Angiolini and Levy & McRae

Central Police has now confirmed that the investigation related to an alleged misappropriation of public funds involving Elish Angiolini and Peter Watson, of Levy & McRae, has been passed to the CID.

With regard to Angiolini`s ten-year boardroom connection with Sheriff Principal Bowen, it has proved difficult to ascertain exactly who was responsible for allocating my case to him. I have been informed that the application for a sheriff to adjudicate was passed to Sir Stephen Young, Sheriff Principal for Grampian, Highland and Islands.

Sir Stephen is also a commissioner for the Northern Lighthouse Board.

Finally, thank you to everyone who has been kind enough to offer their best wishes and prayers for me next Friday at Stonehaven. I would also like to extend my appreciation to those who may be able to make the journey there to witness and support me.

Of course, what may happen to me is not really of major consequence. What is important is to bring to justice those who committed such appalling crimes against Hollie and other children, which in itself will help to prevent further unspeakable sufferings at the hands of those perpetrators still at large.

Is there a senior political figure in Scotland with sufficient courage and compassion to stand up and demand an inquiry?


  1. “Is there a senior political figure in Scotland with sufficient courage and compassion to stand up and demand an inquiry? “

    If the matter can be kept ‘grounded’, to the cold hard logical facts and on an adult basis – that is to say away from hob-goblin masonic fairy stories and tacky embroidary – Yes!

    Angiolini made few freinds – not even among light house keepers. There are in reality many who would see her figuartively burned at the stake – Preferably on top of the Bell rock!


    Put that in your wee pipe n smoke it…

  2. Replies

    1. Eng65… As you’ve taken to ‘spamming’ with this post you can have the reply you got earlier…

      That’s a cheap comment – emotional blackmail? Coming from the likes of you? Do you honestly imagine you are a credible person to be pontificating?

      It doesn’t wash since it’s the conspiracy theorists like YOU who are ENSURING paedophiles and sex offenders have ‘get out of jail’ cards’… YOU are no better than GLW in that respect.


      Had to post this over two posts – sorry.

      I stumbled upon this blog from another blog when researching something else, and read it with great interest.

      I sympathise with Robert Green and the crusade with which he has gotten himself entangled – I’m speaking from raw hard experience, as someone who has been there, seen it, done it, worn the tee-shirt, and have all the bruises to prove it. So I have a personal message for Robert Green, stripped of all emotion, and I sincerely hope he can see the wisdom in it. I’m going to seperate facts from fiction and theory and strip it all bare. You don’t know me Mr Green, and I don’t know you – and this is the internet, so I could be anyone at all and this whole post could be yet another tango with the loonies. Ironically, we have a similarly ‘colourful’ name.

      I have raw experience with Crown Office and Levy and MacRae – even Sheriffs. I battled for almost 20 years with them all. It was a lonely battle. Raw emotion oftentimes gets in the way of common sense. There is an old legal saying that a man who is his own counsel has a fool for a client. There is great wisdom in that saying. It does not mean that every man who is his own counsel is in fact a fool. But it demonstrates the fine line that can often exist between raw legal facts, and often times our own personal and emotional proximity to a disputed situation.

      The law deals solely on raw facts and hard evidence. It needs to. Neither is it perfect, if it were, we would have no need for appeal courts. It is staffed entirely by human beings, just like you and I. Some are good, some not so good, some are completely indifferent – some even make mistakes, just like you and I may also do from time to time. For the most part, they all believe they are doing a service – as in fact they are doing. Cases of the type you have become embroiled in are notoriously difficult to investigate, and by virtue of the nature of how they manifest, proof or evidence is often times hard to find. Often times it comes down to one persons word against another. In legal terms, that can be a very difficult matter to determine, and is fraught with all manner of problems. The law demands doubt beyond reasonable belief for prosecutions. For the religious ilk popping up in the threads, the bible demands the same – ‘out of the mouth of two or three witnesses’ shall a matter be establised as a fact, and in the absence of that standard of proof, there is nothing much that can be established at all, other than that there is contrary opinions and beliefs in a particular matter.

      Levey & MacRae are a law firm with solid connections and of some notoriety for their skills and expertise in law. I don’t know Peter Watson and have never dealt with him. However, when you start attacking a law firm, or indeed any organisation for the perceived flaws or errors of perhaps one or two individuals, you walk a particular pathway. You oftentimes tarnish an institution, whether intending to or not, which will in turn do everything within it’s power to defend itself. There will be individuals who become greatly aggrieved at such railing accusations, and who have done no wrong. They will take a moral highground against such matters, and rightly so, for they themselves have done no wrong. One of their company may or may not have wronged you or someone else, but in their eyes and mind, that gives you no right to tar them all with the same brush, even if that is not what you intended to do.

      In legal circles judges, sheriffs, law lords, prosecutors, advocates, and indeed the whole fraternity, many of them may well ‘know’ some or others, or share some time in the course of a whole manner of different kinds of professional business. Furthermore, they are all members of the same organisation, the Law Society. When dealing with them or considering particular associations, it is necessary to seperate personal relationships from business or professional relationships.



      Leave a Reply

      Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *