ScotGov has released its external legal advice from the Salmond judicial review. It's basically set out as a timeline of documents; starting from 27 Sept, when counsel were satisfied that most grounds were "weak", but there was "real risk" over the ground of procedural unfairness
However advice changed quickly on 31 October, when the extent of contact between the investigating officer and complainers became clear; Roddy Dunlop QC said he was "very concerned indeed" and said this "presents a very real problem" - adding that IO may have been "not eligible"
Paper trail then jumps forward a month to 6 December, where Roddy Dunlop and Christine O’Neill say that “the ‘least worst’ option would be to concede the petition”. However emails from the following week say the Lord Advocate argued there was “no question” of dropping the case
On to 19 December. External counsel now say “our dismay at this case deepens yet further”, they have suffered “extreme professional embarrassment” due to govt’s assurances to court “turning out to be false due to the revelation of further documents”. Case may now be “unstatable”
On 28 December the external counsel threatened to resign; in the following days the advice shows how talk turned to *how* to concede, not whether to, and the government conceded the case shortly thereafter
I imagine this external legal advice was not in fact *free*, but it certainly was frank... the government has published it here: gov.scot/publications/l… 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
