Salmond and truth about THOSE meetings
ANYONE found to be involved in an alleged plot to ‘imprison’ Alex Salmond could face the threat of jail themselves, a legal expert has warned.
Alistair Bonnington, a former professor at Glasgow University’s School of Law, said the ex-SNP leader’s claims that he was the victim of a conspiracy by people at the very top of the Scottish political establishment raises serious questions about possible criminality.
Mr Bonnington said he finds it ‘suspicious’ that the Crown has refused to let the committee examining the Scottish Government’s botched handling of harassment allegations against Mr Salmond see social media messages he claims are crucial in proving his assertions.
He added: ‘The major matter underlying all this is Mr Salmond’s contention that he was the victim of a conspiracy by some at the very top of the Scottish political estabstatutory lishment to “get” him – even to the extent of imprisoning him.’
He added: ‘Nobody should think this is merely the kind of spat which takes place between politicians often enough.
‘Mr Salmond is alleging that the serious crime of attempting to pervert the course of justice was perpetrated against him.
‘That crime can normally be expected to carry a three to fiveyear term of imprisonment.
‘In view of the identities of those who Mr Salmond claims were involved in the conspiracy, Scotland’s government would easily qualify as the most sleazy and corrupt in Europe if he is right.’
Mr Bonnington claimed that Mr Salmond’s appearance before the committee was ‘an unedifying spectacle’.
He added: ‘When dealing with such a well-prepared witness as Mr Salmond, it was downright embarrassing to watch inarticulate committee members stumble over their repetitive queries.
‘The correct route would have been a judge-led inquiry with powers and experienced legal counsel.
‘Furthermore, the committee has been hamstrung by the restrictions imposed on it at the behest of the Crown Office, whose intervention in this matter is both legally doubtful and highly suspicious.
‘Understandably, Mr Salmond was clearly furious that he was not allowed to present his evidence fully.
‘Not only did the Crown’s action succeed in removing important parts of Mr Salmond’s submissions, but they also had previously refused to supply the committee with some of the evidence lodged in court at his criminal trial.
‘Again, their legal basis for so doing is doubtful.’
Several legal experts have said the inquiry has raised fundamental questions over the Crown Office’s position as an independent justice body.
Summing up Mr Salmond’s appearance yesterday, Mr Bonnington said: ‘Mr Salmond made his points in a straightforward fashion. He persuasively argued for significant legal investigations to take place.
‘He correctly identified several things which, on the face of it, seem to require police attention. Given the behaviour of the Crown Office to date, however, it is highly unlikely that they will initiate any inquiries.’
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) said that it takes ‘seriously our responsibility to uphold the law and to protect the dignity and rights of all those who come into contact with COPFS’.
It added: ‘Scotland’s prosecutors have acted independently and in the public interest at all times when considering matters related to this case.’
‘Clearly furious about evidence’