The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Thrugelmir

Moe_The_Bartender said:

Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal aren’t going to come out of this smelling of roses.

Nor will the SNP members that tried to stitch him up. 

bhupinder

Herzlos said:

Weird the need to keep attacking him, but if it makes you feel better go for it. 
There will be loads of "there's no smoke without fire" arguments being made.

Weird the need to keep defending him what if it was your wife or daughter and there should be arguments too that's how Jimmy Saville & Rolf Harris and others were eventually found out.

Herzlos

bhupinder said:

Herzlos said:

Weird the need to keep attacking him, but if it makes you feel better go for it. 
There will be loads of "there's no smoke without fire" arguments being made.

Weird the need to keep defending him what if it was your wife or daughter and there should be arguments too that's how Jimmy Saville & Rolf Harris and others were eventually found out.

I'm not defending him, I think his behaviour was bad but clearly not illegal. I'm just commenting that despite being given essentially an all clear legally (the not proven is somewhere in the middle), he's still going to get attacked by the people who want to attack him.

I'm actually hoping we can move on from this and people can stop trying to use this as something to beat the SNP with considering he resigned anyway. Can we get back to complaining about Independence instead now that the Salmond issue is done and dusted?

The_Rainmaker

Herzlos said:Can we get back to complaining about Independence instead now that the Salmond issue is done and dusted?

Nope, once we have finished the Covid-19 truce, we will need to look at Nicola's affair.

So give it a rest for the time being.

poggs

I wonder if the the police will be investigating the (9) nine women who one assumes have all lied on the stand or the other 5 or 6 too fearful to give evidence.
As he was not guilty, they must surely all be vindictive liars.
 its time to remove trial by jury.  The general public are too stupid to be allowed to sit on them.

Herzlos

Salmond would have the option to try and sue them and the Scottish Government (for dematation) but I don't think he will.

Trial by Jury is one of the foundations of our legal system and what makes it so fair. It's pretty concerning that people are willing to ban all sorts of institutions because it gave them the "wrong" result. The evidence wasn't sufficient to convince a group of people (i think slightly more than 50% women) that he was guilty, that's not a problem with the jury system, but the case.

I don't deny he's a bit of a slimy guy and has done things that he shouldn't, but he was found to be not guilty of the crimes presented in a fair and open hearing (potentially biased against him if anything, considering how vehemently hated he is by the Unionists and thus most of the press).

What do you know that the prosecution didn't?

Arklight

I think it needs to be remembered, that the case for Scottish Indy has nothing to do with Salmond's murky private life. He has been found innocent of the charges presented against him, and that is all we know.

NCC-1707

Herzlos said:

Salmond would have the option to try and sue them and the Scottish Government (for dematation) but I don't think he will.

Trial by Jury is one of the foundations of our legal system and what makes it so fair. It's pretty concerning that people are willing to ban all sorts of institutions because it gave them the "wrong" result. The evidence wasn't sufficient to convince a group of people (i think slightly more than 50% women) that he was guilty, that's not a problem with the jury system, but the case.

I don't deny he's a bit of a slimy guy and has done things that he shouldn't, but he was found to be not guilty of the crimes presented in a fair and open hearing (potentially biased against him if anything, considering how vehemently hated he is by the Unionists and thus most of the press).

What do you know that the prosecution didn't?

What??

Herzlos

NCC-1707 said:

Herzlos said:

Salmond would have the option to try and sue them and the Scottish Government (for dematation) but I don't think he will.

Trial by Jury is one of the foundations of our legal system and what makes it so fair. It's pretty concerning that people are willing to ban all sorts of institutions because it gave them the "wrong" result. The evidence wasn't sufficient to convince a group of people (i think slightly more than 50% women) that he was guilty, that's not a problem with the jury system, but the case.

I don't deny he's a bit of a slimy guy and has done things that he shouldn't, but he was found to be not guilty of the crimes presented in a fair and open hearing (potentially biased against him if anything, considering how vehemently hated he is by the Unionists and thus most of the press).

What do you know that the prosecution didn't?

What??

It's like defamation, but after a few medicinal whiskies.

Shakethedisease

poggs said:

I wonder if the the police will be investigating the (9) nine women who one assumes have all lied on the stand or the other 5 or 6 too fearful to give evidence.
As he was not guilty, they must surely all be vindictive liars.
 its time to remove trial by jury.  The general public are too stupid to be allowed to sit on them.

Well since the woman in the main charge wasn't even seen to be there that night ( and several testified that she hadn't attended on the night in question) then it's likely she probably was lying. Salmond's defence rested on proving she hadn't been there that night and it seems from the testimonies presented that she wasn't. So how could what Salmond was accused of that night have taken place ?  There was also all the 'what's app' stuff that went on between complainers. Talking about 'sitting on it till it needs to be deployed'.. if these accusations were so serious to them how come no one went to the police at the time ? And why sit on anything ?

Imo this was a political smear campaign that went wrong when Salmond took the Scottish Gov to a judical review over these complaints and the complaints process and won. S A Sommerville texted afterwards to friends that they'd lost the battle but not the war. I think it all got out of hand and found itself in the courts. Some of the charges 'pinging curly hair' = sexual assault ? Come on... That's an insult to all real sexual assault charges. A hand on a knee when the woman's husband was in the same car, there was a fixed armrest with a phone and the driver and husband saw nothing ? He'd have to have leant across and moved significantly to do so, and the car journey was only half a mile or something.

He's reportedly writing a book to expose all.. and he will. But the defence was right about one thing, the whole thing stank from top to bottom with these flimsy 'sexual assualt' charges. Salmond was the most picked over and intensely analysed politician in the UK from 2011 to 2014.. the media were desperate for any dirt then and didn't find any...

I look forward to his side of the story and all the evidence he has that wasn't allowed to come to light in the court case.