Nipper Salmond

[ICTJohnboy]

3 hours ago, SandyCromarty said:

Jackson's main problem here is that he named two of the women, and his statement on Salmond's bullying and nasty personality where it is clear he dislikes Salmond makes me wonder why he took the case on.

 

And made me wonder why Salmond engaged him.

[SandyCromarty]

2 hours ago, sophia said:

For naming the women, it may not be significant if the person he was engaged with was directly involved in a professional capacity.

As for Salmond's management style, it's hardly a secret that he is a hard task master and I recall Andrew Tickell saying so. More than that, Alex Salmond himself said that his style was abrasive. Are we to discredit generations of football managers?

To name the women in public during the first week of the trial when anonymity restrictions were in place , regardless who the conversation was with, was a flagrant disregard of his legal position.

Football Managers run clubs, their actions/decisions do not impact on the country as a whole while FM's does.

I am a strong supporter of the SNP and Independence but Alex Salmonds behaviour at times, by his own admission, during his tenure, is what I take exception to. 

[git-intae-thum]

14 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said:

To name the women in public during the first week of the trial when anonymity restrictions were in place , regardless who the conversation was with, was a flagrant disregard of his legal position.

Football Managers run clubs, their actions/decisions do not impact on the country as a whole while FM's does.

I am a strong supporter of the SNP and Independence but Alex Salmonds behaviour at times, by his own admission, during his tenure, is what I take exception to. 

See this is the gist of how things are going. Folk are piling in to condemn the man even though a court of law found him innocent.

I have heard this from a few folk. What is this heinous behaviour "by his own admission?"

He strongly denied all the accusations.

The only time he agreed that he acted improperly was with witness F.

If you actually read the transcript of his evidence in regard witness F's allegation, he states clearly that the incident was a brief fully clothed, fully consenting cuddle. Nothing more. Both parties realising very quickly they were being daft. Behaviour for which he apologised shortly afterwards . Apology apparently accepted.....until an allegation suddenly appears years later.

Ok. Morally, as a married man, he was in the wrong....but....other current politicians have no doubt done much worse. There is certainly no justification to condemn the man in the manner some absolute rockets seem determined to do.

One can only presume that there is a definite thing going on to not only destroy any possibility of political comeback, but also his reputation.

It is poor behaviour towards someone who made the idea of independence a reality, if not a certainty.

[Granny Danger]

Salmond’s reputation is tarnished, rightly or wrongly that is the case.

If his first priority is Independence he will suck it up and take a back seat, at least for the foreseeable future.  If his first priority is himself he will want to be centre stage regardless of the impact on the Independence issue.

[git-intae-thum]

8 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Salmond’s reputation is tarnished, rightly or wrongly that is the case.

If his first priority is Independence he will suck it up and take a back seat, at least for the foreseeable future.  If his first priority is himself he will want to be centre stage regardless of the impact on the Independence issue.

Obviously thats presuming the current leadership in charge of the SNP share the aspiration for independence.

Given the evidence at the trial. I do not think we can be certain that is the case. Sadly.

[ICTJohnboy]

35 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

Obviously thats presuming the current leadership in charge of the SNP share the aspiration for independence.

Given the evidence at the trial. I do not think we can be certain that is the case. Sadly.

 

What evidence did you hear at the trial that suggested to you the current leadership of the party do not necessarily share the aspirations of others for Independence?

[sophia]

50 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

Salmond’s reputation is tarnished, rightly or wrongly that is the case.

If his first priority is Independence he will suck it up and take a back seat, at least for the foreseeable future.  If his first priority is himself he will want to be centre stage regardless of the impact on the Independence issue.

Peter Murrell's reputation is tarnished, rightly or wrongly that is the case .....

[git-intae-thum]

26 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

What evidence did you hear at the trial that suggested to you the current leadership of the party do not necessarily share the aspirations of others for Independence?

One of the witnesses described as being at the highest level within the party, gave evidence to the effect that she was a "soft supporter of independence" and not very political.

That being the case, it must be reasonable to assume that there may well be others in the current leadership for whom independence is very much not at the front of the agenda.

I hope I am wrong.

 

[Clockwork]

A letter from Salmond's accusers which will no doubt divide opinion.

The jury has delivered a majority verdict on the charges brought against the former First Minister.

We are devastated by the verdict. However it is our fervent hope that as a society we can move forward in our understanding of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

In defending Alex Salmond, Gordon Jackson quoted Woman H and said his client should have been a ‘better man’.  

He said behaviour which others described as demeaning, intimidating and humiliating, was ‘trivial’.

The behaviours that Alex Salmond and his defence team admitted to in evidence were not and are not trivial.

Today we want to send a strong and indisputable message that such behaviours should not be tolerated – by any person, in any position, under any circumstances. 

This has been a traumatic process however we thank Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for taking our experiences seriously and for allowing our voices to be heard.

Many of us did speak up at the time of our incidents but were faced with procedures that could not deal with complaints against such a powerful figure.

Others were silenced by fear of repercussions.

It was our hope, as individuals, that through coming forward at this time we could achieve justice and enact change.

We remain firm in our belief that coming forward to report our experiences and concerns was the right thing to do.

But it is clear we alone cannot achieve the change we seek.  

The outcome of this trial will pose many questions and be cause for much debate.

But as politicians, commentators and society reflect on this case, we would ask you to consider whether behaviour which is so often merely described as ‘inappropriate’ or is tolerated by society, is acceptable towards your daughters, granddaughters, sisters, wives, friends, and colleagues.

Many of them will already have suffered such conduct. Often in silence.

We would also request that as you debate, you conduct it respectfully and stay mindful of the many women in Scotland who may have had traumatic experiences and are considering whether or not Scotland is a country in which they can come forward to seek help and support.

This is more important now than ever before.

All people should feel safe, valued and equal in society and their workplace and it is imperative to ensure robust complaint structures are in place.

We should all take strength in calling out bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault wherever it takes place.

And we should all seek to create an environment in which people can challenge and report these behaviours without hesitation or fear of retribution.

Some say that women’s fight for respect has gone ‘too far’. We argue it has far to go.

For too long, behaviour which should be condemned has been accepted and excused.

For too long perpetrators in positions of power have been shielded by their ability to influence and intimidate.  

For too long women’s complaints have been dismissed or swept under the carpet.  

And for too long, women have been let down by organisational structures which should exist to protect them, not put them in situations which endanger their welfare.

This must end.

To those who have spoken out in support – thank you, we see you.

While we are devastated by the verdict, we will not let it define us.

We hope through shining a light on our experiences, it will serve to protect and empower women in the future.

Be brave, be loud, be heard.

Signed,

Woman A, Woman B, Woman C, Woman D, Woman F, Woman, G, Woman H, Woman J, Woman K

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/while-we-are-devastated-by-the-verdict-we-will-not-let-it-define-us-/

 

 

Yet there are those who maintain that these allegations are wholly fabricated in an attempt to frame a completely innocent man. Lies and deliberate smears created solely to tarnish his reputation. The claims of intimidation, bullying, demeaning sexual harassment, trauma and suffering can be summarily dismissed as fictional, concocted falsifications, nothing more.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

7 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

One of the witnesses described as being at the highest level within the party, gave evidence to the effect that she was a "soft supporter of independence" and not very political.

That being the case, it must be reasonable to assume that there may well be others in the current leadership for whom independence is very much not at the front of the agenda.

I hope I am wrong.

 

I think anyone who puts Independence above all else is one for the watching. I'm a die hard support of Scottish Independence but if it can only be achieved to the detriment of Scotland and Scottish people then it can get in the bin.

[Sergeant Wilson]

8 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

One of the witnesses described as being at the highest level within the party, gave evidence to the effect that she was a "soft supporter of independence" and not very political.

That being the case, it must be reasonable to assume that there may well be others in the current leadership for whom independence is very much not at the front of the agenda.

I hope I am wrong.

 

Ambitious person hitching themselves to the most convenient cause to further their career shock!

[welshbairn]

8 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

One of the witnesses described as being at the highest level within the party, gave evidence to the effect that she was a "soft supporter of independence" and not very political.

Where was this? She's described here as a Scottish Government official, ie. a civil servant.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8090867/Alex-Salmond-arrives-trial-face-14-sexual-assault-charges.html

[SandyCromarty]

11 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

See this is the gist of how things are going. Folk are piling in to condemn the man even though a court of law found him innocent.

I have heard this from a few folk. What is this heinous behaviour "by his own admission?"

He strongly denied all the accusations.

The only time he agreed that he acted improperly was with witness F.

If you actually read the transcript of his evidence in regard witness F's allegation, he states clearly that the incident was a brief fully clothed, fully consenting cuddle. Nothing more. Both parties realising very quickly they were being daft. Behaviour for which he apologised shortly afterwards . Apology apparently accepted.....until an allegation suddenly appears years later.

Ok. Morally, as a married man, he was in the wrong....but....other current politicians have no doubt done much worse. There is certainly no justification to condemn the man in the manner some absolute rockets seem determined to do.

One can only presume that there is a definite thing going on to not only destroy any possibility of political comeback, but also his reputation.

It is poor behaviour towards someone who made the idea of independence a reality, if not a certainty.

Yes the jury found him innocent of all charges and I agree with that decision.

However the charges are not what I object to, what is clear from his sworn testimony is that he behaved in a drunken and boorish manner over some time, which to me is objectionable in our FM, bear in mind we are striving for our Independence and we not need this type of adverse publicity for the likes of Sarah Smith and the unionists to feed and gloat over, it gives the impression that we cannot govern ourselves in a responsible manner if the FM is seen acting the fool.

I don't give a shit over what other politicians outside Scotland get up to, what I do care about is that our senior people in our government behave in a responsible and appropriate manner.

BTW Google his reported misconduct back in 2018 at Edinburgh Airport.

Edited March 30, 2020 by SandyCromarty

[pandarilla]

I think anyone who puts Independence above all else is one for the watching. I'm a die hard support of Scottish Independence but if it can only be achieved to the detriment of Scotland and Scottish people then it can get in the bin.

Yeah this is pretty much it.

Depending on how you define it a 'soft supporter' of independence could be anything, including my own take.

I wouldn't describe myself in that way but as you say, it's not the be all and end all. It's not absolutely everything.

[supermik]

How long after the epidemic is over will he unleash his Eckidemic on the Scottish government?

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

On 30/03/2020 at 07:59, AsimButtHitsASix said:

I think anyone who puts Independence above all else is one for the watching. I'm a die hard support of Scottish Independence but if it can only be achieved to the detriment of Scotland and Scottish people then it can get in the bin.

I can't see your logic here, or any way in which independence could only be achieved in those circumstances.

[Highlandmagyar 2nd Tier]

33 minutes ago, supermik said:

How long after the epidemic is over will he unleash his Eckidemic on the Scottish government?

If he does, it will show he is just an establishment puppet.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

44 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

I can't see your logic here, or any way in which independence could only be achieved in those circumstances.

So if, for instance, we found out that due to the economic catastrophe that is the coronavirus outbreak there were knock on effects that meant Scotland would be entirely unable to function to, at least, its current abilities in terms of the welfare state, wages, NHS and education as an Independent state you would still be for Independence even tho' it would be to the detriment of the people who live and work there?

[oneteaminglasgow]

I can't see your logic here, or any way in which independence could only be achieved in those circumstances.

The logic is that Scottish independence isn’t something that should be strived for in and of itself, rather it’s something that should be strived for as a means to improve Scotland and the lives of its people.

[strichener]

40 minutes ago, Highlandmagyar 2nd Tier said:

If he does, it will show he is just an establishment puppet.

How so?