Alex Salmond arrested.

Paddyann is clearly upset by the news and why wouldn't she be ?
There are many that I knew in the past who were the same when it was found that a highly regarded " miracle worker " doctor turned out to be a loathesome predator.

Fortunately it's never been in my nature to look up to anyone no matter what their position in life------so no nasty surprises.

Good post Pogs

I may be being pedantic and if so I’ll shuffle off to the corner but I don’t equate admiring with looking upto

Paddyann exudes a Scottish nationalism out of every pore. Fine! but often at the expense of making anti English comments.

Yes, TerriBull. Frankly I am offended by Paddyann's hatred and vitriolic comments about the English, many of which I have read on GN over the years. If she were making these comments about anyone else, it would be considered racist. And she would be totally up in arms if others were posting horrible anti-Scottish comments. Why the nastiness? People are people, good and not so good, wherever they are from. Surely we must be more tolerant.

paddyann has made her position clear over the Alex Salmond scenario before by starting a thread herself so I don't think it possible paddyann will shift her view.

paddyann called it a ' stitch up' , gave money to Alex Salmonds ' Crowd Funding ' escapade so I can understand how deeply she feels about this latest debacle .

Ihttps://signal-corridor.live/forums/news_and_politics/1251653-Allegations-against-Alex-Salmond don't think Paddyanne will ever

www.gransnet.com/forums/news_and_politics/1251653-Allegations-against-Alex-Salmond

When I express surprise re people being accused of crimes my DH always says 'you never really know anyone.' Not that we know famous people obviously. What is that old saying 'believe half of what you see and none of what you hear' (or it could be the other way around).

I can understand anyone being shocked by the news. I do not understand anyone getting upset about it, other than his close family or intimate friends, who had no idea what he was like.

Allegedly, Monica.

One the previous thread, linked above, I said :
If AS is proved to be guilty, I will be very annoyed with him for creating such a public fuss about his innocence as well as for the original offences.
I hope he is proved to be innocent, however.

That is still my view since, if he is guilty but is dragging it out as is now happening, he is allowing far more damage to his party and the independence cause than if he said "It's a fair cop, gov."

If he is innocent, he has no option but to try to prove it.

(I hope his idea of innocence is not the usual predator's defence of saying it was consensual.)

Time will tell.

Thank you POGs for what you have posted about the need for a fair hearing and the dangers of comment on social media such as this.

I am very disappointed that one or two GNers are ignoring my earlier caution about the strictures of Scottish law so I am posting this link from the BBC in the hope it will moderate the comments.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47001028

And please, my fellow Gransnetters, be aware that these pages will be closely monitored by prosecution and defence in a high profile case like this. Do you really want to see the editors in GN hauled up for contempt of court while the matter is sub judice (going through the Scottish legal process)?

It is fine to have views of course, but as there is no initial hearing in Crown Court - such as you might have in England - where much of the evidence is revealed in open court, there are all sorts of dangers if you express and publish those views ... which can be seen as an attempt to pervert the course of justice.

In extreme cases, this can lead to no trial. That would be unfair all round.

I just had a look at Mumsnet. Quite a lack of caution there.

Sorry, allegedly, was in mind but not written. I fully appreciate that he is innocent until proved guilty.

I haven't been following this closely. Can we assume that these alleged assaults were promptly reported at the time? And how much comes under the umbrella of sexual assault? Not long ago the term was used to cover touching someone's knee under the table at a dinner.

And please, my fellow Gransnetters, be aware that these pages will be closely monitored by prosecution and defence in a high profile case like this. Do you really want to see the editors in GN hauled up for contempt of court while the matter is sub judice (going through the Scottish legal process)?
Caledoinal4 when I warned on a thread a while ago about another high profile case which was sub judice I was ignored, this is only GN, etc etc, so I hope that your warning is heeded this time.

I'm sure that GNHQ will be keeping an eye on it and perhaps deleting posts which could in any way prevent a fair trial, or indeed prevent a trial ever taking place.

Agreed, I have also pointed this out before now about other things.It won’t just be the editors of GN either, it will be the poster!

Thanks Jalima. It might be difficult to decide which are likely to cause problems which is why I am urging caution.

Winterwhite I'm not sure what to say except please read both my posts and the link, if you can. The matter is now sub judice under Scottish law. There is nothing to prevent people having views and expressing them, but there are risks in posting (effectively publishing) on an open public forum like GN, where it may be difficult for the editors to know a different legal system. It is they who would be fined/jailed, not us.

There is nothing wrong with asking the question. It's the answers you get which could prove prejudicial, going by some of the comments here.

This particular situation is one of the best examples of Scottish Law protecting people from being judged anywhere other than in open court. It also protects witnesses/accusers and potential jurors, though in this case I already feel the latter is going to be a tricky issue, precisely because of comments in social media. We don't need to make it any more difficult.

paddyann has certaintly judged the man,

As also has Ellan Vannin I believe.Completely opposite judgements of course!!!
I worry about the time this investigation seems to have taken and why the charges didn't emerge until after his victory over the government?

It may be, Trisher that his victory over the government is what convinced the complainants to take action, from whatever motive. There would be no arrest and no publicity about the allegations until after all the painstaking investigation into whether a substantial case could be made.

The fact that charges have been laid against him shows that it is considered that there is enough evidence for it to be worth pursuing. However the rest of us do not yet know enough of that evidence to judge whether he should be declared guilty or innocent, so we should wait and see.

A wise woman keeps her own counsel... though that would kill many a chat forum!

I didn't say anything about the allegations as being true or untrue Elegran but given that the original 2 allegations took place in 2013, were made to police in January 2018, and extensively reported when Salmon took the government to court in September 2018, the length of time the police have taken to act must surely be questioned.
It isn't a question of innocence or guilt but of the time frame.

I wasn't commenting on you having given a guilty/innocent verdict, trisher, but on the fact that some posters are already certain one way or the other.

Can't resist a dig can you trisher ?
Can I ask why you and others are carrying on with this thread when it's clearly been stated that the case is ongoing ?