ICTChris Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Thought this was probably more appropriate that General Nonsense for this news. Former editor of the News of the World Andy Coulson has been cleared of perjury at the High Court in Edinburgh, after the trial collapsed. There were several days of legal argument prior to this outcome but the judge has agreed that Coulson has no case to answer. He was accused of lying about his knowledge of phone hacking at the News of the World during the trial of Tommy Sheridan for perjury. The argument that the defence made appears to have been that in order to be convicted of perjury the evidence needs to have been vital to the case in question and that Coulson's evidence in Sheridan's trial was not central to the Crown's case against Sheridan - Coulson was a defence witness after all. It does beg the question that is it OK to lie in court if it is irrelevant. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32962263 I think there has to be questions about why Police Scotland and the fiscal pursued this. The police in this country seem obsessed with the phone hacking investigation - the Met's Operation Elveden has cost nearly £20m to charge journalists under a 13th century law, only for most of them to be acquited. Citizen Tommy has reacted to the verdict by tweeting #CoulsonLiedButIsAcquitted Scottish Justice? Pays 2 have friends in high places #TheStenchOfCrownCorruptionIsOverwhelming #RubiCON Told you. Haven't heard anything from Coulson, maybe wouldn't expect to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Disappointed in you Chris. I would have expected a "Has any P&B'rs committed perjury and got away with it?" suffix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 Disappointed in you Chris. I would have expected a "Has any P&B'rs committed perjury and got away with it?" suffix. He didn't commit perjury, he just lied in court under oath. Completely different, obviously. Have any P&Bers ever lied in court under oath but not to the relevance of the case and thus not committed perjury? I'm not a lawyer but it always struck me that the calling of Coulson was a bit of a desperate move by Sheridan - it almost felt like he was trying to tie his case to the phone-hacking scandal, when I don't think there was ever any suggestion that any of the evidence for the NotW Cupids story came from phone hacking. Apparently (very apparently as I read it on Twitter) Sheridan sacked his legal team when they strongly advised (legal term) him that calling Coulson was unwise, took over his own defence and called him. The end game that Sheridan was maybe looking to get his conviction declared unsafe due to perjury committed at his trial but that appears to be screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Coulson must know some incredible shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Coulson must know some incredible shit. I know some incredible shit. It is illegal to eat snake in Iran on a Sunday. Gorillas fart 5 times louder than humans. f**k you, Coulson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 A lot of the phone hacking stuff that went on is totally illegal and morally disgusting (not two things that always coincide), However this Sheridan / Coulson perjury case has always been a nonsense ego battle with Sheridan desperate to use any legal technicality to clear his name, no matter what he has actually done or not done. In the process he has made Coulson look even more like a smug p***k than he usually does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 Judge's explanation here - http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/HMAvAndrewCoulsonjuryexplanation030615.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Judge's explanation here - http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/HMAvAndrewCoulsonjuryexplanation030615.pdf His full findings will be more revealing I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 His full findings will be more revealing I would imagine. http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=c377daa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.