My thread on the criminal threats made against me on 1st February 2021 the day I was sacked from @theSNP Westminster front bench for as yet unspecified “behaviour”. scotsman.com/news/crime/you…
Grant Karte appeared at Edinburgh Sherriff Court this morning Friday 12 March and pled guilty to offences under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003
Some of the threats which Mr Karte made to me were of a sexual nature. A recent survey of parliamentarians showed that while politicians of both sexes receive abuse and threats, it is largely female politicians who receive threats of sexual violence.
I believe that this is a problem which requires to be acknowledged. #SexMatters
At the time of the offence Mr Karte was a member of a branch of the SNP where there have been a significant number of complaints about abuse of women by younger men.
Had these complaints of abuse, and the targeting of me and other women on social media been addressed, it is likely that this behaviour would not have escalated to the scale of threats of sexual violence.
I believe that the untrue allegations of transphobia made against me, some of which were repeated by senior politicians who ought to know better, put a target on my back. Therefore, I hope that everyone involved learns from this episode.
Women must be allowed to discuss women’s rights, and to acknowledge that sex matters, without being labelled bigots or abused and threatened.
Sex is a biological reality which we cannot ignore and if we do ignore it, we distort reality in a way that can only make women more vulnerable.
Sentence has been deferred until 16 April. I would like to thank the police for their assistance. And to everyone who has sent me their love & support.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The front page of today’s @heraldscotland wrongly states that I “am taking a defamation action against a Scots actor”. This is incorrect. There is no such action in court and I note the online version has been corrected to reflect this.
Article 10 of the ECHR (which is part of Scots law) protects the right to freedom of expression. It specifically states that the exercise of this right carries with it duties & responsibilities and may be subject to such restrictions or penalties as are
prescribed by law & are necessary in a democratic society. This is what permits us to legislate to criminalise hate speech & it is why individuals including MPs are entitled to take steps to protect their rights & reputations when people tell lies about them
A thread on the newly announced @theSNP Roadmap to Referendum which I have seen for first time today & am studying carefully 👇
I’m pleased that ideas previously advanced by me & others are being pursued & I hope all @theSNP members will now unite around the recognition that we need a Plan B, by which I mean a strategy which does not rely on Westminster granting a section 30 order
However, I have many questions about the detail of this new strategy, which I have seen for the first time today, and the proposed timetable, and I intend to pursue these questions at tomorrow’s SNP national assembly
I’m used to nasty hatchet jobs on me. Its been a particular feature of my experience in politics. Often they come from a position of ignorance from those who have never spoken with me & wish to distort something I’ve said by taking it wholly out of context
Today’s piece in the Herald is fairly . Typical. Perhaps Mr Smith didn’t read or understand my original column? heraldscotland.com/news/19000771.…
Fortunately the Irish Times did & here’s their piece. Typical of the consistently high quality of their journalism irishtimes.com/news/ireland/i…
The route to #independence must be legal & constitutional. I support Plan A of replicating the Edinburgh Agreement but there are other legal & constitutional options & it’s right for @theSNP to consider these . thenational.scot/news/18995586.…
It is foolish & dangerous to rail against having a fallback plan, should it be required. Foolish, because it undermines the carefully achieved past gains such as the concession Salmond secured from Dewar in exchange for supporting the devolution referendum
Dangerous, because it re-inforces the power of our adversary and cements in the minds of the international community that the only way Scotland can leave the UK and become independent legally and constitutionally is by replicating the 2014 referendum.
Some follow up thoughts on a great piece by Andrew Tickell: How Scots have learned to love independence in 2020 thenational.scot/news/18970919.…
Andrew says; “Now, the idea of independence in the lead and the Union in retreat is a banal fact of Scottish life.” As others have pointed out this has parallels with where we were with #devolution post the 1992 General election.
But then, Scotland had to wait for Westminster to catch up with us before we got devolution. 5 years passed before a party that supported devolution came to power at Westminster and held a referendum
What Priti Patel says about the law enforcement & judicial co-op parts of the deal is simply wrong. It affords us considerably less protection than we had with #EU membership -
PM's Brexit deal makes UK safer, Priti Patel insists theguardian.com/politics/2020/…
Such data sharing as we retain will be slower as not in real time. Information exchanges between police forces will be significantly reduced. We are out of the European Arrest Warrant with a poor relation replacement
Plus it’s all conditional on the #EU Commission making a positive data adequacy ruling within 4 month window