Press Information 4th March 2021
- STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF ALEX SALMOND
“The documents released tonight confirm that sisting (postponing) the Judicial Review was indeed under active consideration by the Scottish Government in September 2018.
John Swinney must now be the only person in Scotland who believes that the piecemeal release of these extraordinary legal documents have done anything other than demolish the Government’s pretence that they were not warned months in advance that they were on course to lose the judicial review. The more they release the more threadbare the government’s position becomes. We look forward to further revelations in tomorrow’s instalment.
The real question he has to answer is why they kept running down the clock and running up the bills, long after they were warned of the position by external counsel in the starkest of terms.
A witness statement supplied to the Inquiry this week by Alex Salmond, demonstrates that the prospect of the criminal investigation overtaking the judicial review was well known among special advisers and SNP officials by November 2018.
External counsel were specifically asked in September by the Government to consider whether they “should seek to have the judicial review proceedings sisted pending the outcome of any police investigation” and on September 4 said “we can see strength in the argument that the criminal investigation may make the entire petition pointless: if there is a criminal conviction then surely the case would not proceed.”
On September 17th the Lord Advocate advised in favour of reporting restrictions instead. In the event it was Alex Salmond’s legal team who moved for these reporting restrictions on 4th October 2018 in front of Lord Pentland. The Government were not even represented at the hearing.
Mr Salmond has never argued that the Lord Advocate was involved in accelerating the criminal case to overtake the judicial review. Indeed in his evidence last Friday he argued exactly the opposite.
What he has stated is two things;
Firstly, that the prospects of sisting was in wide discussion in September 2018. The Committee has not been given all of the documents by the Government but if they serve a notice on Mr Salmond’s lawyers they will be provided with the ones they hold. The Crown Office have blocked their release up until now.
Secondly, that it had become common knowledge among special advisers and SNP officials in November 2018 that the judicial review was going to succeed but that it could be overtaken by the criminal investigation if it were sufficiently advanced.
Mr Salmond at the Committee’s request, submitted a witness statement yesterday which corroborates that position.
In contrast to the Scottish Government, Mr Salmond has provided, or offered to provide, documentary evidence to back every statement he has made to the Inquiry”
Appendix 1
In his oral evidence session Mr Salmond said;
“Sisting was being examined by the Lord Advocate because, quite clearly, you would expect him, as the Government’s legal adviser, to be looking at that—and not just Mr Cackette and others; it would be very important for those to see it. I am not suggesting for a second that the Lord Advocate was engaged in thinking, therefore, “We should accelerate the criminal case in order to avoid defeat in the civil case.” I am not suggesting that for a second. I am merely suggesting that there was widespread knowledge by November 2018 that the judicial review was going to fail, on the part of the Government, and that there was a prospect of it being sisted if the criminal case came to a moment before the judicial review hearing in January 2019.”
Appendix 2
Documents released from 4 September 2018
Note from External Counsel
27 we have been asked for our views on whether the respondents should seek to have the judicial review proceedings sisted pending the outcome of any police investigation and/or criminal proceedings that may follow the investigation
35 we can also see strength in the argument that the criminal investigation may make the entire petition pointless: if there is a criminal conviction then surely this case will not proceed; and if there is a trial and an acquittal then the Ministers would be faced with a very different situation than that which presently obtains”
Ends
Which explains Murrell’s Whatsapp ” Put pressure on the police”. Because they knew they would lose the Judicial case.
The Snp Govt. obviously believe that the slower they can dribble out the truth, the less painful it will be for them, and the less impact as May’s elections loom on the horizon. This appears to be their only hope….
Roberto – Exactly.
It’s why they gave the paperwork to the hearing at the 11th hour before Sturgeon appeared. Redacted of course, but it gave them no time to properly scrutinise or for the media to run a story on. Sturgeon knew that, which explains her cockiness in the hearing. That and she had been primed by her PR people to say she didn’t recall when faced with any sticky questions.
Yep I’ve seen a video compilation where she says 50 times I don’t know or I’ m not sure or I don’t recall etc . They probably gave up when they got to 50.
Sturgeon would never have got away with that performance in a court room.
Something else . Did you notice the grim stare and silence when Jackie Baillie asked her why it had taken 3 votes in Holyrood to get the paperwork and they still didn’t have it. That look alone was all you need to take away from the hearing. Cover up!
My brother messaged me this morning about a herald expose on Salmond ! I was going to read it then thought why read more shite to add to the torrent currently emanating from Holyrood .She is simply not to be trusted but then l never did .
The uber loyalist Hetald protecting the unions friend Sturgeon against the biggest threat to the union, Salmond. That is,telling enough sadly too many wont get it!
Like many, I keep wondering why and how do they do these things, all the NEC shenanigans, List rigging, hated policies – GRA/HCB etc, the disappearance of the ring fenced money, the loss of so many members (even with 5k+ new ones overnight – if you believe it), the centralisation of power and disenfranchisement of ordinary members and branches, never mind this whole AS Conspiracy, and the truth shines out quite clearly. The obvious conclusion has to be – they are simply not interested in Independence, only on retaining power for another 5 years. That crosses all the t’s and dots all the i’s, doesn’t it.
You folks are providing a lot of glee for the Unionists. I know Alex and have a lot of admiration for his efforts in our advancement for Independence. However, the weight of evidence still suggests that he behaved wrongly – I can understand that as a “man” thing and a good wrap on the knuckles is deserved. People got things wrong on both sides but I am not convinced that any of it calls for a public hanging. More like an argie-bargie on a stairhead. What I am sure about is that perfection is a myth and that nobody is going to come out of the smelling of roses. It all makes good reading for unionists and utter dismay for those of us anticipating the opening of the floodgates for independence.
The evidence proved the exact opposite about Alex, Salmond innocent on all of the trumped up charges. Those of you still trying to find him guilty should be ashamed of yourselves.Suit you better to be demanding perjury charges, against the liars and demanding Sturgeon calls in the police to find the source of the leak to the Daily Record.
I agree Alex Salmond is not guilty, the court confirmed this.
I do not believe Nicola Sturgeon tried to have Alex Salmond jailed or harmed.
I do believe the civil servants working for westminster were trying to get Alex Salmond and when that failed they went after Nicola Sturgeon which also failed.
Hope fully one day we will get all the facts including the documents Alex says proves his correct .
In the meantime there is an important election to be won then a referendum
You can magic up any belief you are wrong. Just go and avail yourself of the evidence in the public domain. Sturgeon and her husband are in this up to their necks.
Jack you could have tried harder eg
I have known Nicola since she was a Bonnie baby. Even then I knew she was something special. A Saint even. Our very own female Moses to deliver us to the promised land of independence. Her first word was ” freedom”. She is super honest has never lied once in her whole life and looks after injured birds nursing them back to health in her spare time. Not that she has much spare time as she is always begging Johnston for Sect 30. Oops.
Salmond behaved wrongly you say – so did I once when I bought a steak and didn’t notice it had a Union flag on it. Me so bad. Your smear is pathetic.
I have known Alex since I was 17/18 years old (I’m 71 now). He has said himself he has behaved inappropriately which is not being looked into. I backed him all the way with canvassing for independence when he was FM. But my estimation of him has gone down now. The 8 hour grilling of Nicola was only short of the stone light shining in her face. Baillie and Fraser reminded me of being in the SS with their deplorable despicable behaviour.
Utter nonsense Sturgeon is, a, liar and denier Alex Salmond is not this continual smearing by the Nicola, cult is nauseating.
Geordie Farmer
It was an investigation into Sturgeons actions not a book club.
Are you not too young to be in the SS!
Your definition of the followers of the Sainted Nicola as a cult is spot on .The late and unlamented Jim Jones would have felt right at home and it’s now reached a tipping point where all but the faithful are beginning to see through .The sheer unremitting joylessness of the Covid show which she now uses as a political platform is a case in point where the viewpoint amongst those my age (65 plus) is now “ not her again “ even among Indy supporters .The broadcasts now remind me of my thankfully left behind west highland free church upbringing where the minister was all powerful and dissension was not brooked even for the most extreme points of view .