainants on multiple occasions (including in mid process) and failed to disclose this in either the civil or criminal case.

The procedure was conceptually flawed and would have collapsed on principle even if it had been properly implemented. It is a retrospective, hybrid policy, which claims jurisdiction over private citizens who might have no connection whatsoever with the Scottish Government and shows complete confusion between the legitimate roles of Government and political parties.

It is demonstrably unfair. It transgresses the most basic principles of natural justice in not even allowing the person complained about the right to prepare their own defence. In addition, the Permanent Secretary denied access to civil servants, witness statements or even my diaries until they were pursued in a subject access request.

The Government was aware at a very early stage that they were at significant risk of defeat in the Judicial Review, and by October 2018 were advised that, on the balance of probabilities, they were likely to lose. Nevertheless they kept the clock running and the public ended up paying over £600,000 as a result.

This information on likely defeat in the JR was communicated to key decision makers – the Permanent Secretary, First Minster, the Lord Advocate, the Chief of Staff- in meetings with external Counsel through October and November 2018.

The interests of complainants were disregarded by the Government in refusing mediation initially without consultation, being given no consultation whatsoever on the possibility of arbitration, being given false assurances on the Government accepting their clear view against reporting matters to the police and then sending the report to the Crown Office against their express wishes. The Government didn’t even instruct counsel to attend court for the procedural hearing to address my application to guarantee the anonymity of complainants.

The Crown Office has blocked key information coming to this Inquiry by wilfully misinterpreting legislation designed for other purposes.

The Lord Advocate is manifestly conflicted in his roles as both Government legal adviser and prosecutor.

The advice of the Lord Advocate at one stage included, for example, the option of sisting (pausing) the Judicial Review to allow a criminal case to overtake the JR proceedings. A consequence of this happening would have been to protect the government from the catastrophic damage arising from losing the judicial review and a finding of unlawful conduct.

This prospect provided an incentive and imperative for the recruiting and encouragement of police complaints from others.

This was done by the closest advisers to the First Minister and senior SNP officials actively involving civil servants AFTER the police investigation had started.

The Permanent Secretary ordered her decision report to be sent to the Crown Agent, David Harvie, against the terms of the policy and the wishes of the complainants. At that time I understand that she was his line manager.

Against police advice the Permanent Secretary decided to press release the fact of complaints on Thursday 21st August 2018. That publication was only prevented by threat of legal action by my solicitors.

A matter of hours later, there was what the ICO assessed as a prima facie criminal leak of information including details of complaints to the Daily Record, in breach of my rights of confidentiality, and those of the complainants. Such action was also contrary to the express assurances of confidentiality offered to all parties and central to such workplace issues.

The Judicial Review was only conceded when both Counsel threatened to resign from the case

The policy and actions of the Permanent Secretary and the Government were accepted as and then judged as “unlawful”, “procedurally unfair” and “tainted by apparent bias”.

The real cost to the Scottish people runs into many millions of pounds and yet no-one in this entire process has uttered the simple words which are necessary on occasions to renew and refresh democratic institutions – “I Resign”.

The Committee now has the opportunity to address that position.

Rt. Hon. Alex Salmond

17th February 2021

The question asks itself - why has the First Minister of Scotland allegedly instigated a conspiracy to ruin her predecessor, up to and including having him imprisoned? When they used to be such good friends?

In her glossy election material, delivered to every home in Scotland, RuthBoy Davidson, looking tough, Scottish  and capable, states: "only the Scottish Conservatives can prevent the SNP winning a majority, stopping their second independence referendum". Do you know, I'm going to have to vote conservative. For the first time.


mongoose said...

It is interesting, mrs i. You may not know but I venture as far north as Edinburgh - a couple of times every year - as my business partner lives there. She has a blue-arsed, Braveheart attitude to what I treasonously call McFreedom. She is also one of those outgoing sorts who network assiduously - probably does it in her sleep - and she knows several of the people whose names appear hereabove. Edinburgh is a small town after all.

I tease her mercilessly, as you would expect, about the failed referendum, the Phantom trams that nobody ever goes on, and all the other mcbollocks. But even she lets it squeak out that independence isn't actually the objective of the upper echelons. They want - have always wanted - money and power. I believe that it used to be called Devomax. My friend calls it "Devomax++". They want public funds to keep their Glaswegian NEDs in Buckie and to maintain a steady supply of nice restaurants in Edinburgh. Actual real independence is the label on the packet. So Mrs Fish isn't an MI5 asset or any of the other silliness. She's just today's apparatchik. Good for fuck all but popping down one of mr i's mineshafts after a good rubdown with a housebrick.

Vote for TFT?! For shame, madam. Say it ain't so.

Mike said...

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

mrs ishmael said...

That's one way of looking at it, mr mike.
Ever keen to avoid defamation and far be it from me to utter anything libelous, I think it is safe to point out that Sturgeon joined the Scottish National Party in 1986, at the age of 16, when Salmond was 32 and a member of Parliament and he assisted in her development as a politician. She said of Salmond:"The personal debt of gratitude I owe Alex is immeasurable. He has been my friend, mentor and colleague for more than 20 years. Quite simply, I would not have been able to do what I have in politics without his constant advice, guidance and support through all these years".

mrs ishmael said...

That's interesting, mr mongoose. So nobody would be more shocked and aghast than your chum and her powerful, gourmet friends if Scotland was cut adrift from the Union. It's a dangerous game they are playing.

mongoose said...

I think that is just what they are doing, mrs i, playing a dangerous game. There are two factions. The rank-and-file and true believers would give their last bowl of porridge to starve in the snow in a highland glen singling Flower of Scotland. And then there is the cynical clan of political parasites who saw devolution as a ticket too riches and everything they previously had to go to Westminster to get. It is a complicated game of expectation management. Regarding Mr Fish, I think they fucked with the wrong wily old bastard. He'll have Mrs Fish back on Arbroath Town Council where she so richly deserves to be.

lady maga said...

fact number one, two, three and four:

the public figure whom we all know-and-hate as 'alexis salmondeli' is, in reality, former president of the united states donald scrump - donning a deep disguise.

yessir, it was actually the devil incarnate donny strumpf who, without so much as a by-your-leave, diddled all the women in the scottish parliament - down to-and-inexcusably-including the undelectable first minister dungeon...

and that is not all, oh no...

for i hear, from a reliable source-of-utter-shite - otherwise known as my best buddy distillery - that desperate donald was also directly responsible for the christchurch mosque massacre in new normal zealotland, the perpetrator of which non-socially-distanced atrocity was later discovered to have been furnished with a highly detailed set of directions to the scene-of-crime - all written on official white house notepaper, and signed by none other than said former president of the united state of islamophobia himself...

of course, mrs distillery blue nun should know exactly what she's talking about, since she cased the joint - along with neo-liberal soul-mate and cognitive clockwork-green therapist jasinda ardun - just a month before the attack.

oh my god, just listen this breaking news:

'leaving her personal dog-walker for dead in a cold-blooded hound-heist, two black gunmen wearing maga-baseball-caps have cruelly kidnapped lady nougat's beloved babies, rhubarb and mustard, at the point of a semi-automatic pistol.

apparently now on the scent of the unashamedly alt-right assailants, the federal bitches of investigation are following leads which strongly indicate this inhumane act of terror to be not only politically motivated, but also carried out on the strict personal orders of don "the doggy-bag" thump - a notorious white supremacist godfather, who is widely believed to have directed the entire canine-snatch-operation from the secluded cloisters of his mar-a-lago mafioso-mansion in palm beach, florida.

a third baby belonging to the world-famous singer-song-writer - and named dysphasia - is reported to have escaped the evil conservative clutches of the maga-abductors, and to be tucked up safe-and-well in the bosom of her shocked celebrity-family.'


how awful

don "the doggy-bag" thump said...


i've been just dying to get my hands on lady nougat's puppies...

and basically, if the one-billion-dollar-ransom is not paid by noon on monday, the pooches get it...

alternatively, i'll consider payment-by-instalment, but then, of course, the cute little pedigree-pets will have to be returned in instalments too...

starting with the ears.

mrs ishmael said...

oh, don't, mr ultrapox, it's not their fault, poor little doggos. They must be dreadfully frightened. I'm glad one of them managed to run away. Apparently, dog-napping is big in the wealthier parts of the States.
Anyway, onto the major news event of the day, if not the decade - according to Fraser Nelson, editor of the Spectator, which has done more than its bit to bring the Fish scandal into the public arena, this ranks up there with the Thorpe trial in terms of political controversy. I spent the afternoon glued to the TV, listening to Salmond give his evidence. He was sensible, well prepared, spoke without notes, knew his case inside out and back to front with knobs on. He made his case compellingly and convincingly. Dignified, much. How Sturgeon will survive this, gods only know. When Salmond was asked why these senior members of the Scottish establishment engaged in this malicious plot against him, Salmond set out his belief that the Scottish Government encouraged the prosecution in order to have the Judicial Review adjourned and then lost in the publicity of him being sent to prison, because the senior members of the Scottish Government knew they would lose the Judicial Review - which they did, at great cost, and Sturgeon would be forced to resign - which she didn't. The SNP would lose credibility and lose the next election.
When asked if he was sorry for his inappropriate behaviour towards female civil servants, Salmond referred his interlocutor to the findings of the Judicial Review and the Criminal prosecution - that is, that he was fully exonerated. But why were the two original complainants encouraged to make a complaint against Salmond in the first place, under the new retrospective policy against harassment, which was seemingly introduced for the express purpose of getting Salmond? I can see that the malicious plot was motivated by a cack-handed attempt to lose the Judicial Review, but why did the SNP turn on Salmond in the first place? Why wash the dirty linen in the public eye? Hubris? Naivety? Spite? A quick strike from the serpent's tooth? Distraction from the appalling record of the SNP?

Bungalow Bill said...

Between them, they have ensured that independence will not happen until we on here are all dead. And then some. They are graceless and humourless, and they have eaten themselves.

I'm a romantic nationalist and would have independent everywheres, with proliferating ancient languages, laws and customs and all manner of sprouting things to subvert the satanic globalists who want to enslave us and who would obliterate the lovely differences which underwrite our humanity

They will keep plotting to cut us to size but someone or something somewhere will refuse to fit and will regenerate the root of our freedom through the very tiniest of gaps.

Freedom and goodness cannot be defeated, however long it takes. Our victory is assured.

May Boris, Matt and Michael, the vile trinity, drop dead in the meanwhile.

Mike said...

I listened to all 4 hours of the Salmond testimony to the inquiry. I'm not a Salmond fan, but I have to say that his performance was exceptional. Very well briefed and on top of the detail. Presented very well and calmly despite provocation by some SNP numpties. Very much still a power to be reckoned with. Failing a stellar performance by Sturgeon, and if Salmond and 2 court cases can be proven flawed (impossible). then Sturgeon is toast.

mrs ishmael said...

It was an impressive performance, mr mike. Couldn't tear myself away, despite Harris' attempts to engage me in Walkies. Sturgeon's interrogation will be as compelling, I'm sure, unless she phones in sick. Whereas Salmond presented himself as rational, calm and statesmanlike, Sturgeon is likely to reveal herself as bad-tempered, shrewish and dismissive - it's her default position. There's a very good overview of the process that has brought the SNP and the Scottish Government to this present position in today's on-line Spectator, by Alex Massie. He attempts to answer my question - why did they embark on this disastrous witch hunt in the first place? There's the usual inuendo about Salmond's grooming behaviour, but this is telling: "In November 2017, Mark McDonald, the minister for childcare in the Scottish government, is discovered to have sent what are deemed 'inappropriate' texts to women. He is forced to resign as a minister. And speculation mounts that, if he is also compelled to resign his Aberdeen Donside seat, Alex Salmond might be interested in contesting the ensuing by-election.
Salmond’s supporters argue that Sturgeon considered this an intolerable threat to her own position. Salmond, they insist, had to be stopped and by any means necessary. Sturgeon’s allies believe this is a nonsensical interpretation of history, though they also acknowledge that the first minister had wearied of her predecessor. She, not him, was the boss now and his occasional intimations she was merely the SNP’s chauffeur were unwelcome."
As mr mongoose says, they took on the wrong wily old bastard.

mongoose said...

It is The Question, mrs i. Why?

When the referendum happened, and was lost, there was footage of Salmond being driven away. Head down in the back of his limo, face drawn, Fucked For Sure, all hope gone. Salmond is a true believer and he had lost his shot at McParadise. (Had he won, we'd have been rootling through the books to find out who his King was to get him back from across the water.)

And so he was done and it being 40 years between goes, he would die a Brit. He had to pass the matter on to Mrs McFish to keep it warm, do her bit, until another go could be had in 2050. Mrs McFish had other ideas. She is a tactical parasite. She has remade the devolved institutions as SNP institutions - corrupted and now arms of her political enterprise. By doing this, she has - as mr bb notes above - fucked the pooch. She is not bringing independence nearer, she is pushing it further away. Brexit has, of course, ruined her programme completely. Far from Devomax++, she is now being excluded as Westminster connects directly once again to the Scottish regions. Salmond gets this and either she does not or she is content to thwart his McTartan dreams for cashmere carpets. As all petty tyrants do, she just decided to fuck him over. Do a Stormy Daniels on him, #MeToo will finish the job. Well, he didn't roll over and cry on Twitter begging for forgiveness, did he? He got properly lawyered up and beat her backside like a drum. She knew. Everyone knows she knew. Hubby supplemented the cases by ringing the feds with some extra kompromat. Caesar and Caesar's hubby behaving as if all these people work personally for them. "Don't we all have a dram in the Oxford Bar of a Friday evening? Hamish will see us right." But Hamish knew that Salmond knows where every body in Scotland is buried, and Hamish sized up the combatants and made his call.

The Brits would have done a Dr Kelly, or a Robin Cook. Much tidier and so many fewer moving parts. But there isn't a McSIS to be had. Rejoice, m'lady, the tartan revolution eats itself and we get to watch it on TV as it happens.

Mike said...

Mr mongoose: I've long been of the view that the objective of SNP and the Scottish elite is not independence, although, I don't doubt there are true believers. The sub-test is the belief that sooner or later the English will scrap the Barnett formula and Scotland will become a wasteland of drunks and druggies, and anyone with skills will leave. So the (largely phony) quest for independence - never properly or fully prosecuted - knowing full well that no English PM could go to the palace and tell the Monarch that Scotland (and the lands, castles etc) are lost. So the English turn a blind eye to funding Scotland; small potatoes in the scheme of things, but considerably enriching the Scots and particularly the ruling cabal.

ultrapox said...

moi, don "the doggy-bag" thump?

good grief, you might very well think that, mrs ishmael, however for reasons of professional propriety and aesthetico-thespian ethics, i couldn't possibly comment...

except to the extent that i don't believe the good lady maga would mind my chiming on a related note by mentioning her accidental omission of the word "to" before "this breaking news".

now, on the reputation-splattering matter of the current highland-games, my personal take is that a vacancy may soon arise upon the stale scone of stone - a rock-hard culinary relic constituting the ancestral caledonian throne - and that, given this legislatio-evolutionary eventuality, don courseone - better known to his enemies as "eighteen-holes" - will soon be storming down the perfectly trimmed political fairway to the scottish disassembly-rooms - acrimoniously accompanied, at appropriately etiquettical intervals, by wild insurrectionist pairings of plus-foured club-wielding gin-and-tonic-sipping tribesmen.

of course, if - because he cannot prise the nepotistic nationalist-limpet from her sticky sanctimonial seat - the double-bogey-don ultimately fails to score a parliamentary birdie at holyrood, then he may just find some comforting cancellarian lebensraum developing due to deutsche democratic degeneration in the reichstag.

ultrapox said...

@ultrapox - 27 february 2021 at 21:53

for the sake of absolute political clarity, let me rephrase the final paragraph of the above comment thus:

"of course if - in his brave attempt to score a scottish parliamentary birdie - the double-bogey-don ultimately fails to prise the nepotistic nationalist-limpet from her sticky sanctimonial seat at holyrood, then - due to the democratic degeneration of dear old deutschland - he may just find some comforting cancellarian lebensraum developing within the rock-against-rights reichstag."

yes, mrs dungeon may be deep in the bunker, but can anyone dig her out of it?

well, the answer to that question is "quite probably"...

because, under the present administrative dictatorship in edinburgh, scottish nationalism has unfortunately suffered from a fundamental strain of ideological corruption which has made the, already nutty-flavoured, nationalist cause look rather foolish - internally undermined as it has been by the political hypocrisy of persistent snp-attempts to trash the very notion of uk, and therefore, by extension, english, independence from the virulently neo-imperialist grasp of a compulsively power-grabbing globalist europe.

publically, the suicidal snp-leadership is attempting to serve the two ideologically antipathetic masters of globalism and nationalism at the same time - yet as a serious political strategy, this can only ever prove as stable as a house-of-cards in a howling hebridean gale.

in the final psycho-analysis, i am compelled to drift into agreement with the preceding comments, for whilst the caution-to-the-wind-brexit-campaign was always driven by an emotionally liberating undercurrent which constantly screamed "to hell with the economic consequences", the crusade for scottish independence has always appeared psychologically underpinned by an over-cautious count-the-pennies attitude - which, as we now tragically observe, has made the greedy globalist guerillas in holyrood innately susceptible to bulging brown envelopes from westminster.