It is worth looking at recent editions of Diary of Injustice, the Scottish Law Reporter, the Scottish Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Herald in reporting the extraordinarily evasive conduct of the Lord President, Lord Gill.

A formal petition, brought about by Peter Cherbi, has been accepted by the Scottish Parliament with a special committee set up and having the full support of the Judicial Complaints Reviewer, Ms Moi Ali.

One of the main  purposes of the petition was merely to ensure that members of the Scottish judiciary should have a duty to publicly disclose information about their interests that may be perceived to have a bearing on their impartiality when adjudicating cases.

The Lord President has reacted in a most unusual way, by not only flatly dismissing the proposals, but also even refusing to face questions from a properly constituted committee made up of representatives elected by the people of Scotland.

The Lord President`s position seems to be that he regards all his judicial colleagues to possess such a high level of integrity that it is entirely unwelcome and unnecessary to hold them to public account in any way. In my experience alone, I can assure him that Sheriff Patrick Davies, Lord Bannatyne and most certainly Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen fall well below the standards to which the Lord President refers. And does the Lord President think it appropriate that six of the colleagues he is trying to protect are members of the Violate Club?

You will probably be aware that Bill Roache, the Coronation Street actor, has been found not guilty of the serious sexual criminal charges laid against him. It is difficult to comment when not being involved in the proceedings, but it does appear that justice has finally been done and has seen to have been done. However, can anyone explain why Mr Roache was questioned, arrested, charged and brought before the court on the simple basis of verbal allegations from thirty or so years ago when Denis and Greg Mackie, with overwhelming impartial expert witness evidence against them, including that from the police and fully accepted by the Criminal Injury Compensation Authority, are never even questioned by the police?

Finally, you may recall that I have lodged a formal complaint to Cheshire Police about Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen`s racially discriminatory outburst at my trial after I had challenged him over the concealing of his ten-year relationship with cited defence witness Elish Angiolini from the court and from the defence. Even worse, Bowen, with others, is responsible for subsequently conspiring falsify solemn court audio evidence in order to delete the discriminatory remark. There is absolutely no question that Bowen has committed a criminal offence.

Despite the fact that the inaccurate transcript taken from the audio was produced by a Gloucestershire firm, Cheshire Police has decided that the matter must be dealt with by Police Scotland. Many of you who were present and heard Bowen`s comments that  have now been omitted from the records have kindly offered to send me statements to confirm what they heard Bowen say. I would be most grateful if those of you who made the offer would be so good as to send me their brief witness statements. It is not required to comment on any other aspect of the case nor to offer an opinion. Just what you heard is enough and is all that is desired.

Some of you already have my home address, but if not, you can contact me on:-

Thank you in advance for your courage and integrity.

1 comment:

  1. Taken from Paul Hutcheon’s fantastic article in last Sunday’s Scottish Sunday Herald; He (Lord Gill) added that a register could infringe a judge’s “freedom from harassment” from “aggressive media or hostile individuals”.

    Previously, I could not comprehend these words as they seemed to me to be completely out of context?

    Could the context now be realised?


Leave a Reply

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