As many readers will be well aware, both previous attempts at reforming self regulation of lawyers in Scotland failed miserably - after two Justice Committee probes of how the legal profession regulates itself.
It was inevitable, that the combined vested interests of Scotland’s legal profession – the Law Society of Scotland, Faculty of Advocates, along with all their sub-groups, backed up by the judiciary - lobbied to remain in charge of looking after their own.
And, Scotland’s legal profession did exactly that – looked after their own.
Headline after headline, investigation after investigation, and even when BBC Scotland deigned to come along in 2014 with “Lawyers Behaving Badly” - albeit using fantastical cases resembling dubious, ever altering cave paintings carved in fossilised stone from the Jurassic age to put their point across - about dodgy legal regulators looking after their own rogue lawyers – nothing changed.
Yes, it is true – the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) came along in 2008 – as a response to an ‘extensive’ probe by the Scottish Parliament’s Justice 2 Committee in 2006 of complaints against lawyers and how the Law Society of Scotland ‘handled’ clients & consumers who complained against the legal profession - to the point of destruction.
However, twelve years on from the creation of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, anyone with a serious & geniune complaint who has used it, knows the SLCC as more of a Cayman Islands front company for lawyers to look after their own, rather than the allegedly ‘independent’ SLCC was created and put in place by civil servants who had little clue or knowledge what they were actually doing.
Sadly, the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission spent the last twelve years mirroring the work previously done by the Law Society of Scotland where lawyers were protected time & again, while clients were often targeted by the legal profession after complaints had been submitted to the ‘independent’ SLCC.
In any case, there is now a third attempt at reforming complaints against lawyers, and you can participate in it.
On 23 December 2020, the Scottish Government published the latest consultation on reforming complaints about the legal profession - along with a questionnaire for those who like that sort of thing to fill out, and send back in the forlorn hope your views and experiences will be taken into account.
You can download the Scottish Government consultation documents here: Scottish Government Consultation: Amendments to Legal Complaints (pdf) and here Respondent Information Form and Questionnaire (docx)
The details are as follows:
Complaints against lawyers and legal firms in Scotland: consultation
Published: 23 Dec 2020
This consultation sets out proposals and seeks views on potential improvements to the legal complaints system, within the current legislative framework of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007.
The handling of complaints is one of the most important parts of any regulatory system. It is crucial that users of legal services have access to an efficient, effective and fair process for dealing with their complaint. Equally, legal professionals rely on a complaints system which is efficient, effective and can resolve complaints in an impartial manner.
There is a compelling case for the consideration of amendments to the current regulatory framework for dealing with complaints that would seek to improve the way in which the legal services complaints system operates.
The objectives behind these proposals
This Consultation seeks views on whether these proposals would meet the objectives of:
1. Reducing the overall time taken to deal with complaints.
2. Achieving greater proportionality in the complaints system, allowing the SLCC to identify earlier in the process which issues are more likely to require investigation.
3. Reducing the cost of the complaints system.
4. Continuing to ensure an independent and fair system.
5. Providing greater flexibility in the system.
The changes proposed in this paper seek to build on previous changes made in 2014[1] and are based on 10 years’ working knowledge of the current legislation and the experience of the current system.
The current proposals in this Consultation on which views are sought, and which are intended to have a cumulative effect in meeting the objectives, fall into three categories:
1. Changes to the process of complaint categorisation;
2. Changes to the process of complaint investigation, reporting, determination and conclusion of cases; and
3. Changes to the rules for fee rebates.
The proposed changes listed at 1 and 3 can be viewed as standalone amendments but those listed at 2 should be viewed as a package of amendments in order to gain the maximum impact from the changes.
The proposals - a summary
The aim of the proposals detailed below is to explore options to create a more flexible and proportionate complaints system, that will be more efficient yet just as effective, if not more so. Views on whether these proposals address stated frustrations of those who have been involved in the complaints system, who often perceive it to be time consuming and overly complex, are also sought in response to this consultation.
Why is this important?
Those who make or are subject to complaints in respect of legal services have indicated that they would wish for a speedy, robust and proportionate response to each complaint. While all complaints are equally important, there is a recognition that not all complaints are the same. Those who manage the complaints process, as well as many of those who have experienced it, have stated that they consider the current statutory framework insufficiently flexible to enable the process to be adapted to the specific subject of the complaint in each individual case.
While a one-size-fits-all-approach provides consistency in the application of the complaints process, there is an argument that this does not always lead to an efficient system, with the result in the current system that the end of the complaints process can often be some time away from the time of the original incident that led to the complaint. This can be unsatisfactory for all of those involved in the process. These proposals are intended to reduce this time period and improve efficiency while continuing to maintain a robust and fair system.
Costs
The cost of the legal services complaints process administered by the SLCC is met by way of levies on the legal profession. These take the form of an annual general levy paid by all legal services providers[1] as well as a separate complaints levy[2] which is payable only by those legal professionals who are subject to a complaint which is upheld.
Should the proposals set out in this Consultation be taken forward then they will likely take time to be fully implemented. There is also likely to be a cost implication for implementation. Depending on the range of amendments ultimately decided to be taken forward, implementation in year one is likely to have associated costs in terms of changing rules, process and IT systems. These costs will be borne by the SLCC and it is not presently expected that these will require an increase in funding to either of the above levies. However, in the first full year of operation, and likely after set-up costs are offset, the proposed changes in this Consultation could lead to longer term savings.
A. About this Consultation
The objective of this consultation paper is to offer an opportunity for targeted views to be gathered on the technicalities of making specific changes to the legal complaints system in Scotland.
The main proposals relate to possible changes to the categorisation of complaints to introduce hybrid-issue complaints as well as changes to the processes of assessment, investigation, reporting, determination and conclusion of complaints. Possible changes to the rules on fee rebates are also proposed.
Responding to this consultation
The Scottish Government are inviting responses to this consultation by 20 February 2021.
Please respond to this consultation using the Scottish Government’s consultation hub, Citizen Space (http://consult.gov.scot). Access and respond to this consultation online at https://consult.gov.scot/iustice/amendments-to-legal-complaints/. You can save and return to your responses while the consultation is still open. Please ensure that consultation responses are submitted before the closing date of 20 February 2021.
If you are unable to respond using our consultation hub, please complete the Respondent Information Form to:
Access to Justice Unit Scottish Government Justice Directorate St Andrew’s House Edinburgh EH13DG
Or by email to: LegalServicesRegulationReform@gov.scot
An earlier report on the Esther Roberton review, and how it began, is here: LOOK AFTER THE LAWYERS: Law Society proposals to pro-lawyer legal review seek to reclaim control of regulation & complaints, appoint ‘window dressing’ ombudsman & criminalise ‘misuse’ of the term “lawyer”
I refuse to have anything to do with lawyers as far as possible. They are a filthy group of people and their filth is invisible.
ReplyDeleteI started reading this blog in the year 2000 and I am not surprised at this latest report DOI. Covid will kill us all before these criminals lose the levers of their power. So much for equal rights in a democracy I always knew it was false.
ReplyDeleteThere is a Scottish Government consultation you can all participate in...............Why nothing will change the Scottish Government are as corrupt as the Law Society. Waste of time like the Reforming Complaints thing Cathy Jamieson got the Law Society to send out twenty years ago. I filled that in and sent it off. They are all the one unit against the public. Fk that writing to the Scottish Government.
ReplyDeleteIf people want to change this system the only way is to stay away from lawyers.
ReplyDeleteAre you taking comments on this consultation?
ReplyDeleteSelf regulation did not work for MPs or the banks and has never worked for the legal profession - BBC TV's 'Lawyers behaving badly' confirmed that beyond any doubt.
ReplyDeleteAs has been said for years, the only way the legal profession (and the judiciary) can be effectively regulated is by truly independent regulators who have the necessary powers to do the job.
This 'consultation' just smacks of more window dressing - albeit that anyone who has suffered at the hands of the legal profession should make their voice heard.
@ 12 January 2021 at 18:31
ReplyDeleteYes, comments are being accepted.
However - and given an increasingly significant number of unpublished comments threatening journalists and those who debate or report on legal issues of public interest and importance - those who are posting comments under "anonymous" or any other identity will have to stick to the comment rules posted if they want comments to appear.
This blog is not an unmoderated platform. Comments are moderated.
Please read the following in bold.
Clients of the legal profession, consumers, and ever other person who is not a Scottish lawyer or judge or has a creepy monetary vested financial interest in the justice system - should by now understand that voters and followers of all political parties in Scotland - are all treated with equal disdain (particularly when it comes to taking clients financially to the cleaners) - by legal vested interests and the business model of the Scottish Courts system which has historically, and always will be - turned upon anyone who ends up being a victim of their legal representatives and the justice system, rather than their client.
Do yourself a favour, fellow Scots - think about why you need to run to a lawyer for legal services and how much money you are throwing at them for an end result which in reality will be very far from the often shifty, dirty & dishonest promise of your legal representative who - motivated by money & greed - only want to charge you fee after fee for a case, a defence, administering a will or some other iffy whiffy or dodgy legal service which may end up ruining your life. You are a lot better off without it, folks.
And of course, continue to report wrongdoing by identified solicitors & law firms (along with any necessary and required paperwork) to the blog team.
Yes the best advice is stay away from lawyers. I don't know why they call that lot The Justice Committee in the Parliament a misnomer if ever there was one. The Bull**** committee is more appropriate. Everything slams shut when a member of the public tries to get justice against a member of the legal profession. Lawyers have total control.
ReplyDeleteStall, stall, stall and put new facades on bureaus like the SLCC face of the Law Society. That is what has been happening for the last 20 years and more. The system will never change, only members of the public change for life when they realise it is a criminal cartel not about justice except clearing crooked lawyers of corruption constantly. Thank you DOI for lifting the fog and telling the public the way it really works. There is no complaints system. Shame on the MSP's elected by us and protecting corrupt lawyers, you are all corrupt. Muck.
Do yourself a favour, fellow Scots - think about why you need to run to a lawyer for legal services and how much money you are throwing at them for an end result which in reality will be very far from the often shifty, dirty & dishonest promise of your legal representative who - motivated by money & greed - only want to charge you fee after fee for a case, a defence, administering a will or some other iffy whiffy or dodgy legal service which may end up ruining your life. You are a lot better off without it, folks.
ReplyDelete=======================================================================================
Don't learn the lesson the hard way, we have told you the wat it is.
Do yourself a favour, fellow Scots - think about why you need to run to a lawyer for legal services and how much money you are throwing at them for an end result which in reality will be very far from the often shifty, dirty & dishonest promise of your legal representative who - motivated by money & greed - only want to charge you fee after fee for a case, a defence, administering a will or some other iffy whiffy or dodgy legal service which may end up ruining your life. You are a lot better off without it, folks.
ReplyDelete======================================================================================
Yes they are thieves, the politicians are worse because they are meant to represent the public. Lawyers are legalised crooks, they never were regulated and never will be. Make phone calls, e mails, complain you will get no justice because these people called lawyers are important to the state and clients are not. They will take everything you have and then the whole reporting machinery and MSP's will remove the rights you thought you had. That is the way it is as people will find out should they not heed the above advice.
Worth participating in the consultation or not?
ReplyDelete"Lawyers Behaving Badly" was aired over six years ago and obviously did nothing to advance independent regulation for solicitors.
ReplyDeleteCases featured in the programme did not encourage public interest or participation in reasonable debate.
Relevant issues in LBB
1. O'Donnell segment appears to be largely copied from yourself and Russell Findlay's work at the Sunday Mail.
2. QCs from England commenting on O'Donnell compared to how dishonesty is acted upon at English SDT hearings.
3. Compared to England, dishonesty in Scotland's legal profession is viewed in a lesser light at Scottish SDT stated by the SSDT Chairman to the camera.
I am surprised BBC Scotland team on Lawyers Behaving Badly did not seek to involve yourself in their effort rather than just copy your work without credit.
Then again you are to quote a colleague "not the average journalist" and are well thought of even in legal circles (no insult intended).
Of interest? Lockerbie appeal denied again
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-55663299
Judges reject Lockerbie bomber's appeal against conviction
Scottish judges have rejected a third appeal on behalf of the Libyan man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing.
The family of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who died in 2012, argued that he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
But the Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the verdict of the original trial, which took place at special Scottish court in the Netherlands in 2001.
Megrahi is the only person to have been convicted over the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 in December 1988.
All 259 passengers and crew on board the flight were killed, along with 11 people in Lockerbie who died when the wreckage fell onto their homes.
Last month the US announced new charges against a Libyan man who is accused of making the bomb.
Abu Agila Mohammad Masud has been charged with terrorism-related crimes, and prosecutors say they will seek his extradition to stand trial in the US.
Megrahi was found guilty of playing a central role in the bombing in 2001 after the trial at Camp Zeist, and lost the first appeal against his conviction the following year.
He abandoned a second appeal shortly before he was released from prison in 2009 after being diagnosed with terminal cancer. He returned to Libya, where he died in 2012.
Lockerbie bombing sceneimage copyrightGetty Images
His family continued their efforts to ensure a further appeal against his conviction, and the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission referred his the case back to the courts last year.
A written judgment rejecting the appeal was delivered by Scotland's most senior judge, Lord Carloway, the Lord Justice General.
He said they had rejected the argument that the trial court had come to a verdict that no reasonable court could have reached.
"On the evidence at trial, a reasonable jury, properly directed, would have been entitled to return a guilty verdict," the judgement says.
The five judges also rejected the second grounds of appeal, that the Crown failed to disclose material which would have created a real prospect of a different verdict.
Lawyer Aamer Anwar said Megrahi's family were determined to fight for justice
In a statement issued by lawyer Aamer Anwar, the family said they were "heartbroken" by the decision and would now lodge an appeal with the UK Supreme Court.
He said Megrahi's son, Ali Al-Megrahi, maintained his father's innocence and was determined to clear his name.
"All the Megrahi family want for Scotland is peace and justice, but as Ali stated today their journey is not over.
"Libya has suffered enough, as has the family for the crime of Lockerbie. They remain determined to fight for justice," said Mr Anwar.
Dr Jim Swire, who lost his daughter Flora in the bombing, said he had believed the Scottish system would deliver "truth and justice" - but did not think it had done so.
Kara Weipz said she was pleased with the decision to refuse the appeal
"I very much regret that we have to see whether we can go elsewhere to look for those outcomes," he said.
However Kara Weipz, whose brother Richard Monetti was killed in the atrocity, said she was "quite pleased" with the decision.
"We have always had confidence in the system that it would turn out this way," she said.
"I don't know how many more decisions can be made that say the conviction at trial was the correct decision.
"I don't know how many more judges can confirm what was decided at Camp Zeist."
Megrahi's trial took place at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands
read your initial report on the consultation and group composed of Law Society of Scotland interests and came to same conclusion the Scottish Scottish Sturgeon Society consultation is rigged
ReplyDelete@ 14 January 2021 at 21:34
ReplyDeleteYes, if only to air clients actual & real experiences of complaints regulation - rather than the usual fake content responses written by the Law Society of Scotland & vested legal interests and submitted in other identities.
@ 15 January 2021 at 12:07
Note what you say.
On Lawyers Behaving Badly - those making the programme had other ideas.
@ 15 January 2021 at 18:30
Is the appeal still about 'justice' issues? Somehow seems not ...
@ 16 January 2021 at 15:20
Isn't everything put out by current Scotgov?
Still, worth participating in if only to air consumers actual experiences with complaints about lawyers - rather than lawyers preferred versions of waffle...
The BBC are no longer of any help. The nutter has turned Scottish BBC into the H****r channel with her daily angry screaming match
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThe BBC are no longer of any help. The nutter has turned Scottish BBC into the H****r channel with her daily angry screaming match
18 January 2021 at 11:24
No need to put stars in the word *Hitler*
People have been saying for nearly a year now she turned the BBC into Hitler Channel just as her and her party have done with everything else.
If you dont tow the line in Scotland the online thugs will hunt you down appear at your house or boycott your business and use Facebook and every other avenue to call for the death of all enemies of her viewpoint.
What I want to know is why all the internet companies are turning a blind eye to Sturgeon and her evil fan base instead of de-platforming them in the same way the companies have done to lunatic Trump supporters.The two mobs are exactly the same with the same evil intentions.One ruined America while the other ruined Scotland.
No one is allowed to criticise or discuss in nationalist Scotland because the nationalist thugs will intimidate the press to prevent debate
ReplyDeletehttps://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19019032.snp-complains-bbc-exclusion-coverage-sturgeons-briefings/
SNP complains to BBC over 'exclusion' from coverage of Sturgeon's briefings
18 Jan 2021
By Alistair Grant Political Correspondent
THE SNP has been criticised after complaining to the BBC that it is being excluded from coverage of Nicola Sturgeon's coronavirus briefings.
The party's deputy leader Keith Brown said inviting opposition politicians to discuss the latest updates was "deeply unfair".
The BBC's coverage cuts away from media questions to allow Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green politicians to have their say.
In a letter to the BBC, Mr Brown said this section "is now overtly political with a stark bias against the largest party".
He wrote: "Constituents of mine, who are also your audience, have contacted me and have rightly pointed out that the first minister's only focus is on public health and pandemic-related matters – indeed, the first minister, as any regular viewer will know, goes out of her way to avoid making political points even when invited to by journalists.
"So why is the BBC enabling non-SNP politicians to have a 'free hit'?
"I urge you to reconsider the format of and our exclusion from this programme as a matter of urgency."
The Scottish Conservatives said that in an average week of the BBC briefings, the SNP received approximately 90 to 100 minutes of coverage.
This compares to roughly 10 minutes for the Conservatives, the party said.
Chief whip Miles Briggs MSP said: “Not content with leading a daily televised briefing, the SNP now want the right to reply to themselves.
“It’s madness and it would be laughable if the result of their pressure and lobbying of the BBC wasn’t so serious.
“They are determined to turn Scotland into a one-party state where only SNP voices are heard. On the current evidence, they’re succeeding.
“We are happy to give Keith Brown the facts. The SNP receive about 10 times the coverage of the main opposition party in these briefings each week, just four months before an election.
“Nicola Sturgeon has used the pandemic as a campaign platform and has disrespected and bypassed the Scottish Parliament on a number of occasions.
"It’s clear that the First Minister is happy to turn the briefings political whenever it suits the SNP’s agenda.
“The very act of holding the briefings becomes political when SNP leaders claim on BBC television that independence is an 'essential priority' for Scotland’s recovery from Covid, as the Deputy First Minister has done recently."
SNP and BBC are in the news arguing the toss about who gets more coverage on telly
ReplyDeletePlease tell me your are NOT SNP!!
ReplyDeleteIs this the same Martin Wilson you wrote about in the Court of Session?
ReplyDeleteIf so Lord Doherty has some explaining to do
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/sons-court-bid-block-sale-23189636
Son ‘blocks’ sale of mum’s £800k seven-bedroom house in Glasgow’s west end
A solicitor says the bid to sell the family home is being stopped by a long-running feud over composer’s estate.
By Sally Hind 19 DEC 2020
Townhouse at centre of row was owned by composer Thomas Wilson
A son is trying to block the sale of his elderly mum’s £800,000 home in a long-running legal row over the estate of “Scotland’s greatest composer”, a court has heard.
Lawyers for 89-year-old Margaret Wilson claim she is “in danger” as she is being forced to live alone in the seven-bedroom Victorian townhouse in Glasgow’s west end, while son Martin tries to put buyers off the pad.
Margaret, whose composer husband Thomas died, aged 73, in 2001, was first taken to court by Martin over the musician’s will in 2012.
Her solicitor, David Welsh, told the Court of Session the latest in a series of court actions brought by Martin is a bid to stop Margaret selling the property and he has already succeeded in putting off two prospective buyers.
Welsh told the hearing: “Mr Wilson keeps bringing proceedings because he knows live proceedings will put off any purchaser of the house.”
Lawyers for both parties drew up an agreement over the Thomas’s estate in 2015, which gave Margaret the right to sell the house. But Martin brought an action in 2017 to alter the terms.
The case was abandoned but Martin has lodged an appeal and a hearing was held this week.
He has also raised petitions for interim interdicts to prevent the sale of the house.
Welsh, representing Margaret’s power of attorney, said Martin had no legal right to the house and Margaret was being prevented from moving to England to be close to her other son.
He said: “She’s living alone in a very large house. Neighbours are assisting Mrs Wilson as she has nobody else there and it is dangerous for her to live in that house.
"Mr Wilson now doesn’t want her to sell the property. He seeks to do that by keeping litigation live.”
The lawyer argued for the case to be thrown out.
Martin argued it should go to a hearing and said it was safe for his mum to live on one level of her home.
Lord Doherty will deliver his decision at a later date.
Even after 100 attempts lawyers will not allow anyone else other than more lawyers to regulate themselves and the obvious answer to this is they are paying off or threatening any politicians or political parties who want to bring in a law to allow independent complaints about lawyers especially in Scotland
ReplyDeleteThe ✈️ appeal has not been about justice issues for some time.
ReplyDeleteGood advice to read up on funding and fees to obtain a clear picture of who now benefits most from the 'campaign'.
However if I say anything else in this comment certain lawyers and factions will unleash their online bullies to block free speech and debate.
You know the rest.
Problem in writing up news stories on people complaining about their lawyers is when you ask the complainer what they were doing while their lawyer did whatever they were alleged to have done there is never a clear reply.When hit with a question complainers often make it worse and turn on journos as I am sure you also experienced.Another relevant factor is age of complainers who are mostly 50+ and will pursue an argument with anyone over nothing.Young people have no money to go to lawyers unless their case can be covered by legal aid.Not to poke fun at the elderly but it is a fact most people who complain about their lawyers then come to a journalist and demand attention can tell you exactly what is happening in the latest episode of any television soap.Then for some strange reason they cannot give journalists accurate information on their complaint such as how much they lost from their lawyer and why it took so long for the complainer to realise what was going on and why it took so long to do something about it.
ReplyDeleteSturgeon Govt publishes a consultation 2 days before Christmas after a 3 year review run by lawyers for lawyers oh well we can all see where this is going!
ReplyDeleteBe careful of what you are writing about the Sturgeon Salmond war because both sides have previously encouraged their followers to attack journalists and the £ pound signs drooling out of their gobs are now too obvious.
ReplyDeleteWho are Sturgeon's pals at BBC Scotland protecting her daily propaganda show?
ReplyDeleteThere is a story today about the SNP complaining they are being cut from Nicola Sturgeon's daily crooked briefing show
ReplyDeleteEveryone has jumped on the bandwagon to criticize the complaint however with the timing to put everyone off other news I would not be surprised if the SNP complaint is STAGED and ARRANGED with someone at the BBC itself
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1385554/snp-news-bbc-latest-scotland-briefings-nicola-sturgeon-snp-complaint
SNP attacked after complaining to BBC over lack of coverage despite briefings - ‘Madness!
THE SNP has been accused of turning Scotland into a "one-party state" as a huge row broke out over the First Minister's coronavirus briefings.
By Richard Percival14:00, Mon, Jan 18, 2021 | UPDATED: 14:25, Mon, Jan 18, 2021
It comes as the SNP complained to the BBC claiming their politicians were not appearing enough in Nicola Sturgeon’s COVID-19 briefings. A letter, written by SNP depute leader Keith Brown, claimed opposition parties including the Scottish Conservatives received more coverage than the ruling Scottish party.
In a letter, Mr Brown said he was “deeply concerned” after the BBC changed the name of the programme and format which broadcasts the First Minister’s briefings.
The name was changed from “Coronavirus Update” to “BBC Scotland News Special” in October after opposition parties claimed Ms Sturgeon coronavirus briefings needed more political balance last year.
Mr Brown said it was “deeply unfair and grossly misrepresentative” for the SNP to only get coverage when Nicola Sturgeon leads the briefings with an uninterrupted statement for 10 to 15 minutes, followed by questions.
However, the Scottish Conservatives said in an average week of the BBC briefings, the SNP receive approximately 90-100 minutes of coverage compared to roughly 10 minutes for themselves.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1385554/snp-news-bbc-latest-scotland-briefings-nicola-sturgeon-snp-complaint
ReplyDeleteMiles Briggs MSP, Scottish Conservative chief whip, told Express.co.uk: “Not content with leading a daily televised briefing, the SNP now want the right to reply to themselves.
“It’s madness and it would be laughable if the result of their pressure and lobbying of the BBC wasn’t so serious.
“They are determined to turn Scotland into a one-party state where only SNP voices are heard.
“On the current evidence, they’re succeeding.”
Mr Briggs claimed Ms Sturgeon had used the coronavirus pandemic as a “campaign platform and has disrespected and bypassed the Scottish Parliament on a number of occasions.”
He continued: “It’s clear that the First Minister is happy to turn the briefings political whenever it suits the SNP’s agenda.
“The very act of holding the briefings becomes political when SNP leaders claim on BBC television that independence is an 'essential priority' for Scotland’s recovery from Covid, as the Deputy First Minister has done recently.
“It is critical in an election year that the failings of this SNP Government are exposed and SNP ministers are held accountable.”
In a letter to BBC Scotland, Mr Brown wrote: "Constituents of mine, who are also your audience, have contacted me and have rightly pointed out that the First Minister's only focus is on public health and pandemic-related matters – indeed, the First Minister, as any regular viewer will know, goes out of her way to avoid making political points even when invited to by journalists.
"So why is the BBC enabling non-SNP politicians to have a 'free hit'?
"I urge you to reconsider the format of and our exclusion from this programme as a matter of urgency."
BBC Scotland, which is led by new director Steve Carson, previously caused confusion amongst Scots after they announced they would reduce its live broadcast of the daily COVID-19 announcements from the Scottish Government.
Going forward, corporation chiefs said it would base it’s briefings coverage on "editorial merit" while continuing to stream them online.
The decision sparked much confusion amongst viewers, who were left unsure as to where the programme would be shown each day.
BBC Scotland has been approached for comment.
The only people writing about Salmond are the crowdfunding hand-over-the-money for our great writing and more often than not they mange to make the story about them rather than Salmond.Some of them claim they have to do the begging route because Sturgeon is backed by Government cash.I dont buy this argument and neither should anyone else.
ReplyDeleteOne of the best things about your blog is you dont take this approach and focus instead on the story or subject or people you are writing about and dont ask for money at the end of it.Stay that way please!And dont ever ask for awards because those are given out to shut people up!
I was told at the time in 2013 BBC Scotland approached you for help with Lawyers Behaving Badly so why did the programme get it so wrong?
ReplyDelete@ 18 January 2021 at 18:29
ReplyDeleteTrue, however it is still important for people to participate and submit their comments, perhaps also insist publication of their submissions and keep a journalist informed of what is submitted and any responses by the Scottish Government team handling the review.
@ 18 January 2021 at 20:08
The legal Mcmafia are everywhere, and in positions to influence {and have done so on multiple occasions] broadcast content.
@ 18 January 2021 at 22:23
Answer to what you say is - buy a paper - there are many good journalists in Scotland and despite online claims to the contrary, online attacks on journalists and online re-writing of actual events, you will find most print journalists write the best, and most authentic news.
Awards of any kind, particularly from those who earn a living by preying on their own clients, and the vulnerable in and out of court are not the thing really .. of no interest.
@ 19 January 2021 at 12:44
No one wanted to hear and the programme ended up the way it did.
Problem with BBC is when they pitch up to a story, they expect a salute and red carpet treatment as a big broadcaster. This is not a way to cover news and frankly, what I have seen of their journos - how BBC intentionally cut print journos out of stories (and talk behind their backs, even brief against them) then same Beeb reporters go on to claim as an exclusive (not) to give all the praise to their in-house 'award winning journo' who wants their face on the programme instead of the actual events .. not really a broadcaster worthy of working with.
The learning experience with the beeb was great tho - compare it to be like swimming with gigantic hammerhead sharks.
@ Unpublished comments (several)
Comment rules on this blog are very clear.
This is not a forum for attacking others who post comments - or attacking political parties (as in a party & viewpoint, rather than one politician).
Additionally, comments with the intention of insulting journalists, newspapers or other media organisations are not helpful to debate, and will not be published.
@ 18 January 2021 at 15:13
ReplyDeletePossibly true in certain respects. The Law Society of Scotland have a powerful, quite creepy Parliamentary liaison group who call in MSPs whenever issues of self regulation of solicitors are raised.
@ 18 January 2021 at 14:27
Journalist of no political affiliation, given this blog has to cover (and help pick up the pieces) of the carnage dished out to clients of all (or even none) political affiliations by Scotland's legal profession and dark money vested interest courts.
@ 18 January 2021 at 17:46
Noted ... however, have to take complainers at face value while also insisting accurate documentary evidence and names of solicitors, law firms & SLCC case handlers, etc are provided so material can be checked and used if permission is given to publish ..
Will say one thing tho - For a number of years now, an individual who uses a wide variety of fake identities, has contacted this blog and other journalists claiming to be whoever, and claiming to have made complaints about law firms or certain solicitors.
However - when each journalist has asked for material to verify this man's claims - the individual adopts a different tone in his reply and becomes aggressive to the journalist he has contacted while using a fake identity.
This individual - who is connected to a man who once won an 'award' which he then allegedly used to bully local businesses for discounts on purchases, has inserted himself into a number of online campaigns, including abuse of children, domestic abuse, a long running case which includes a number of fraudulent claims made in the Court of Session, the defrauding of funds provided for litigation, and various potentially fraudulent schemes involving banks, insurance companies and harassment of solicitors, an arson attack on a farm, campaigns by fake or malicious news organisations, while also spending his time online attacking mostly one political party.
This individual has done enormous damage to the credibility of those who have genuinely suffered at the hands of incompetent, negligent or corrupt lawyers, and the fake cases created by this individual - all very highly detailed but without any verifiable documents provided to the media - make it much more difficult for journalists to be able to write about those who submit genuine complaints against solicitors and other members of Scotland's legal profession.
ROFL "The learning experience with the beeb was great tho - compare it to be like swimming with gigantic hammerhead sharks"
ReplyDeleteYou nailed it right there laddie.Good chap!
jeezo sounds like a case for PS
ReplyDeleteGood you mostly recused your writing from the Sturgeon-Salmond war
ReplyDeleteAny plans to expand your knowledgeable tweets on the subject?
"Problem with BBC is when they pitch up to a story, they expect a salute and red carpet treatment as a big broadcaster."
ReplyDeleteBroadcaster also known to air far-fetched claims on behalf of lawyer with hoodlum friends.
BBC Scotland involvement in Marine Scotland tied to a chair non-story did lasting damage.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8164097/Civil-servant-tied-chair-sacked-internal-investigation.html
This man you say has infiltrated campaigns about justice and abuse.Wouldn't by any chance be same man who claims to show up at properties owned by Sheriffs and serve false warrants from a website impersonating a court?
ReplyDeleteI take it this refers to the 300 or so phone calls of a drunk fraudster I had to listen to for the past week 😷😡
ReplyDeleteLove the part where she asks if she can create an agreement before 2007 for her cough 'partner' to gift her half of a farm no longer in their ownership.
Criminal conspiracy right there added to all the others call by call.
Scotland is now a country where journalists are asked to conform their political alliances?
ReplyDeletePresumably if you answer with a political preference the hate will be unleashed from the Scottish FIRST MAGA
Thanks for publishing the consultation information I am going to write in and will send a copy to your blog.
ReplyDeleteYes please keep away from the Salmond Sturgeon story Peter these two and their cohorts are dragging down all of us Sturgeon should resign or be kicked out and I fear they will try to rig the election the same as Trump supporters did in the USA. I am suspicious of all thoe polls claiming she will win a landslide and immediate independence because all the polling companies rely on telling their clients what they want to hear for business and I read many comments and posts online on how convenient the numbers of polls are for independence and Sturgeon made leader for life. What a horrific country we are living in feels like she is making everyone who does not agree with her an inmate of jail
ReplyDeleteHave you seen the Sky News on Salmond
ReplyDeletehttps://news.sky.com/story/nicola-sturgeon-faces-more-questions-over-alex-salmond-bullying-claims-after-internal-emails-leaked-12192267
A media enquiry by Sky News has led to questions over what Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon knew of bullying concerns surrounding the office of her predecessor Alex Salmond.
When we asked the Scottish Government for copies of its grievance procedure, officials mistakenly sent out their internal emails which detailed their handling of the request.
Someone called me tonight to read your blog and the comments about BBC and lawyers behaving badly A person from BBC Scotland phoned me in 2013 to take my details and asked me to send in a copy of what happened to my complaint about my solicitor who took me to court over legal fees he made up and wanted my house I sent copies of my papers to their office and then a woman called and said she read my papers and wanted to meet me then I heard nothing more!
ReplyDeleteThis guy you are talking about who trolls msps and worms his way into campaigns is the same guy on the Lawyers Behaving Badly episode who intros himself as being on television and working with BBCScotland!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThis guy you are talking about who trolls msps and worms his way into campaigns is the same guy on the Lawyers Behaving Badly episode who intros himself as being on television and working with BBCScotland!
19 January 2021 at 21:04
==========================================================================
Do you mean the Hairy Biker Scotlands most serial stalker
Watching Salmond and Sturgeon is the same as watching Trump v Trump
ReplyDeleteDO NOT GET INVOLVED!
Any sensible person please take the advice and stay away from lawyers they build your hopes up and tell you lies about how much it will cost to go to court to hook you into their schemes.Please don't fall for it!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteSomeone called me tonight to read your blog and the comments about BBC and lawyers behaving badly A person from BBC Scotland phoned me in 2013 to take my details and asked me to send in a copy of what happened to my complaint about my solicitor who took me to court over legal fees he made up and wanted my house I sent copies of my papers to their office and then a woman called and said she read my papers and wanted to meet me then I heard nothing more!
19 January 2021 at 20:28
Not surprised.I know someone who was visited and gave an interview to the BBC for this show and for some reason they used none of it.Law Society interference probably.
Is it possible to impersonate someone from BBCScotland? and shouldnt he be pulled up for telling people he works for/with BBC when he only appeared in one item SEVEN YEARS AGO!!!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aol.co.uk/solicitor-stole-136-000-elderly-131331404.html
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteProblem in writing up news stories on people complaining about their lawyers is when you ask the complainer what they were doing while their lawyer did whatever they were alleged to have done there is never a clear reply.When hit with a question complainers often make it worse and turn on journos as I am sure you also experienced.Another relevant factor is age of complainers who are mostly 50+ and will pursue an argument with anyone over nothing.Young people have no money to go to lawyers unless their case can be covered by legal aid.Not to poke fun at the elderly but it is a fact most people who complain about their lawyers then come to a journalist and demand attention can tell you exactly what is happening in the latest episode of any television soap.Then for some strange reason they cannot give journalists accurate information on their complaint such as how much they lost from their lawyer and why it took so long for the complainer to realise what was going on and why it took so long to do something about it.
18 January 2021 at 17:46
========================================================================
What an absolute plonker there are thousands out there that can give you chapter & verse not including recordings. Is it not the case that like the rest of them you cant be bothered & couldn't care less about the horrendous things happening to innocent people in Scotland today.
I for one applaud your impartiality on politics and willingness to write about all those lost souls to the legal macmafia as you call it!
ReplyDeleteWhat are you doing about the coverage of the fire incident in the light of most/all of their claims to newspapers resembling a scheme based on fraud and threats
ReplyDeleteDo Police Scotland know she moved her own horses days before the fire and those animals found dead belonged to another man she was secretly charging thousands in rent at the derelict farm which no longer belonged to her partner?
Listen to the comments Peter and please do not get involved with the Salmond Sturgeon scandal you said yourself on twitter people should set aside their differences and come together and rebuild Scotland we need people like you who think that way not the Sturgeon types and her rule forever dictatorship and your blog is a gem as are you!
ReplyDelete@ 19 January 2021 at 16:40
ReplyDeleteOnly the legal aspects of the case and involvement of counsel in the Scottish Government's consideration of Mr Salmond's judicial review, and the apparent deployment of Police & prosecutors to manipulate the courts into a trial which many view as politically motivated.
@ 19 January 2021 at 17:28
Oh yes, the unforgettable photograph of the tied up civil servant - always wondered how that story came about with backing from the beeb.
@ 19 January 2021 at 17:42
Yes. JO were asked for a statement, not keen to talk for some reason, even via FOI but there is an email admission from the particular individual he did do as he claimed and appeared at the homes of at least three Scottish Sheriffs, and further claims which are being looked into ...
@ 19 January 2021 at 20:28
Interested to hear further, please email the blog with any material, and notes of your contact at the time ...
19 January 2021 at 19:19
Yes - wondered which solicitor she may try to involve in such a blatantly fraudulent agreement.A name of a solicitor in the Borders - connected to her activities - was raised.
@ 19 January 2021 at 21:34
Yes, appears to be an accurate description given the terms of stalking quoted in a writ which appeared in court and is currently being looked into ...
@ 19 January 2021 at 20:07
Interesting. I thought that particular media org & lawyers knew about it in 2018... Perhaps the good work of the Parliamentary probe will uncover more details and who knew what, when and more might come out on who was used to do what, and exactly when.
@ 19 January 2021 at 22:18
Good advice, certainly in terms of civil actions and many other legal services which I wish people would understand - they neither need nor really want to get involved in.
As fare as criminal allegations go - certainly always good to have the required legal representation, particularly as the Crown Office can be manipulated to maliciously prosecute individuals if it is in the interests of headlines, PR or political gain.
@ 20 January 2021 at 01:26
Legal mcmafia - or in other words, the real rulers of Scotland and where power actually rests - at Parliament House in Edinburgh, the seat of the Lord President.
@ 20 January 2021 at 10:13
ReplyDeleteWell I assume Police Scotland knew all along if they investigated the incident properly. If they didn't know then, they will know now via these comments.
An investigation so far has established the undeclared rent money charged to the individual who the dead horses belonged to - amounts to somewhere between £3K to £5K. There is an audio admission on file of these numbers along with an admission the income was not declared.
A further investigation has also established there is a potential and significant financial fraud against the local area authority North Lanarkshire Council - deliberately misleading representations on rates relief, non payment of council tax and other fees for properties in Bonkle and the vacated derelict farm - however the sums are so large £100K+ final figures will take some time to calculate.
In any case, this is an open media investigation.
Now that issues have become more clear, and corroborated - and the involvement of certain individuals hooked into what appears to be a malicious campaigns by the dominus litus litigant to intimidate, blackmail, threaten and destroy their way across the landscape of courts & law - these matters will be published in a full investigation - while other matters involving Mr Campbell and his role in two remaining issues already reported, are looked at further.
In a response to an increasing number of comments in relation to issues around the Scottish Parliament probe of Harassment complaints against Alex Salmond and the Scottish Government's handling of Mr Salmond's judicial review - commenters are reminded journalists take no sides in events, and are here to report in an unbiased manner on events revealed by the ongoing probe and issues around the trial, the Scottish Government's handling of the case and how these events in pact on justice and law in Scotland - for everyone and not only those involved.
WOW I am glued to your comments section today!
ReplyDeleteExcept you are not unbiased because you obviously cant stand Trump!
ReplyDelete"Well I assume Police Scotland knew all along if they investigated the incident properly. If they didn't know then, they will know now via these comments.
ReplyDeleteAn investigation so far has established the undeclared rent money charged to the individual who the dead horses belonged to - amounts to somewhere between £3K to £5K. There is an audio admission on file of these numbers along with an admission the income was not declared."
How did you pick up on this while the Police missed?
Some potential problems now in claims relating to the arson attack on the farm which the 'victim' claimed was targeted at her and her partner for reasons they did not want to specify.
"I thought that particular media org & lawyers knew about it in 2018... Perhaps the good work of the Parliamentary probe will uncover more details and who knew what, when and more might come out on who was used to do what, and exactly when."
ReplyDeleteYou do realise you have now crashed the entire inquiry with this comment?
Even if they replace Sturgeon with Salmond nothing will change in Scotland what we need is real change and a new Government like you said on Twitter!
ReplyDeleteI am sure North Lanarkshire Council Fraud Unit will not be too amused to read this:
ReplyDeleteA further investigation has also established there is a potential and significant financial fraud against the local area authority North Lanarkshire Council - deliberately misleading representations on rates relief, non payment of council tax and other fees for properties in Bonkle and the vacated derelict farm - however the sums are so large £100K+ final figures will take some time to calculate.
The possibility an arson attack in which three horses died was used by someone and possibly others connected to events to evade the law or interfere in the justice system is too horrific to contemplate.
ReplyDeleteHowever if I assume future headlines may confirm this line of thinking and the participants being linked to the world of horse racing you are potentially looking at a big scandal and hopefully criminal charges for those who did this.
Amazing stuff Peter you are to be congratulated for your dogged determination in pursuing the truth!
ReplyDeletePerhaps the real reason Police Scotland have not acted so-far in this case is because the person who claims to be the 'victim' in the Horse arson case verbally and in copious emails threatens anyone who wants to speak to her with a powerful politician who is not her MSP.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to your always full and comprehensive investigation on the subject, Peter.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteEven if they replace Sturgeon with Salmond nothing will change in Scotland what we need is real change and a new Government like you said on Twitter!
20 January 2021 at 16:04
This is like replacing Trump with Trump.Exactly NOT what Scotland needs to move on.
AND DO NOT be mistaken by SNP govt FAKE criticism of Trump.The STURGEONS AND SALMONDS love him and represent EXACTLY THE SAME AS TRUMP DOES.
Very interesting to see the whole Nolan v Advance issue unravel before our eyes in your comments section.Did you know Nolan's partner attempted to persuade BBC journo Sam Poling to investigate the Nolan gang dubious claims.
ReplyDeleteHappy to see her attempt came to nothing otherwise would have produced another Marine Scotland size mistake for BBC Bosses to talk away.
How I wish blogger can make it so anyone wishing to comment can reply to a particular comment below the comment itself instead of one single comment box for all comments!
ReplyDelete@ 20 January 2021 at 15:32
ReplyDeleteOne can still be unbiased and despise pure evil at the same time ...
@ 20 January 2021 at 15:40
A close examination of the facts - and an investigation of those who hounded the media to cover the arson attack on the farm a few hours after it occurred.
@ 20 January 2021 at 16:00
This is for the Parliamentary probe to establish, and for the two media orgs to investigate how and why they were used by vested interests in the 2018 coverage.
@ 20 January 2021 at 16:07
Possibly .. am unsure as to how some of the potential fraud numbers have not been previously detected - perhaps an over reliance on form filling and false declarations - however there are significant numbers potentially and over time well into £100's of Ks in the misrepresentations to the local area authority and others.
Additionally, the debt to bank level of the litigant and his partner is quoted by a bank-credit corporation at around £2.9Million in a financial probe of both sequestrations.
@ 20 January 2021 at 16:19
Further will be reported in time. In relation to criminal issues it is for Police & the Crown Office to detect and prosecute where crime can be proven, particularly when events arising from such an incident have been used to frustrate the law while furthering the ambitions of dishonest persons.
20 January 2021 at 16:49
I think you will find that particular MSP always kept her at arms length given there have been consistent issues of dishonesty associated with the litigant's claims. A report will appear in due course.
@ 20 January 2021 at 17:16
Yes, a lucky escape.
After I refreshed the page I noticed your latest reply to comments.It does take time to read through your posts and your links and documentation but the evidence you present to readers is to your credit.Somehow I would like to know you more than only your online work Peter.You are very assured of what you write and extremely well informed on the law.I bought Russell Findlay's book and read of your quest for reforming the law and reading your own blog and writing is a real treat.I am sorry to read some of the things you had to go through in life but you have put these to good use to help others away from the injustices of our world.Also and perhaps the best part of your writing as I read somewhere in another comment is you make the person who suffered an injustice the subject of the story rather than a great many others who try to make whatever the subject is all about themselves.Unsure if all my comment will appear because of my phone screen.Keep up the good work Peter!
ReplyDeleteAngelaM
There are several persons around Nolan and his partner who are all involved in their scams including the man from Lawyers Behaving Badly and a tall guy who hands around with her.Well known throughout Newmains these persons are trouble and up to no good.
ReplyDeleteIf you are able to answer the following I would be grateful.
ReplyDeleteCan you confirm if the individual from Lawyers Behaving Badly who uses different identities to journalists and campaigns has joined any groups campaigning on issues considered to be women only.
Thanks in anticipation of your reply.
When are you planning on telling Carloway? He will have a fit at all this new info 😱
ReplyDelete@ 20 January 2021 at 15:32
ReplyDeleteOne can still be unbiased and despise pure evil at the same time ...
@ 20 January 2021 at 15:40
I LOVE UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 💖
Not sure if you are aware of following - Nolan's partner is alleged to have put in a false residence address to a Scottish Parliament committee in an attempt to intimidate MSPs she had the support of someone I see has been referred to as "a powerful politician" for a petition against the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission
ReplyDeleteI am told one of the clerks spotted it and amended her address to the correct location of her residence in Bonkle. She then she replied to the Clerk and insisted the address be changed back to the false address of what I understand is/was "Morningside Farm".
At a hearing where the petition was heard and later closed Mr Nolan's partner brought along a group of people who intended to disrupt the committee meeting and Police officers were called to attend.
You may want to confirm this with the Scottish Parliament.
@ 20 January 2021 at 18:40
ReplyDeleteThanks, and noted.
I assume you refer to the Acid Attack book - which is the most accurate account of what goes on in Scotland's legal world. Read it thoroughly.
It's good to share knowledge and the written word to help others. Also and for the record - all projects, investigations and articles are a team effort and other journalists have put in work on this blog.
@ 20 January 2021 at 18:56
Interesting, thanks ...
@ 20 January 2021 at 19:10
There is evidence this individual has inserted himself into campaign groups on a wide variety of issues and those would include campaign groups which could be considered to campaign on women exclusive issues. He has posed as both male and female in a variety of identities he uses to further his unclear activities over time.
@ 20 January 2021 at 19:47
Noted!
@ 20 January 2021 at 19:14
Not sure ... he isn't a Lord Hamilton figure- who was much more professional as Lord President and open to discussion
Carloway has given vile performances at Scotparl & law related functions ... also diabolical in court on misdirections to juries and more. Also the fact is the judiciary acted as crookedly as others in this case - so deffo an instance where both sides were and remain as bad as each other.
@ 20 January 2021 at 20:00
Thanks for this. Am aware of the incident and the identity of the clerk who acted quite properly in amending the fake address provided by Mr Nolan's partner. The false address usage does seem to be part of a wider attempt to intimidate MSPs in relation to issues which have since been debunked. Am also aware of the incident where it is alleged Police Officers were called to safeguard against persons who were intent on disrupting Scotparl proceedings.
Ah yes Peter at his best.Trouble is you give him one story to look at and he finds 50 more multi million pound scandals along the way.
ReplyDeleteYou are like that Lakeland Terrier you follow 😂
Some turn of events!
ReplyDeleteDidn't realise you are a Lord Hamilton fan and yes I agree he was much more the professional than Carloway.
ReplyDeleteAs others say keep up the good work!
@ 20 January 2021 at 19:10
ReplyDeleteThere is evidence this individual has inserted himself into campaign groups on a wide variety of issues and those would include campaign groups which could be considered to campaign on women exclusive issues. He has posed as both male and female in a variety of identities he uses to further his unclear activities over time.
======================================================================
I heard about this guy. If its the same person he turned up at the AIB representing the Nolans or more like assisting crooks in a fraud everyone was talking about them. One wonders what he was offered she's well known for offering people all sorts to help her & it now looks like he's in it up to his neck
Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
This guy you are talking about who trolls msps and worms his way into campaigns is the same guy on the Lawyers Behaving Badly episode who intros himself as being on television and working with BBCScotland!
19 January 2021 at 21:04
==========================================================================
Do you mean the Hairy Biker Scotlands most serial stalker
19 January 2021 at 21:34
I like it the hairy biker thats him ok rumour has it he has a Charles Xavier Cerebro Helmet set on campaign mode
So safe to say this is why the Nolan v Advance case never went anywhere
ReplyDeleteSo if I understand this correctly a man who was on a BBC programme about lawyers in 2014 is posting as a man and a woman and is secretly infiltrating campaigns on whatever subjects.This is as bad as the Police spy scandal where the cops are making friends with campaigners and using false identities to make friends and find out what they are doing.Better take action and out this idiot now.
ReplyDeleteI heard Collins and Nolan have been trying to threaten you and use someone they know and you know to bully you into not writing about their crooked activities you better be careful because one of the plans discussed is for this guy to distract you while they try and break into your house and I am not kidding about this your safety is in danger because the believe they are due millions for their fraud in the court so you better take precautions
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly you didn't like Lord Brian Gill either and your judicial investigation forced his resignation after only 3 years as Scotland's top judge.
ReplyDeleteYou must be the only journo to manage such a feat and remain alive to talk about it!
No surprise to hear this.If you ask any solicitor in the Newmains area they may now open up about how corrupt the Nolan v Advance case always was although I suspect people will only now talk because you have found out the truth!
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think about the Salmond inquiry and where it is going?
ReplyDeleteRead today's Daily Record they are not even publishing the evidence so how can we expect any truth to come out?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/holyrood-inquiry-submission-alex-salmonds-23357460
A submission to the Holyrood Inquiry by Alex Salmond’s former chief of staff will not be published.
Geoff Aberdein’s evidence was provided three months ago but the decision not to make it available was made after the Parliament cited its “legal obligations”.
A special Holyrood committee is examining the SNP Government’s unlawful investigation into sexual misconduct complaints against the former First Minister.
I know you don't say or print what you cannot prove or have documents to support so I would like to ask the following question;
ReplyDeleteGiven what we now know of Mr Nolan and his partner, and Nolan v Advance, why did 'leading' QC John Campbell not pick up on these points and flaws in the evidence before taking the case to court?
@ 20 January 2021 at 23:21
ReplyDeleteGill was his own worst enemy - the same is true of Carloway (Colin Sutherland).
Taking an overtly aggressive position against calls for a register of judges' interests - as both Gill and Carloway did - and their overall attitude against increased judicial transparency was always going to reveal the judiciary's real attitude and underlying disrespect of accountability and public interest transparency.
@ 21 January 2021 at 11:48
May as well move the inquiry to England and Westminster.
There are plenty of grounds to do so as this is an investigation of how the current leader and Government of a devolved nation used the resources, staff & power of the Scottish Government, Police Scotland and the Crown Office to manipulate the courts into a trial which then cleared the former First Minister of the allegations.
Everyone knew the evidence was flimsy from the start, and there is an overwhelming impression the trial, leaked reports from civil servants to assist their aims, and all before it was and remains politically motivated.
@ 21 January 2021 at 12:56
Well, material already published on this blog and in the media revealed John Campbell QC demanded and personally collected large sums of cash which appear not to have been declared as fees ... and then the Faculty of Advocates billing arm - Faculty Services Ltd - were used in an attempt to cover up for Mr Campbell's uplift of cash payments by the issuing of fake fee credit notes.
So ... to answer your question, the money angle seems to have been more important to the legal team of Mr Campbell, Mr Murray and Mr McPhail than the quality of the litigants, evidence before them and how it was used in court ...
"May as well move the inquiry to England and Westminster.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of grounds to do so as this is an investigation of how the current leader and Government of a devolved nation used the resources, staff & power of the Scottish Government, Police Scotland and the Crown Office to manipulate the courts into a trial which then cleared the former First Minister of the allegations.
Everyone knew the evidence was flimsy from the start, and there is an overwhelming impression the trial, leaked reports from civil servants to assist their aims, and all before it was and remains politically motivated."
Yes I agree with you because there is nil possibility of the truth coming out in Scotland.
The incident with Collins, Nolan and the group who turned up to harass the petitions committee is well known throughout staff at Holyrood.Good to see you uncovered the truth of their motives.
ReplyDeleteHi Peter
ReplyDeleteYou're one of my heroes! Thank you so much for what you do.
I was abused by a solicitor a very long time ago.
The day after the tragic death of my husband, I was told I must urgently go to this solicitor's office. I was driven there.
He took me into his office and viciously emotionally and psychologically abused me. Using his professional status and office, he was able to take control of all family properties and possessions on behalf of my husband's former wife, sister and brother-in-law. They were taking advantage of very distressing circumstances.
I later discovered this solicitor had forged my husband's signature on a forged unwitnessed will.
My husband and I had been together for fifteen years. At the time of his death, we had been separated for four years. We were not divorced and we were not estranged. We had two children - two boys aged six and thirteen years old.
I meticulously documented what had happened and I presented my case to the Law Society of Scotland. They are corporately liable for wrongdoing by their members. They refused to investigate what I was putting before them. I was stonewalled.
I went to the Police Station in Fettes Avenue. I gave them my dossier and I told them I wanted to make a formal statement. The Fraud Squad would not let me make a statement. Effectively, they told me to 'go away and be a good little victim'!
I've stood my ground. I have written to the Scottish State and the Law Society. I've called them out and socked it to them. I've told them exactly what I think of them!
From my point of view, the Scottish Legal System is a rotten, rigged, mafia-type setup. My heart goes out to people who have suffered abuse at the hands of this tyrannical State-Corporate Crime Syndicate
The bottom line is State-Corporate Crime - the Cover-up of Fraud and Abuse of Power in the Scottish Civil Justice System.
Fight the Good Fight!
Sandra McDonald @ 21 January 2021 at 17:28
ReplyDeleteHi Sandra
Thanks for your comment and an account of your experiences with the solicitor.
I agree with what you say - the state has effectively turned a blind eye to daylight robbery where solicitors have gotten away with taking clients assets - particularly from deceased estates & wills - and clients have received little or no redress while the system of self regulation used by the Law Society of Scotland to cover members misconduct, negligence & more - has been allowed to remain unchanged and all-powerful for decades.
From looking at cases over the years, it is apparent neither the Law Society of Scotland or the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission have any motive to raise standards in the legal profession or tackle corrupt solicitors and law firms who do to clients what was done to you.
And, for a variety of reasons even when the media do cover such cases and the issue of self regulation of solicitors - almost every politician will say one thing in a comment - then appears to be unable to do much more for their constituent after representatives from the Law Society wade in to brief against any client who has a case which should be acted upon.
Do you intend writing of your experiences to the Scottish Government consultation? - if so, please keep the blog informed.
Very good Peter.
ReplyDeleteObviously there are huge implications for your findings on the Nolan v Advance case and finally some truth to the former jockey's unrealistic expectations in court.
I imagine Advance Construction and others will be interested in what happens next..
I saw your comments on the Sturgeon Salmond war hotting up!
ReplyDeleteThis reply from Peter is the best advice everyone should listen to:
ReplyDelete"I agree with what you say - the state has effectively turned a blind eye to daylight robbery where solicitors have gotten away with taking clients assets - particularly from deceased estates & wills - and clients have received little or no redress while the system of self regulation used by the Law Society of Scotland to cover members misconduct, negligence & more - has been allowed to remain unchanged and all-powerful for decades."
"From looking at cases over the years, it is apparent neither the Law Society of Scotland or the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission have any motive to raise standards in the legal profession or tackle corrupt solicitors and law firms who do to clients what was done to you."
"And, for a variety of reasons even when the media do cover such cases and the issue of self regulation of solicitors - almost every politician will say one thing in a comment - then appears to be unable to do much more for their constituent after representatives from the Law Society wade in to brief against any client who has a case which should be acted upon."
@ 22 January 2021 at 16:38
ReplyDeleteYes ... certainly up for a chat regarding the new evidence and remaining issues requiring some attention.
"This is for the Parliamentary probe to establish, and for the two media orgs to investigate how and why they were used by vested interests in the 2018 coverage."
ReplyDeleteYou said two media orgs in the Salmond Sturgeon scandal?
I read the comments above regarding Salmond and Sturgeon and agree your blog is all the better for ignoring much of what they are doing to each other.
ReplyDeleteParticularly those who are crowdfunding their cough 'writing' about the ongoing scandal have their own interests and doubtless promised incentives in return for online support to either side.
As you have said before in another arena vested interests support vested interests.
Sturgeon and Salmond only care about their own ego not Scotland or real people with real problems.
Did you see Sturgeon on Andrew Marr today?
ReplyDeleteNo matter what they ask her she gets away with it each time!
Interesting what you now report about Nolan v Advance Scotland and the litigants do the new developments have any effect on your previous reporting?
ReplyDeleteAs you say nothing will happen with the consultation lawyers are always get away with it no matter how heinous their crimes
ReplyDeleteAlso forgot to add your blog is the only credible website for information about the legal industry in Scotland because most or all of the sites have some link back to the Law Society even the ones run by ex hacks on the legal profession's payroll.
ReplyDelete@ 23 January 2021 at 11:46
ReplyDeleteYes, two media orgs.
@ 24 January 2021 at 12:58
They are asking the wrong questions.
Perhaps time to stop avoiding the issue of two media companies & the two people re events of how the Salmond story was used, rather than leaked - and the motivation of those who participated. There is already an awareness of these events - incl. companies legal of the links between employees, Scotgov and the events which followed. A news report last week on documents & leaks was ridiculous, potentially dishonest given previous involvement.
@ 24 January 2021 at 16:53
No effect whatsoever. If the courts had not met corruption with corruption as in allowing Lord Malcolm to sit there while his own son was in court, and all the rest that followed with it - the judiciary may have had a claim to honesty, however they do not.
Additionally there is a judicial colleague of Lord Carloway who is now at the centre of a media investigation re the litigants use of a power of attorney to manipulate the courts, financial issues and thwarting of the law in terms of sequestration and other serious matters.
@ 24 January 2021 at 18:49
If people participate, at least their experiences and views can be reported on by the media and could affect how the review of complaints will progress to any reform of legislation.
A judge involved in a power of attorney used to thwart the law
ReplyDeleteGood detective work
I like where this is going!
Wings published a report a few weeks back along the lines of what you mention although this is the first time I read of your take on two media companies.Care to name them?
ReplyDeleteI posted a link and quote from the Wings blog in a comment you may want to read and reply to.
ReplyDeleteIf you are interested or can shed any light on the content perhaps you can write up what you know about the media companies and involvement of employees in Sturgeon's war against Alex Salmond.
"If people participate, at least their experiences and views can be reported on by the media and could affect how the review of complaints will progress to any reform of legislation."
ReplyDeleteExactly this!
@ 25 January 2021 at 12:41
ReplyDeleteWill be published in due course.
@ 25 January 2021 at 14:57
I understand the two involved and their respective media companies are known to Counsel who represent Scotgov, and certain advisers/civil servants. I understand both companies [and legal reps] are aware of their employees actions in this matter.
It does appear several MSPs unwittingly and unknowingly retweeted a media report from last week of someone who has been directly involved from the start of the coverage on Alex Salmond.
Perhaps the good work of the ScotParl Harassment Complaints Committee will establish further detail & evidence ...
@ 25 January 2021 at 15:21
Thanks for the [unpublished] link/quote.
Interesting how events linked to the same group of people have unfolded on (i) a defamation case and (ii) the Salmond case - with the judiciary and manipulated PR playing a role in both.
The content of the article is accurate to the degree am aware - and the relationship between two of the individuals identified plays a significant and pivotal role in the matter to which you refer.
In a response to several unpublished comments - comments telling a journalist not to look into or become involved a case or political scandal usually peaks media interest to look at developments
"Perhaps the good work of the ScotParl Harassment Complaints Committee will establish further detail & evidence"
ReplyDeleteIf they are reading your blog Yes!
Obviously you know the whole story
ReplyDeleteAre you going to write about Sturgeon's warn on Salmond?
ReplyDelete"It does appear several MSPs unwittingly and unknowingly retweeted a media report from last week of someone who has been directly involved from the start of the coverage on Alex Salmond."
ReplyDeleteLOL How unlike politicians to retweet something they never properly researched first
Is what you write known to others? Asking for a friend..
ReplyDeleteAt least people are now aware there is a consultation on the Law Society and as you say anyone with experiences of corrupt lawyers should get their views in.
ReplyDelete"Interesting how events linked to the same group of people have unfolded on (i) a defamation case and (ii) the Salmond case - with the judiciary and manipulated PR playing a role in both."
ReplyDeleteI am guessing from references to the Wings post what you are talking about.Yes very much agree with you now you pointed this out.
@ 25 January 2021 at 17:48
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I think they already know ...
@ 25 January 2021 at 18:30
The warning signs were there - a garbled and gasping news report of a leak and a Scotgov official who wanted details changed but not a name in sight. Kind of wondered why the company's legal reps blocked an earlier version back in 2018 - pre August 23.
@ 25 January 2021 at 19:28
Certainly, yes.
In relation to certain unpublished comments, views have been noted and thanks to those for information supplied on matters which will be looked at further.
"The warning signs were there - a garbled and gasping news report of a leak and a Scotgov official who wanted details changed but not a name in sight. Kind of wondered why the company's legal reps blocked an earlier version back in 2018 - pre August 23."
ReplyDeleteWhat does the August 23 date 2018? relate to?
Interesting blog you have and the petition for a judges' register.I hope for a judges' register for England and Wales.
ReplyDeleteI do not live in Scotland and cannot write in to the consultation but I wish you well for your writing.
You did the right thing in not writing about the Sturgeon Salmond crap no one really gives a damn about either and as I am sure you will agree we need a new First Minister
ReplyDelete@ 27 January 2021 at 16:57
ReplyDeleteThe date Alex Salmond received the media query on day of the 'leak' according to the Levy Mcrae files submitted to the Committee probe.
@ 28 January 2021 at 00:31
There are discussions & moves by campaigners in England & Wales to create a similar register of judicial interests for all rUK judges.
@ 28 January 2021 at 15:49
Certainly yes. Scotland needs a new Government and FM, and must move on from the dark years of one person rule.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteYou did the right thing in not writing about the Sturgeon Salmond crap no one really gives a damn about either and as I am sure you will agree we need a new First Minister
28 January 2021 at 15:49
======================================================================
No what we need is the closure of the Scottish Parliament. They do nothing for their Constituents not one of them & there has been many atrocities & to them you are just a nuisance. Cut the funding & they will all go. I hope Boris closes the place.
What do you think about the contempt of court case against Salmond's main writer
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't your chums in the media report his claims about Sturgeon's main adviser leaking the story>
People with any sense do NOT waste their money and time going to lawyers because everyone knows they are rip-off merchants who are looking how much to steal from you as soon as you go through their door.
ReplyDelete@ 28 January 2021 at 22:49
ReplyDeleteAlthough Scotparl has been productive on a number of issues including debate on judicial interests and the judiciary's public display of animosity to transparency ...
@ 29 January 2021 at 12:28
Not sure ... however COPFS & all sides of court making a fool of contempt of court laws in front of Lady Dorrian is not good for the interests of justice.
Contempt of Court laws - as per the prohibition of identification of abuse victims & accusers - and the prohibition of identity of those including minors who cannot be named for legal reasons - exist for a reason to protect persons in these categories and over a wide range of cases - not just one case of egomania on all sides.
And, for the media to publish an investigation or scoop - always good to have evidence which stands up or can be corroborated and founded upon with facts - rather than sweeping statements without the material proof.
@ 29 January 2021 at 14:02
Yes ... good advice.
agree entirely and the egomania in court
ReplyDeleteWhat a brilliant idea to close the Scottish Parliament as the inhabitants are only interested in themselves & promoting friends & family. Get it shut.
ReplyDeleteGood defence of contempt of court law, almost worthy of a judge.
ReplyDeleteWhy did you allow your comments section to stray off-topic to a debate on Salmond and Sturgeon?
senior party members shared dozens of messages about the former first minister in a WhatsApp group https://news.sky.com/story/snp-faces-fresh-claims-that-high-ranking-party-figures-conspired-against-former-leader-alex-salmond-12201748
ReplyDeletePosted a link to a blog post about the contempt of court want to make any comment on why this is not in mainstream press?
ReplyDeleteDo you think the Law Society will send in fake answers to the Scottish consultation on lawyers complaints?
ReplyDeleteHolyrood has done ZERO for Scotland and everyone knows it AND there is no real parliament because the Sturgeon MOB infected and own it like everything else in Scotland right now
ReplyDeleteI read they asked for the August 2018 leak documents you were talking about in the comments
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55863264
Crown Office hands over 'material' to Salmond inquiry
The Crown Office has handed over evidence to the Holyrood inquiry into the handling of harassment claims against Alex Salmond.
It follows an unprecedented move by MSPs to use legal powers to seek documents from the prosecution service.
Prosecutors have confirmed they have given "material" from the former first minister's criminal trial to MSPs.
But committee members were also asked to consider whether it is in the public interest to publish it.
A spokesman for the Crown Office said: "Material has been provided to the committee and the convener has been respectfully asked to give careful consideration as to whether or not it is appropriate and in the public interest to publish material Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has provided.
"The Lord Advocate and Solicitor General for Scotland have not had any decision-making role in the investigation and prosecution of Alex Salmond and any subsequent related matters."
The committee was set up after a judicial review court case where the Scottish government admitted its internal investigation of two harassment complaints against Mr Salmond had been unlawful.
The government had to pay out more than £500,000 in legal expenses to the former first minister, who was later acquitted of 13 charges of sexual assault in a separate criminal trial.
Last week MSPs on the committee issued a notice to the Crown Office under part of the Scotland Act, demanding a number of documents.
It was the first time MSPs have issued such a formal request in the history of the Scottish Parliament.
The notice, formally issued by Holyrood chief executive David McGill, says the COPFS "may hold documents relevant and necessary for the committee to fulfil its remit".
The committee was seeking the release of documents detailing text or WhatsApp communications between SNP chief operating officer Susan Ruddick and Scottish government ministers, civil servants or special advisers from between August 2018 and January 2019, that may be relevant to the inquiry.
It also asked for any documents linked to the leaking of complaints to the Daily Record newspaper in August 2018.
A Scottish Parliament spokeswoman said: "The committee received a response from the Crown Office this evening.
"This response will be considered by the committee when it next meets."
Mr Salmond looks set to appear before the inquiry on 9 February, while his successor as first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, is expected to give evidence the following week.
Anyone got an answer to why there are so much scum working for the Scottish government?
ReplyDeleteAs well as scum in civil service posts half of their relatives have criminal records some even for drug dealing and involved in gangland murders
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAnyone got an answer to why there are so much scum working for the Scottish government?
As well as scum in civil service posts half of their relatives have criminal records some even for drug dealing and involved in gangland murders
30 January 2021 at 16:04
I am guessing the answer to this is because who is head of the Scottish of the Scottish Scottish govt and if you watch the Alex Salmond hearings the nat crew want crooked thugs who will cheat lie steal and cry when found out so this is why there is so much scum in govt!!
Did the Lord Advocate squeal on Sturgeon yet? or is another cover up of the usual cover ups in the making?
ReplyDeleteAny more guff on Salmond?
ReplyDeleteHe is offering presidency of the SNp to anyone who will support him haha
Stay out of it and stick to exposing corrupt lawyers and judges and their political friends who support them oh wait a minute could be him too
@ 29 January 2021 at 20:13
ReplyDeleteTo save reading up on who was saying what elsewhere.
There are those who know the story of how the leak occurred, who was enrolled by others to do it, and who couldnt do it because their company lawyers blocked publication so it had to go back to the original leaker and her partner in crime - and it is fair to say it was a crime because it was a leak direct from the highest part of Scotgov.
@ 29 January 2021 at 20:29
Instead of a weekly drip drip, better grow some hair and just admit his involvement from the very start - June/July 2018. Its going to come out anyway. People know.
@ 29 January 2021 at 20:32
The link where it comes from says it all and no further comment on the posting other than contempt of court law exists for a reason, and it is not for individuals or the Crown Office to take it upon themselves to misuse it.
@ 30 January 2021 at 00:32
And all the Committee got from the Crown Office was a bag of bones.
MSPs should by now know - in all of the dealings in the Salmond probe, the Rangers admin Malicious prosecution, the Glasgow bin lorry case drop, and countless others - do not expect honesty from an institutionally dishonest Crown Office & Lord Advocate.
@ 30 January 2021 at 19:54
More than his job and the influence, power that comes with it is worth.
@ 30 January 2021 at 21:08
Lord President is a much grander title to offer ...
Apologies for comments from 31 January to 02 February were lost in a select all mishap - however the contents were noted ...
You wrote " his involvement from the very start - June/July 2018"
ReplyDeleteWould you say "his" involvement included his employer and the employer of the other journalist enrolled by NS & co to leak the Salmond complaints?
Would you be surprised to hear clerks to the SNP controlled committee investigating Alex Salmond have been secretly passing information to the Scottish Govt and actively working against members of the committee.Do your thing PC.
ReplyDeleteThe SLCC should be required to alert all those who complain about their solicitor of this survey and how to participate
ReplyDelete@ 3 February 2021 at 16:23
ReplyDeleteNot sure. However, legal reps for both companies now appear to be aware of the actions by the two involved.
If these issues are admitted to or are uncovered in other ways, cant see this being an easy story for the media to report on colleagues who were definitely involved with political vested interests ...
@ 3 February 2021 at 17:48
This has been known about for some time and will be published by the media in a more fuller investigation at some point.
@ 3 February 2021 at 19:25
Good idea - however the SLCC are little more than a front for the Law Society of Scotland so do not go there expecting honesty or help for victims of Scotland's legal mcmafia.
In response to an unpublished comment - if the proposed publication consists of information which corroborates the involvement of the two individuals and the SPADs/civil servants - any publication should be sure of the sequence of events to publish.
ReplyDeleteCannot say for sure if both media groups were aware at the time of their employees actions & involvement (pre-23 August 2018) - however both are now aware via their legal reps so probably - yes.
If the events as related are correct would advise release of the information to the Scotparl inquiry and media at same time to prevent or limit any potential cover up.
Thank you for your reply Peter.
ReplyDeleteDo you agree publication of the 'two individuals' as you refer to them or journalists as everyone else knows them and their direct involvement in leaking the complaints investigation story on Alex Salmond will bring the Salmond inquiry to a rapid conclusion the F* M* and aides were involved in a conspiracy against Alex Salmond.
This comment can be published.
@ 4 February 2021 at 18:30
ReplyDeleteWell ... if published with corroborative evidence of events, perhaps.
However if the well organised malicious prosecution of the Rangers admins is anything to go by ... and how the Lord Advocate is trying to wriggle out of any accountability while giving Police-Scotland and the judiciary a pass for Police & judicial involvement in that particular case .. who knows.
Don't count on the Scotparl inquiry coming to substantive conclusions, think more of a division on party lines, and a definite need for a UK level inquiry and investigation of the FM and those involved in manipulating media, the law, Police, Lord Advocate & the judiciary itself to a trial which saw a jury clear their target - Alex Salmond.
And in response to the further unpublished comment - there are no sides taken by this blog - the issues of how the justice system and law was and is being manipulated by politicians against their rivals is the point of interest in this case - along with how the inquiry has revealed how corrupt and equally manipulative Scotland's civil service is under current Scotgov.