🚨RE #FullDisclosure Shock

"We went through each and every document and cross-compared with what had been disclosed in both the #CivilCase and the #CriminalCase. And we found a substantial number of documents that we had never seen before; which is spectacular."

"[A spectacular example] – but by no means the only e.g. – is a series of documents which demonstrated that the @PermSecScot met one complainant and telephoned the other on March 6, 2018; that was the day before I was informed there were any complaints against me."
🚨"The search warrant in the #CriminalCase specifies meetings between the @PermSecScot and complainants; [but] the @COPFS did not receive that document (I believe), which is almost beyond imagination." .. "That's obstruction of justice! And there are consequences for such things"
πŸ“° On the role of the @ScotGov's @PermSecScot, Leslie Evans...

"Do you think she's discharged her responsibilities in line with the Civil Service Code?" – @JackiebMSP

"No." – @AlexSalmond

"As a former first minister, would carrying on legal action, in the Court of Session, knowing that you had acted unlawfully, be a breach of the Ministerial Code?" – @JackiebMSP

"Yes." – @AlexSalmond


πŸ“’ Retweet if you think @ScotGov should #ReleaseTheDocuments πŸ”“
πŸ’₯ A Special Advisor shared [to Mr Salmond's lawyers] that in Nov 2018 the @ScotGov knew they would lose the #JudicialReview but that, 'they would "get him" in the #CriminalCase'...

#SalmondSpeaks: "I am anxious to share all documentation I can, which establish[es] this point."
πŸ“’ "Let's be frank if I had been convicted of anything – anything at all – then this inquiry would've been moot; nobody would've cared about the #CivilCase nor the #JudicialReview. This inquiry wouldn't be sitting; it would have been entirely overtaken by events."

πŸ“Œ"Fortunately for me (& I believe, for Justice in #Scotland) that didn't happen. This inquiry is taking place. Hopefully, lessons that come from this will improve [our] institutions so as people can have more confidence in them; whether they believe in #Devolution or #ScotsIndy"

β€’ β€’ β€’

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

Keep Current with Scotland Speaks

Scotland Speaks 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 @ScotlandSpeaks

1 Mar
"22 Jan 2020 at the preliminary hearing of the criminal case. We were presented with a #MemoryStick by @COPFS. The next day in the offices of @LevyandMcRae, we went through a series of messages. It was one of the most #extraordinary days of my life"

🚨 #theConspiritors
"... because I'm not allowed to describe in any detail the #messages. Let's say I recognise the one you've just read out. And what they speak to behaviour which I would never have countenanced from people I've known in some cases for 30 years."

"There has been behaviour which is about not just pressurising the Police (like the one you read out), pressurising witnesses, collusion with witnesses, we're talking about the construction of evidence b/c the police somehow were felt to be inadequate in finding it themselves.
Read 9 tweets
28 Feb
πŸ”₯"@MaureenSNP, you say the present Lord Advocate is the former Dean of the Faculty [of Advocates]; the [@ScotGov] external Counsel is the present Dean of the Faculty. I'd have thought it of interest to hear what @RoddyQC & Christine O'Neil were saying in Oct 2018.
πŸ“Œ"I don't think the Lord Advocate would have done very well if he'd been in the shoes of @RoddyQC and having to argue the case." .. "The Practitioner – the person who was actually having to argue the case in Court – probably recognised the essential difficulties"

πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ "[#Mediation] cannot be thought to be totally unsuitable, @MaureenSNP because it's actually in the policy, but it only applies to current Ministers; not past Ministers."
Read 4 tweets
28 Feb
🚨 "We indicated a willingness to [hand over documents to the committee], we then had correspondence from the @ScotGov who only would only agree [to us doing so] if we gave the documents to them [first] so they could – as they put it – 'make suitable redactions'."

"The Investigating Officer (IS) presents the case for the prosecution before the defendant is even informed about the procedure. Then the [accused], instead of being able to present their own case, has to give that case to the IS to present on his behalf."
"The @PermSecScot decision not to allow me any contact with civil servants or even have documents (like my own diaries)."

Why would Civil Service use a procedure, to then hand over to a political party for sanction?

"Highly questionable!"

Read 7 tweets
28 Feb
πŸ“Ί Regarding the alternative options available to @ScotGov, including #Arbitration and #Mediation to resolve complaints.

"Mediation [was] available for current ministers, but not former ministers" .. "Mediation [was] missing .. for no understandable reason..."

πŸ“° "[#Arbitration] designed to provide a cheaper/ more private was of dealing with disputes."

"The idea that that wouldn't have been a better way to approach this matter – than what has transpired over the last 3 yrs – would be an extraordinary position to adopt"

πŸ’‘"If people would say, 'on reflection we could have avoided this disaster and saved the Scottish people Β£600,000' – that might be a good thing for people to say." .. "But people who took a decision might be expected to defend it, however disastrous the decision turned out to be"
Read 6 tweets
26 Feb
πŸ“° Regarding the #JudicialReview against the @scotgov:

"We would have expected to get a substantive reply" .. "Perhaps they were going to say, 'we're about to legislate for this anyway, or do something – remotely – legal"
–– @AlexSalmond

The @scotgov refused arbitration; pressed ahead and cost the taxpayer Β£512,250 – the very highest level that could be awarded by the judge. The reason for that is the unprecedented lengths the Gov went to hide their evidence.

🚨 A totally extraordinary position.

"The Gov were prepared to go before the Court and say, 'there were no more documents'." .. "[@scotgov] had been withholding documentation, not just from the petitioner (myself), not just the Court, but from their own Counsel."

Read 5 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!