We're standing by in the virtual courtroom for @CraigMurrayOrg's trial to begin. Our tweets will be on this thread. More info on the case can be found at craigmurray.org.uk
Presiding are Lord Turnbull, Lord Menzies and Lady Dorian. Court its now in session.

No further information to be submitted. John Scott is speaking. Affidavits have been submitted. Lady Dorian discussing relevance. The respondent is willing to give evidence.
Advocate depute invites court to consider whether Craig Murray's conduct constitutes contempt of court (n reporting on the trial of Alex Salmond), in terms of :
1/ jigsaw identification of complainants
2/ influencing outcome of trial
3/ contravening order to desist
Advocate referring to Murray's 'Yes Minister' article, which he asserts could have permitted jigsaw identification. The court issued a warning on Jan 21 2020. Murray did not remove the article and court decided not to prosecute.
Lady Dorian: You refer to article on Jan 18. What about a previous article on Aug 21 2019?

Advocate Depute: The earlier article is in a different category

LD: Both were before the trial. If the Crown thought there was a problem, strange that no action was taken then

AD Agreed
Lady Dorian: These assertions are disputed, especially in relation to Woman C. How far can one take this point? The respondent completely disputes jigsaw identification.

Advocate Depute: All the court can proceed on are facts

LD: So what is disputed we have to put aside
Lady Dorian: Although there is nothing in the body of Murray's article, comments on his website should have been moderated (and removed if identification was happening)?

AD: Yes
LD: Do we interpret this generally or specifically?
AD: If anyone can identify, not general public
Advocate Depute: Identification more harmful if it happens close to the complainant's own workplace. Even if no particular piece of info doesn't identify, it should be taken in conjunction w/ all other material.

LD: I have difficulty w/ the 2 articles before which didn't breach
AD: Previous articles were not removed.
LD: Moving on to whether outcome was influenced. Does the Crown accept that there is a balance to be struck here w/ Mr Murray's Article 10 rights )freedom of speech)
AD Yes
Defence lawyer John Scott: This is an open court. There are 313 listening on the Webex connection and more on phone line. Re internet searches, you drew attention to how variable they are. Mr Murray should be held to the same standard as mainstream media...
John Scott: Mr Murray, a former diplomat is not fixated on the Alex Salmond case. He is interested in open justice & is a former whistle-blower. He covered the #JulianAssange case. He has a significant heart condition. Was refused accreditation so attended in person every day.
John Scott: Mr Murray is a man of integrity. He was aware of the complainer's names but did not reveal them. His affidavit outlines the care he took to avoid identification. Crown asserts he "dropped enough hints". He sees a bigger picture involving the complainers.
John Scott: Re warnings, he only received one. He saw that one as inappropriate censorship rather than a friendly warning that there MIGHT be contempt. There was no order to remove his articles. Many others reported & he based his reporting on theirs when he was not in court.
LD: How do you test it for accuracy if not in court?
JS: He cross-referenced between different reports and issue commentary in his own words. When he was excluded from the court, he held the court as "a beacon of integrity". He speaks of why they reached a sound verdict.
John Scott: Turning to the legal submissions...
There are 3 points: prejudice, identification & revealing a juror had been dismissed. Nothing of this was drawn to attention of the court before or during Alex Salmond's trial. Now that is over & Salmond acquitted, it's too late
Lady Dorian: If the argument is prejudice, it could go either way?
JS: Indeed yes. The prejudice was in relation to the bigger picture, but the Crown should have drawn attention earlier. There was no complaint about the fairness of Alex Salmond's trial.
John Scott (defence): Re revealing juror's dismissal, no order was breached. Re 'Yes Minister' article, that was satire.

If the Crown's interpretation of identification were accepted, nothing at all could be reported. There will be workmates who have pieces of the jigsaw.
John Scott: [referring to identification by "the public"] If a crime were committed on a lighthouse (or Bute House) the mere mention of the place would enable many to work out who a complainer was.

Lady Dorian: More so by work-mates, for example?

JS: Yes indeed.
John Scott (defence) If the definition is that ANYONE could identify, that is too wide and not reasonably balanced with the public's Article 10 rights to be informed.

Lady Dorian: There will be a work colleague who will know, perhaps because complainer told them, but others not.
Lady Dorian: Where does one draw the line?
John Scott: That depends on each case. There may be colleagues who could work out the identity of a complainer. LD: It has to fact sensitive. One piece of info may be enough. If only one member of staff...
JS: Article 10 applies here
That concludes John Scott's comments on Article 10. No questions from Lord Turnbull or Lord Menzies. John Scott & Craig Murray are conferring. Scott is reminded by Murray that no reference was made as to what in his article might be in breach. He nevertheless revised & redacted
The court is adjourned. Notification of the outcome will be in writing. Lady Dorian was the only judge to speak. We do not know the opinion of Lord Turnbull or Lord Menzies.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Consortium News

Consortium News Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Consortiumnews

6 Jan
We'll be live-tweeting from the #JulianAssange courtroom again today on this thread.

Starts: 10am BST / 9pm AEST / 5am EST

At 3pm GMT #CNLive! will speak with @johnpilger & @rogerwaters about the outcome.

This👇WILL be the link after the hearing:
We are in the virtual court room. Judge Baraitser has arrived. Awaiting #Assange.

US prosecutor has said it is uncertain whether the US will continue with the extradition effort:

Camera is panning around Court 1 at Westminster Magistrates Court. Few people in attendance. #Assange has not yet arrived.
Read 26 tweets
4 Jan
We are in the virtual courtroom for #JulianAssange's extradition judgement. Our tweets will be on this thread and #CNLive! will go to air 30 minutes after the hearing concludes.
The image we see is a close-up of the dock. Empty as yet...

#JulianAssange has not yet arrived.
Read 22 tweets
30 Sep 20
We'll be connecting to the #Assange courtroom soon & live tweeting on this thread. Today's witness is expected to be Andy Worthington.

See you at 5pm BST for Joe Lauria @unjoe's account of the day's proceedings.

Court in session.
Statement from journalist Patrick Cockburn, Middle-East correspondent & writer on wars in Iraq & Afghanistan since 1977. He & other journalists on the ground suspected but could not prove - until @WikiLeaks revelations - that many civilians were being killed.
Cockburn reported on the 'Collateral Murder' & the shooting of the wounded, inc the Reuters journalist Saeed Chmagh.
The US claimed @Wikileaks caused harm but efforts to find victims have failed. @Wikileaks made every effort to redact names. Unredacted cables published by others.
Read 44 tweets
29 Sep 20
Day 16 of the #JulianAssange extradition hearing will begin soon. Our live tweets will be on this thread.

Join us on #CNLive! at 5pm BST for Joe Lauria @unjoe's round-up of the day's proceedings.

Court in session. This morning's witness is Maureen Baird, who worked in the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) & as a warden who is experienced w/ Special Administrative Measures.

MB #Assange is likely to be subjected to SAMs
MB: SAMs prisoners locked in their cells 23-24 hrs/ day. They have no contact at all w/ other prisoners. They were allowed to go into another "recreation" (empty) cell. They can make 1 30' or 2 X 15' calls to approved family members per month. All mail is screened. Takes months.
Read 66 tweets
28 Sep 20
DAY 15 of the #ulianAssange extradition hearing is about to begin. Our live tweets will be on this thread.

Join us at 5pm BST for Joe Lauria @unjoe's live report on the day's proceedings.

As we wait for Judge Baraitser to arrive, we see that lawyer Yancey Ellis is waiting to testify. His practice appears to be based in Alexandria Virginia.

All stand...
We will hear from a representative from the press association. Fitzgerald says the defence has been unable to take instruction from Mr #Assange, so they want to hear Mr Ellis's testimony first

Before that, judge is reading the application from the press, who want more disclosure
Read 85 tweets
25 Sep 20
DAY 14 of the #Assange extradition hearing will start soon. Our live tweets are on this thread.

Join us at 5pm BST for Joe Lauria @unjoe's daily update on the day's proceedings.

One of today's witnesses is Patrick Eller.

Summers: At 11.30 last night we received the prosecution's bundle for witnesses. Mr Eller hasn't had a chance to read it. There has been an exchange between Eller & Kromberg & a challenge to his evidence. Eller needs an hour to read it.
Baraitser grants 1 hour. She received 2 statements last night. Questions whether they can be admitted. Lewis will give an answer today.

Now speaking about what journalists can disclose. Nothing more than what is discussed in open court, acc to defence.
Read 39 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!