Court media guide faces dishonesty claims. DOCUMENTS giving advice on how the courts should handle media enquiries reveal staff at the Scottish Court Service (SCS) are told to provide a scripted response of false information when faced with certain questions from journalists.
The Scottish Court Service media guide - obtained in response to a Freedom of Information request, was initially released in a redacted format - deliberately concealing the sections of the guide which recommend court staff lie to the press when asked about convictions.
However, after the Scottish Information Commissioner became involved in the matter, the guide was grudgingly released by the SCS in an unredacted format - revealing the controversial written advice to SCS staff on how they should conceal types of information when queried by journalists.
In one section detailing how SCS employees should reply to enquiries relating to spent convictions, Page 18 of the redacted version of the SCS media guide states “If a conviction is spent it should be treated as though it never existed.” with the remaining details concealed.
On Page 19 of the unredacted version of the SCS media guide - released after the SIC became involved in the case, the uncensored advice reveals Court staff are provided with a ‘suggested reply’ equivalent to providing the media with false information, stating: “Thank you for your enquiry regarding XXX. I can confirm that a search of our records has failed to reveal such a conviction.”
Private Proceedings also came in for censored advice after it emerged the Court Service had deliberately concealed references on page 14 of the redacted version of the SCS media guide to judges holding proceedings in private - merely as a convenience, and to avoid a hearing in open court – which may end up in the press.
The guide warns Court staff to take advice, and states on page 15 in the unredacted version of the SCS media guide : “If proceedings take place in private, you may be able to provide limited information. Explain to the judge that there is media interest and ask whether proceedings are being held in private merely as a convenience (for example in chambers late in the day to avoid having to convene a court) and therefore basic information can be supplied, or whether it was the judge’s intention to exclude the public and the media.”
Scottish Court Service Media Guide. Court Service staff are also advised on every page of the guide: “If an incident arises that is likely to attract media attention, please contact Communications … immediately.”
SCS employees are also told not to get chatty with journalists: “When providing factual information, it is important that you are not drawn into conversation on other matters. You should not be asked to provide views, or to summarise what was said in evidence or by the judge during the court hearing.”
The media guide also bans any “fishing enquiries”. Court staff are told to deal only with requests about specific cases.
The guide states: “You should not answer fishing enquiries on the basis that you are only able to deal with requests about specified cases. Do not answer vague questions such as: Can you tell me if James Smith of the High Street has a criminal record? Are there any other civil actions against Jones and Co? There was a case up the other week about a man who assaulted his wife, who was that?”
Court staff are also told that if media excluded from a case, they should “take advice” and “should clarify with the judge if any information can be provided.”
During the summer of 2014, Scotland’s top judge threatened to ban the media from access to court documents & cases. Lord Gill, Scotland’s top judge issued an angry edict against press freedom to report on cases in Scotland’s courts, reported here: COURT SECRETS: Scotland’s anti-transparency top judge Lord Brian Gill threatens media censorship in row over reporting access to court papers
27 comments:
or in other words - if in doubt - lie.
Also worrying to the extent if the courts are happy to give this kind of advice to their own staff the same can be said of any public body/services and their relationship with the press.
No word from Gill on why his staff are being told to give out false info?
Little wonder no one can get anywhere in the courts and then even if they do it is all kept secret by the clerks and others who refuse to tell journalists about what is going on.
"Are there any other civil actions against Jones and Co?"
Hmm this is an interesting one.By any chance aimed at inquiries asking about civil actions against companies with connections to the courts or possibly even a law firm?
Just goes to confirm everything you are saying about the courts and the judges!DISHONESTY RULES!
Also too much of this Mr X and Mr Y in the judges verdicts then it turns out X and Y are law firms hidden behind some cloak of secrecy no one can or dare explain
@6 February 2015 at 17:53
Similar hush hush advice on how to 'handle the media' rather than being honest in responding to journalists is prevalent throughout public bodies, quangos etc ... including advice to destroy communications or conduct discussions in a way as to avoid Freedom of Information requests.
This gives the lie to Gill's attempt to portray the Scottish legal system 'modernizing' by allowing television cameras into Court..............once in a blue moon.
Anonymous said...
Also too much of this Mr X and Mr Y in the judges verdicts then it turns out X and Y are law firms hidden behind some cloak of secrecy no one can or dare explain
7 February 2015 at 12:05
----------------------------------------
This corrupt practise is rampant throughout Scotland, evidenced by any court Roll in any Sheriff Court and Curt of Session, where the Public are supposed to be able to know who is appearing in court against who and what the dispute is about, otherwise it is not a public court?
Thus, our court is anti-public and are showing that the court is not independent or fair, as they are fraudulently protecting their pals by keeping their disputes a secret?
So now we know dont bother trusting anything coming out of the courts because the staff are ordered to lie by their own bosses and no one bothered saying anything about it until now.Rotten to the core the lot and you know it!
The secrecy has got to the stage that Scottish courts will not even provide you with information about your own case.
What happened to the idea that the courts were a public place that had to be open and above board and answerable and transparent to the people of Scotland?
When exactly did this stop?
Clearly a subject Gill and McQueen should be questioned on by the Scottish Parliament.Telling their own staff to lie is bad enough and this will creep into all sorts of other aspects of court work.
I was involved in a 2 day court case, where the public gallery was empty both days, no one from the press, and when I queried my lawyer as to why this was he replied "yes aren't we lucky" this reply puzzled me as I had no wish to keep it a secret. It became clear much later the 2 solicitors had colluded in the case, and any experienced court journalist would have twigged something was seriously wrong. Is it possible to ban the public and the press from a court case, and who has the power to organize that>????
@ 9 February 2015 at 12:34
A good idea however representatives from the media should be invited in to ask their own questions as the SCS and judiciary usually dodge any searching enquiries from MSPs ...examples abound on this blog and in the media.
@ 9 February 2015 at 15:12
Yes it is possible to ban the press and public from court cases however much of the time in cases where publicity "is not desirable" clerks are told to put off the media or play down a case so as to avoid journalists enquiries or the names of some of those involved in the litigation leaking out.
Also as you can see from the article, proceedings are sometimes held in private on the pretence of convenience however this is actually to avoid open court and wider scrutiny.
You certainly stripped out any credibility the courts have on this so-called media guide!
Anonymous said...
I was involved in a 2 day court case, where the public gallery was empty both days, no one from the press, and when I queried my lawyer as to why this was he replied "yes aren't we lucky" this reply puzzled me as I had no wish to keep it a secret. It became clear much later the 2 solicitors had colluded in the case, and any experienced court journalist would have twigged something was seriously wrong. Is it possible to ban the public and the press from a court case, and who has the power to organize that>????
9 February 2015 at 15:12
£££££££££££££££££££££££££
What you have to remember, if you have the misfortune of your case reaching a Scottish court, then your lawyer or advocate does not have to act in your best interests and in fact has a duty to the court such that he must have regard to his opponent lawyer or advocate, to uphold their rights before your rights are considered last?
The moral of the story is do not use Scottish lawyers and do not use Scottish Courts?
If you disregard this advice, then you are playing into their hands because it is all about them them them and you just become a helpless by-stander in the process?
Lying is rubber stamped in the Scottish courts under Salmond Sturgeon and Gill and yet Gill gave that long rant about making Scotland a centre of arbitration etc
More like a centre for liars cheats tax fraud etc
Something for you to look into - rumours a son of one of Scotland's most prominent judges acquired several unusually discounted properties via repossessions by lenders.His father has ruled in favour of well known high street bank lender many times.
All the properties (at least 6 I am aware of) are in other names.His own name does not appear anywhere in RoS not even on his main residence.
regarding the comment about press banned from court my own experience of the courts is just as awful and on the day we were finally in the court of session one of the clerks came out to tell my witnesses my case was cancelled and told them to go home.This was a LIE because our hearing was put back to 11am and when my lawyer was told my witnesses had left the court he asked the judge for an adjournment because witnesses were delayed and the judge told him he thought the witnesses had arrived so the clerk obviously having words with the judge before court began.My lawyer said it was a set up we got the delay and returned to court 7 months later and had a surprise settlement offer made before hearing started and took it to avoid all the hassle.
As far as I am concerned the judge was in it up to his neck along with the nasty clerk who ran away as soon as she spotted us on the day of the last hearing.
Not naming names because of your comment rules but the law firm against us is in your list of lawyers to avoid and the judge is on your blog.
A fan
A liars charter written by liars for liars and backed by the judges,all very sinister and worthy of a full flush out of crooks in Scotland's courts
@ 9 February 2015 at 20:03
Sounds interesting ... and keeping names out of Registers of Scotland is an increasing trend by law firms etc ... contact the blog with more details.
@ 9 February 2015 at 21:15
A popular trick among court clerks & law firms they have an undeclared interest with ... contact the blog with the names of those involved.
One minute Gill threatens to kick the press out of courts then he says television is in and tweets are okay and now you publish his own court staff media guide telling the court workers to lie when asked about cases in the courts paid for by taxpayers!
Gill and others must be called into the Parliament to explain what is really going on and why the two faced approach to the press and public because we are all now rightly thinking this lie policy can extend to just about anything and any case not just questions from the press.
@ 10 February 2015 at 15:41
Good idea .. remember to write to your MSP requesting an inquiry!
Diary of Injustice said...
@ 10 February 2015 at 15:41
Good idea .. remember to write to your MSP requesting an inquiry!
10 February 2015 at 16:2
Dont think so!
How about some more headlines and then a more open investigation instead of the usual suspects waffling to MSPs about how they are great and no one takes them on.Oh yes and then there is Lord Gill who will probably refuse to answer any questions!
Handy to know Registers of Scotland is just as rotten as the rest of the Scottish legal system.
Is it likely that this is just the thin edge of the wedge?
Once obfuscation and lies are adopted as a 'tactic', where does it stop?
After all, they are working in a self-serving non-regulated industry where they can manipulate the system to enrich themselves knowing because they have made sure that there is zero scrutiny of their games?
Could media lies and the Law Society of Scotland describe the way in which the Law Society of Scotland threatened the BBC to slice 90% of the evidence against them out of the BBC's documentary 'Lawyers Behaving Badly'?
Although, even with 90% of the good stuff left out of the BBC's documentary, it was still explosive in that it revealed the criminality being perpetrated every single day by the Law Society of Scotland against the Scottish Public?
Post a Comment