Author Topic: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.  (Read 2453 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12895
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2020, 12:19:AM »
Why would that be?
There was an intimation that she had conducted a lesbian relationship with one of the plaintiffs.

Now where are my three posts..

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2020, 12:55:AM »
There was an intimation that she had conducted a lesbian relationship with one of the plaintiffs.

Now where are my three posts..
    Alex Salmond has,I think, directly named NS as being behind the plot. Perhaps read Craig Murray or the Grouse beater and you may get a somewhat fuller picture than is available in MSM.
     Whatsapp groups "discussing" the allegations. Discussing may be a euphemism for conspiring, perhaps. Read a full account of the court proceedings including defence arguments and you would know. Fishing texts referred to in court which prosecution didn't want discussing. Lesbian relationships, real or imagined, are not what is referred to here.
    Alex Salmond in his speech today refers to the matters not to be discussed in court which the defence wanted put before the court. He also said all will be revealed in time. 
    It's politics, Steve, nobody cares about lesbian relationships. It's the machiavellian plotting and the usual tactic to bring down those seen as troublesome, sexual allegations. This time it backfired and there really will be a price to pay for the plotters.

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2020, 12:58:AM »
There was an intimation that she had conducted a lesbian relationship with one of the plaintiffs.

Now where are my three posts..
   I also suspect that there will be a flurry of legal letters to many publications after their "reporting" of proceedings. That probably explains where your posts are.

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2020, 01:52:AM »
    But I want to make one thing quite clear. This is not a case where the major accusations failed because of the difficulty of proving what happened with two people alone in a room. In such cases it is often right to feel real and profound sorrow for the accuser with no means of proof. This was a case where there was very real evidence, from third party after third party, of certain accusers telling definite and deliberate lies. A case where eye witnesses stated categorically that claimed events did not happen. A case where eye witnesses testified people were not physically present when claimed. A case where witnesses testified that reports had not been made, and policies not instituted, as claimed by the prosecution.

A limited amount of evidence was also heard of some of the accusers conspiring together with others, including through a Whatsapp group created for the specific purpose, to fabricate and forward those lies. The vast bulk of evidence on this specific issue of conspiracy was excluded by the court both in pre-trial hearings and by dismissal of witnesses or evidence in the trial itself but, as Alex Salmond indicated from the court steps, will be out in due time.

It is also important to note that two thirds of the accusers – and indeed precisely those two thirds who were involved in lies, fabrications and conspiracy – were and are senior members of the SNP, very much part of the party machine, very much close to the leadership and especially involved in the non-independence related agenda that has taken over the party. With one exception, they are in highly paid party nominated jobs now with the tab picked up by the taxpayer. What we learned in the trial about careerism and self-promotion among those earning a very fat living out of the party’s current domination of Scottish politics was really very unedifying indeed.

That a party which has such a wonderful and committed membership – a membership who make me proud to be a member alongside them – should play host to a parasitic and highly paid professional elite with no discernible interest in Independence is a truly remarkable phenomenon. What we saw revealed in court was a procession of members of the political class who would just have happily have made their careers in the old corrupt Scottish Labour Party if it was still in charge. A major, major clearout is needed.

    Steve, the above from Craig Murray today may offer the insight that currently evades you.


Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12895
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2020, 05:47:AM »
    But I want to make one thing quite clear. This is not a case where the major accusations failed because of the difficulty of proving what happened with two people alone in a room. In such cases it is often right to feel real and profound sorrow for the accuser with no means of proof. This was a case where there was very real evidence, from third party after third party, of certain accusers telling definite and deliberate lies. A case where eye witnesses stated categorically that claimed events did not happen. A case where eye witnesses testified people were not physically present when claimed. A case where witnesses testified that reports had not been made, and policies not instituted, as claimed by the prosecution.

A limited amount of evidence was also heard of some of the accusers conspiring together with others, including through a Whatsapp group created for the specific purpose, to fabricate and forward those lies. The vast bulk of evidence on this specific issue of conspiracy was excluded by the court both in pre-trial hearings and by dismissal of witnesses or evidence in the trial itself but, as Alex Salmond indicated from the court steps, will be out in due time.

It is also important to note that two thirds of the accusers – and indeed precisely those two thirds who were involved in lies, fabrications and conspiracy – were and are senior members of the SNP, very much part of the party machine, very much close to the leadership and especially involved in the non-independence related agenda that has taken over the party. With one exception, they are in highly paid party nominated jobs now with the tab picked up by the taxpayer. What we learned in the trial about careerism and self-promotion among those earning a very fat living out of the party’s current domination of Scottish politics was really very unedifying indeed.

That a party which has such a wonderful and committed membership – a membership who make me proud to be a member alongside them – should play host to a parasitic and highly paid professional elite with no discernible interest in Independence is a truly remarkable phenomenon. What we saw revealed in court was a procession of members of the political class who would just have happily have made their careers in the old corrupt Scottish Labour Party if it was still in charge. A major, major clearout is needed.

    Steve, the above from Craig Murray today may offer the insight that currently evades you.
I'm still not sure why this is the case. The "he said she said" scenario is always the most difficult to prove. I'm sorry if I got hold of the wrong end of the stick as far as Nicola Sturgeon was concerned. We have to acknowledge the verdict of the jury, who sat through the whole trial and the totality of the evidence. I'm just not sure the reason why nine women would lie in court when Mr. Salmond was out of the SNP mainstream and surely no threat to Nicola Sturgeon's leadership of the party.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 05:52:AM by Steve_uk »

Offline ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5195
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2020, 09:13:AM »

Now where are my three posts..

I restored them immediately after I posted about the acquittals.

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2020, 12:26:PM »
I'm still not sure why this is the case. The "he said she said" scenario is always the most difficult to prove. I'm sorry if I got hold of the wrong end of the stick as far as Nicola Sturgeon was concerned. We have to acknowledge the verdict of the jury, who sat through the whole trial and the totality of the evidence. I'm just not sure the reason why nine women would lie in court when Mr. Salmond was out of the SNP mainstream and surely no threat to Nicola Sturgeon's leadership of the party.
    It wasn't a case of he said, she said. It was they plotted, conspired and lied. Fishing texts, around 400 were sent out fishing for allegations. Alleged victims were shown not to be even present when supposed to be and incidents were deliberately misconstrued. The tactic is to have so many similar accusations and innuendo that the hard of thinking assume they must all be true. You fell for it and now discuss it as if you are informed. Scratch below the surface, show some curiosity and you would be surprised.
    Read the full accounts of the proceedings, including the defence. The verdict was totally expected by those following the trial, it wasn't expected by those who only read MSM. the accusations should never have made it to court.
    This is just the beginning of the story, all will be revealed in time.
   
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 12:28:PM by gringo »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8920
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #37 on: March 24, 2020, 01:22:PM »
    It wasn't a case of he said, she said. It was they plotted, conspired and lied. Fishing texts, around 400 were sent out fishing for allegations. Alleged victims were shown not to be even present when supposed to be and incidents were deliberately misconstrued. The tactic is to have so many similar accusations and innuendo that the hard of thinking assume they must all be true. You fell for it and now discuss it as if you are informed. Scratch below the surface, show some curiosity and you would be surprised.
    Read the full accounts of the proceedings, including the defence. The verdict was totally expected by those following the trial, it wasn't expected by those who only read MSM. the accusations should never have made it to court.
    This is just the beginning of the story, all will be revealed in time.
   

Do you think the same applies to Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstien?

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 15523
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #38 on: March 24, 2020, 02:44:PM »
Do you think the same applies to Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstien?

theres a slight diffrence they were convicted.

and cosby more or less admited guilt.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 02:45:PM by nugnug »

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8920
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #39 on: March 24, 2020, 03:02:PM »
theres a slight diffrence they were convicted.

and cosby more or less admited guilt.

Last I heard about Cosby, he was appealing.


Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #40 on: March 24, 2020, 03:38:PM »
Do you think the same applies to Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstien?
    There is no comparison to be made between the cases.
    Salmond has been the victim of political dirty tricks which failed. There are going to be huge repercussions and people involved will be exposed. This is not a speculative opinion. Salmond himself told us this on the court steps yesterday.
    It is noticeable that the believe women brigade don't believe the numerous women who testified that the allegations were untrue and that the supposed victim of an attempted rape was not even present when the alleged offence took place.
    None of these women were even cross examined by the prosecution despite the fact that their evidence was, by definition, untrue if the allegations were true. Not challenged. The evidence given left to stand without challenge.
    Some people lied in the trial. This is certainly true because all accounts cannot simultaneously be true. The jury of 15 reduced to 13 and made up of 8 women and 5 men in Edinburgh which is a unionist stronghold and not Salmond friendly territory found on the evidence presented that the accusers were lying. This was without being able to see the plotting texts and messages that were not to be discussed or seen, but will be in good time.
     Salmond was rightfully cleared. Those who conspired in this failed conspiracy have yet to face their reckoning. 

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #41 on: March 24, 2020, 04:35:PM »
The bottom line is that many of these alleged assaults of a sexual nature must have occurred, the Prosecution relying on their sheer number: thirteen charges against nine women.

You have to put yourself in the position of these women at the time, who were hired to further the highly controversial policy of Scottish independence, and its greatest asset and advocate, namely Alex Salmond. Should a woman sacrifice herself on the altar of sexual impropriety for the sake of the common good, not to mention a highly-paid, relatively secure job in a society where these are becoming few and far between.
   I suggest that first of all you acquaint yourself with the Moorov Doctrine. In a nutshell, it is a rule in Scottish Law that witnesses corroborate each other if a course of conduct is established.
     A political rival makes an allegation of attempted rape. Evidence presented and unchallenged in court proves that she wasn't there.
     Texts and messages are sent out to hundreds of women who had worked with Salmond asking about their contacts with him. What you call the multiple assaults of a sexual nature, after this epic fishing expedition, were in fact a small handful of exaggerated and invented claims designed to convince the easily convinced that there is no smoke without fire. The sheer number of them makes them true and the easily led have no need to know the details of the individual charges or the Moorov Doctrine.
     

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12895
Re: Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #42 on: March 24, 2020, 05:04:PM »
   I suggest that first of all you acquaint yourself with the Moorov Doctrine. In a nutshell, it is a rule in Scottish Law that witnesses corroborate each other if a course of conduct is established.
     A political rival makes an allegation of attempted rape. Evidence presented and unchallenged in court proves that she wasn't there.
     Texts and messages are sent out to hundreds of women who had worked with Salmond asking about their contacts with him. What you call the multiple assaults of a sexual nature, after this epic fishing expedition, were in fact a small handful of exaggerated and invented claims designed to convince the easily convinced that there is no smoke without fire. The sheer number of them makes them true and the easily led have no need to know the details of the individual charges or the Moorov Doctrine.
   
In what sense was she a political rival? Do you really think he could make a comeback at 65-years-old? I have read what is available online about the case and it wasn't proven that Witness H wasn't present at the dinner at Bute House-in fact the unnamed celebrity stated that she was there, in contradiction to the Defence witness who didn't see her that evening and who also claimed she had told her she wouldn't be there in a telephone conversation.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I wonder why so many witnesses would lie on oath? Of course this "horseplay" or invading other women' space could be interpreted differently if you're a bloke, but the attempted rape allegation stands alone in its seriousness.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 05:05:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline gringo

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1607
Re: Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #43 on: March 24, 2020, 05:27:PM »
In what sense was she a political rival? Do you really think he could make a comeback at 65-years-old? I have read what is available online about the case and it wasn't proven that Witness H wasn't present at the dinner at Bute House-in fact the unnamed celebrity stated that she was there, in contradiction to the Defence witness who didn't see her that evening and who also claimed she had told her she wouldn't be there in a telephone conversation.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I wonder why so many witnesses would lie on oath? Of course this "horseplay" or invading other women' space could be interpreted differently if you're a bloke, but the attempted rape allegation stands alone in its seriousness.
   There are plenty of political rivalries within parties, Steve. One of the allegations came only after Alex Salmond recommended another candidate to stand as SNP prospective MP. Years after the alleged event and after saying that it would be great to work with Alex again. After being overlooked she remembered a years old never previously mentioned allegation. Gordon Jackson, Salmonds QC, was correct when he said, "It stinks". Political direction and strategies are constantly disagreed on. The number was pathetic given the number of fishing messages. The unnamed actor was not allowed to be cross examined. Their concoction was a pack of lies and proven to be so.
    Salmond still has a weekly show on RT and is a constant thorn in the side of the UK establishment. I would not write a comeback. Whatever your opinion of Alex Salmond, he is a very effective and persuasive politician. A bit too effective for the liking of some.
    Your continued insinuations of his guilt are inappropriate.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12895
Re: Re: Alex Salmond Rape Charge.
« Reply #44 on: March 24, 2020, 05:39:PM »
   There are plenty of political rivalries within parties, Steve. One of the allegations came only after Alex Salmond recommended another candidate to stand as SNP prospective MP. Years after the alleged event and after saying that it would be great to work with Alex again. After being overlooked she remembered a years old never previously mentioned allegation. Gordon Jackson, Salmonds QC, was correct when he said, "It stinks". Political direction and strategies are constantly disagreed on. The number was pathetic given the number of fishing messages. The unnamed actor was not allowed to be cross examined. Their concoction was a pack of lies and proven to be so.
    Salmond still has a weekly show on RT and is a constant thorn in the side of the UK establishment. I would not write a comeback. Whatever your opinion of Alex Salmond, he is a very effective and persuasive politician. A bit too effective for the liking of some.
    Your continued insinuations of his guilt are inappropriate.
Didn't he say he should have been more careful about their space? Why did he tell Ms F a story about a penis? He is a sex pest if nothing else.