Monday, October 16, 2017

DECLARE YOUR JUSTICE: Judicial Office consults with Lord Carloway on including Justices of the Peace in Register of Judicial Recusals - as questions surface over Lord Gill’s omission of 500 JPs from judicial transparency probe

Calls to include Justices of the Peace in Recusals Register. SCOTLAND’S top judge has been called upon to include nearly five hundred members of the Judiciary of Scotland in a Register of Judicial Recusals which was created in response to a five year Scottish Parliament probe on lack of transparency within the judiciary.

The Lord President – Lord Carloway (real name Colin Sutherland) - is currently being consulted by the Head of Strategy and Governance of the Judicial Office on collecting recusal data from Justices of the Peace courts.

The move comes after journalists queried why JPs were not included in the current register of recusals listing when judges stand down from a case due to conflicts of interest.

The addition of Justices of the Peace to the recusals register follows recent development where Lord Carloway conceded to calls for full transparency on judicial recusals, reported here: RECUSALS JUST GOT REAL: Judicial Office concedes to reforms for Judicial Recusals Register, full case details where judges stand down from court hearings to be entered after media & FOI probe success

However, amid an ongoing probe on Justices of the Peace – where it has now been established some JPs have undeclared criminal convictions - there has been no explanation provided by the Judicial Office as to why some five hundred Justices of the Peace who comprise the bulk of membership of the Judiciary of Scotland - were left out of the publication of recusals by Lord Gill during the register’s creation in April 2014.

Moves by Scotland’s judiciary to become more transparent and open up the workings of Scotland’s courts and judiciary to the public, have come in response to MSPs consideration of judicial transparency proposals contained in Petition PE1458: Register of Interests for members of Scotland's judiciary.

The petition, first debated at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in January 2013 – calls for the creation of a publicly available register of judicial interests.

The creation of such a register would ensure full transparency for the most powerful people in the justice system – the judiciary.

The resulting publicly available register of judicial interests would contain information on judges’ backgrounds, figures relating to personal wealth, undeclared earnings, business & family connections inside & outside of the legal profession, membership of organisations, property and land, offshore investments, hospitality, details on recusals and other information routinely lodged in registers of interest across all walks of public life in the UK and around the world.

A full debate on the proposal to require judges to declare their interests was held at the Scottish Parliament on 9 October 2014 - ending in a motion calling on the Scottish Government to create a register of judicial interests. The motion was overwhelmingly supported by MSPs from all political parties.

A full listing of evidence in support of the petition calling for a register of judicial interests can be found here: JUDICIAL REGISTER: Evidence lodged by Judicial Investigators, campaigners, judges & journalists in four year Holyrood probe on judges’ interests - points to increased public awareness of judiciary, expectation of transparency in court.

The move to create a register of judicial interests has also secured the support of two Judicial Complaints Reviewers.

Moi Ali – who served as Scotland’s first Judicial Complaints Reviewer (JCR) - appeared before the Public Petitions Committee of the Scottish Parliament in a hard hitting evidence session during September of 2013.

At the hearing, Ms Ali supported the proposals calling for the creation of a register of judicial interests.– reported here: Judicial Complaints Reviewer tells MSPs judges should register their interests like others in public life.

Scotland’s second Judicial Complaints Reviewer Gillian Thompson OBE also backed the petition and the creation of a register of judicial interests during an evidence session at Holyrood in June 2015.

Both of Scotland’s recent top judges - former Lord President Lord Brian Gill, and current Lord President Lord Carloway, have testified before the Scottish Parliament on the petition, both failing to prove any case against creating a register of judicial interests.

A report on Lord Brian Gill’s evidence to the Scottish Parliament in November 2015 can be found here: JUDGE ANOTHER DAY: Sparks fly as top judge demands MSPs close investigation on judges’ secret wealth & interests - Petitions Committee Chief brands Lord Gill’s evidence as “passive aggression”

A report on Lord Carloway’s widely criticised evidence to the Scottish Parliament in July 2017 can be found here: REGISTER TO JUDGE: Lord Carloway criticised after he blasts Parliament probe on judicial transparency - Top judge says register of judges’ interests should only be created if judiciary discover scandal or corruption within their own ranks

The National newspaper reports on the call to include Justices of the Peace in the Judiciary of Scotland Register of Judicial Recusals.

Campaigner calls on Scotland's top judge to extend register of recusals

Exclusive by Martin Hannan Journalist The National 3rd October 2017

SCOTLAND’S Justices of the Peace should have to register their recusals when they step aside from cases in their courts due to conflicts of interests, according to the man who is leading a campaign on judges’ interests.

The judicial register of recusals was established by Scotland’s most senior judge in April 2014, former Lord President Lord Gill, and the judiciary website shows all such recusals by judges and sheriffs and the reasons why they stepped away from a case.

Now legal campaigner Peter Cherbi has called for the register to be extended to Justices of the Peace, who are lay magistrates dealing with less serious cases such as breach of the peace or minor driving offences.

For five years Cherbi has been petitioning the Scottish Parliament on the issue of judges’ interests, and he sees a register of recusals as vital for public confidence in all the judiciary.

Cherbi said: “Given there are nearly 500 Justices of the Peace in Scotland who must act in accordance with the same rules laid down for other members of the judiciary, JPs should now be included in the Register of Recusals.

“I am surprised Lord Gill omitted Justices of the Peace when he created the Register of Recusals in April 2014. This was a significant omission, given the numbers of JPs across Scotland, and Lord Gill should have corrected this flaw before he left office in May 2015.

“I note Lord Carloway (left) has not attended to this glaring omission since taking office as Lord President in January 2016 until now being asked to do so.

“The omission of Justices of the Peace from the Register of Recusals has left out a significant portion of the judiciary and therefore concealed a more truer representation of numbers of recusals and interests across Scotland’s judges and courts, which are of significant public interest.

“I shall be informing the Public Petitions Committee of this development and if the need should arise, I will request MSPs write to the Judicial Office and Scottish Justices Association to make enquiries as to when JPs will be added to the Register of Recusals, and to seek an explanation why they were originally left out from the data, despite it being a relatively simple operation to include JPs in the recusals statistics.”

The National contacted the Scottish Justices Association, which represents the Justices of the Peace, but no reply had been received by the time we went to press.

Previous articles on the lack of transparency within Scotland’s judiciary, investigations by Diary of Injustice including reports from the media, and video footage of debates at the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee can be found here : A Register of Interests for Scotland's Judiciary.


Anonymous said...

How on earth did Gill get away with excluding jps from the recusals register in 2014?
Obviously they are members of the judiciary and by the sounds of it some dodgy ones among them!

Anonymous said...

Good one Peter!

Justice of the Peace are well at it they and their relatives are given plum jobs and are easily the most difficult to deal with in the judiciary.

I trust the Petitions Committee will now ask searching questions of Lord Carloway as to why he forgot to remedy their non inclusion in the register.

Keep up the good work!

Anonymous said...

Cant see this being by accident old Gill obviously wanted to keep them out of the register and we all know why

Anonymous said...

Something wrong here how can Carloway leave out 500 judges from a register not by accident for sure Why did he keep this from the parliament when he gave his evidence? What a disgrace obviously hiding something!

Anonymous said...

"However, amid an ongoing probe on Justices of the Peace – where it has now been established some JPs have undeclared criminal convictions - there has been no explanation provided by the Judicial Office as to why some five hundred Justices of the Peace who comprise the bulk of membership of the Judiciary of Scotland - were left out of the publication of recusals by Lord Gill during the register’s creation in April 2014."

Oh good.Now we have criminals judging alleged criminals.

Except the criminals doing the judging are able to keep quiet about it and spot all that guff at the end of a case saying how shocked they are at what someone did when they are just as much a crook as whoever is in front of them.

I get your point about the register.Am amazed they got away with this for as long.

Anonymous said...

A jp who lives near to a friend has terrorised half the street with the Police after she was asked to cut her hedge.Wont name the locality but Police visits number in the twenties over a few months.One of the uniformed thugs threatened an elderly householder,85 when he said he was going to speak to the press and the Police are never away from her house.The local paper features her guilty upon guilty sentences and she brags about having the ear of the local sheriff another nasty piece of work who saw to it a farmer lost his land which ended up being owned a local lawyer who lives a few doors down from the sheriff.

Anonymous said...

better watch it look what happened in Malta
I heard one judge threatened your life too

Malta car bomb kills Panama Papers journalist

Daphne Caruana Galizia, a blogger whose investigations focused on corruption, was described as a ‘one-woman WikiLeaks’


Monday 16 October 2017 18.09 BST

The journalist who led the Panama Papers investigation into corruption in Malta was killed on Monday in a car bomb near her home.

Daphne Caruana Galizia died on Monday afternoon when her car, a Peugeot 108, was destroyed by a powerful explosive device which blew the car into several pieces and threw the debris into a nearby field.

A blogger whose posts often attracted more readers than the combined circulation of the country’s newspapers, Galizia was recently described by the Politico website as a “one-woman WikiLeaks”. Her blogs were a thorn in the side of both the establishment and underworld figures that hold sway in Europe’s smallest member state.

Her most recent revelations pointed the finger at Malta’s prime minister, Joseph Muscat, and two of his closest aides, connecting offshore companies linked to the three men with the sale of Maltese passports and payments from the government of Azerbaijan.

No group or individual has come forward to claim responsibility for the attack.

Malta’s president, Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca, called for calm. “In these moments, when the country is shocked by such a vicious attack, I call on everyone to measure their words, to not pass judgment and to show solidarity,” she said.

After a fraught general election this summer, political commentators had been fearing a return to the political violence that scarred Malta during the 1980s.

In a statement, Muscat condemned the “barbaric attack”, saying he had asked police to reach out to other countries’ security services for help identifying the perpetrators.

“Everyone knows Ms Caruana Galizia was a harsh critic of mine,” Muscat at a hastily convened press conference, “both politically and personally, but nobody can justify this barbaric act in any way”.

“The rule of law has collapsed,” opposition MP Simon Busuttil on Twitter. “Our democracy is at stake.” Busuttil led the Nationalist party general election campaign this summer and fronted the allegations against the Muscat administration.

According to local media report, Galizia filed a police report 15 days ago to say that she had been receiving death threats.

The journalist posted her final blog on her Running Commentary website at 2:35pm on Monday, and the explosion, which occurred near her home, was reported to police just after 3pm. Officers said her body had not yet been identified. According to sources, one of her sons heard the blast from their home and rushed out to the scene.

Galizia, who claimed to have no political affiliations, set her sights on a wide range of targets, from banks facilitating money laundering to links between Malta’s online gaming industry and the Mafia.

Over the last two years, her reporting had largely focused on revelations from the Panama Papers, a cache of 11.5m documents leaked from the internal database of the world’s fourth largest offshore law firm, Mossack Fonseca.

The data was obtained by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung and shared with media partners around the world, including the Guardian, by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in Washington.

Galizia’s son, Matthew Caruana Galizia, is a journalist and programmer who works for the ICIJ.

Earlier this year, during Malta’s presidency of the European Union, her revelations caused major concern in Brussles.

Diary of Injustice said...

@ 16 October 2017 at 16:15

Perhaps Lord Gill was too busy saying No-No to everything he just forgot about 500 members of his own judiciary ...

@ 16 October 2017 at 16:32

I'll be asking the Petitions Committee to do just that.

@ 16 October 2017 at 16:48

Good point, Lord Carloway made no mention or reference to Justices of the Peace and their apparent exemption from the register of recusals in his appearance before SP_Petitions.

@ 16 October 2017 at 17:38

Would like to hear more about this please contact the blog via email or if you prefer any journalists who feature on the blog.

@ 16 October 2017 at 19:03

That is a despicable assassination of a journalist probably by powerful and vested interests at very high levels of society who were exposed by her excellent reporting.

Sorry to hear of this news and my condolences for her family's loss.

Anonymous said...

To be honest I am surprised you are still alive given the judicial despots running Scotland were doing as they like until you came along If something does happen to you it will be the state or the judges who did it for sure

Anonymous said...

and what happens to your petition if the judges order you wiped out? I saw Carloway in that clip.He clearly hates your guts That was a man talking who could do anything to be rid of you Gill even worse in the video of him he gets very angry about you its really personal anyone can see it is so obvious better be careful Peter the judges want you dead I'd put money on it

Anonymous said...

Justices of the Peace are full of oaps who earn gongs and praise the crown.
They mostly treat everyone as guilty until proven innocent and their insidious clerks make sure anyone they dont like gets a stiff penalty.If you read up on the Scottish Justices Association the JP brigade are the best thing since sliced bread but as we all now know thanks to a more brave press they are in it for the junkets and lining their pockets like everyone else in the legal system.

Anonymous said...

didnt someone try to kill you awhile back? I remember one of your old Police friends from Jedburgh telling a story about a gang of thugs with petrol and weapons must have been a horrible experience I dont know if you want to publish this comment or not

Anonymous said...

Good to see you getting the message out Peter and I agree Justice of the Peace should be registering their interests and recusals.

Well done as always! The best law blog by far!

Anonymous said...

Obviously Justices of the Peace should be included in the recusals register and without further delay.Get to it Lord Carloway on your £220K!

Anonymous said...

Why has this investigation ran for 5 years and meanwhile the judges have been hiding god knows how much?
Isn't it about time the Scottish Parliament did something instead of just investigating??My god!Five years is a long time look at all you have done on this petition and everyone else!Time to legislate instead of procrastinate!

Anonymous said...

I see the Justices of the Peace have their snouts well in the trough and so much they are fighting over taxpayers cash to spend on their junkets

Top JPs divided over funding for African 'junket'
Tom Gordon Scottish Political Editor

THEY are supposed to help keep the peace, but Scotland's justices have become embroiled in a row over a "junket" to Africa, the Sunday Herald can reveal.

The Scottish Justices Association (SJA), which represents the country's 400 Justices of the Peace, is split over a decision to send its secretary, Group Captain Keith Parkes, to a conference in Zambia. Parkes, a former RAF pilot who sits at Perth Sheriff and JP Court, and who proposed the key vote on the visit, is due to fly out in September.

Organised by the Commonwealth Magistrates' and Judges' ­Association (CMJA), the five-day event is being held in Livingstone, which calls itself "the tourist capital of Zambia", at the opulent Zambezi Sun Hotel next to Victoria Falls.

The main activity on the first day is an evening reception hosted by the Chief Justice of Zambia. There are then three days discussing "Judicial Independence: The Challenges of the Modern Era".

But the whole of the last day is for sightseeing, including a "sunset cruise on the Zambezi River".

The £3000 bill is equivalent to almost a fifth of the taxpayer-funded body's budget. The SJA has a "conference reserve" of £4695.

Amnesty International has said that Zambia's human rights record has deteriorated in recent years, with a "troubling pattern of repression of political opponents, civil society, independent media" and persecution of gays and lesbians.

Amid complaints that the trip is "a gross misuse of public funds", senior SJA members are now threatening to quit, including one who was censured for denouncing the trip as a "junket".

The SJA chose not to attend the CMJA conference last year, when it was held in Jersey.

The Zambia conference was first discussed by the SJA's executive in March. Treasurer Stuart Fair - who, like Parkes, sits in the Tayside, Central and Fife Sheriffdom - proposed sending a delegate, and was seconded by vice-chairman Robin White, of the same region.

However, the idea was opposed by Fraser Gillies, a JP in North ­Strathclyde, and Stewart Daniels, a JP for Glasgow and Strathkelvin.

The minutes stated: "Tom Finnigan [another North Strathclyde JP] stated that association members thought that such conferences were 'junkets' and that the executive was out of touch with its members."

The idea was rejected by eight votes to seven. However, two weeks ago, SJA chairman Allan Clasper ruled the vote was "not competent" under SJA rules, and announced a fresh vote. After what the minutes called "a frank discussion", Parkes proposed a vote in favour, seconded by White. This was passed seven to four with two abstentions.

The minutes said: "In the absence of any volunteers to go to the conference, it was agreed that the secretary would attend."

After the vote, Finnigan emailed fellow JPs and said he had been "censured" for calling the Zambia trip a junket. He added that he and two other North Strathclyde JPs who opposed it "felt it was gross misuse of public funds".

He said the three were "considering our position" on the executive and as members of the SJA.

Finnigan declined to comment.

Asked if the trip was a good use of public funds, Parkes said: "It's one thing we are expected to do, take part in conferences. The last day is not part of the conference and won't be taken by anybody. That's subject to extra funding."

Anonymous said...

You guys are in such a mess! It took us a little over a week to go to the moon and back but your politicians are still messing around with this petition a whole 5 years later!!! Do it!!! Register their damn interests and the recusals!!!

Anonymous said...

Similar problems in New Zealand.Get them registered!

Disciplined Justices of the Peace kept secret
21 Jul, 2016 7:04pm

In response to an Official Information Act (OIA) request from the Herald, the Ministry of Justice refused to name 18 JPs who were the subject of official complaints. Photo / File
Olivia Carville
By: Olivia Carville
Investigative reporter, NZ Herald

The identities of Justices of the Peace disciplined for incompetence, making false allegations or misusing their title for personal gain are being kept secret by the Ministry of Justice.

The Ministry believes the privacy of censured Justices of the Peace (JPs) outweighs the public's right to know who they are, even though JPs from across the country disagree.

In response to an Official Information Act (OIA) request from the Herald, the Ministry refused to name 18 JPs who were the subject of official complaints - including one convicted of electoral fraud.

Two of the unnamed JPs committed offences so egregious they were removed from office by the Governor-General, three resigned after complaints were lodged against them and three were handed a letter of rebuke from the Ministry.

One is still before the court facing tax evasion charges.

Twelve JP association presidents and registrars from all over New Zealand believe the Ministry has it wrong.

JP Raj Thandi, registrar of the Franklin association, said JPs existed to serve the public.

"If we do something against the public we should be outed for it, plain and simple," he said.

Long-serving JP Diane Yalden, of the Bay of Plenty, said "justices are supposed to be upstanding citizens."

"If you've done the crime you should do the time - and be named for it," she said.

For the past 200 years, JPs have been volunteering to serve the public by performing official duties such as verifying divorce papers, signing court affidavits or overseeing bail applications.

Every year about 70 complaints against JPs are lodged with the Royal Federation of New Zealand Justices' Association.

The majority of these complaints are dismissed as frivolous, but on average four a year are deemed serious enough to be referred to the Ministry for further investigation.

The federation has "zero powers to discipline" or publicly name JPs for misconduct, said national registrar Alan Hart.

Hart said he could not wade into the debate over identifying wayward JPs, but added it was "interesting" other professions, such as lawyers and doctors, had governing bodies with these disciplinary powers.

In 2007, amendments to the Justices of the Peace Act introduced disciplinary processes for JPs, including warnings, suspensions and removal from office for misconduct.

Any disciplinary decisions made under the Act occur behind closed doors at the Ministry, but other western countries, such as Canada, have more transparent processes with JPs facing serious complaints fronting up at a public hearing.

Between 2011 and 2015, 18 complaints against JPs were investigated by the Ministry, including false allegations, inappropriate language, insurance fraud, improperly witnessing documents, bankruptcy and the misuse of a title, according to information obtained under the OIA.

In half of these cases no action was taken because the complaint was either not upheld or it did not relate to the individual's role as a JP.

The Herald challenged the Ministry's refusal to name JPs who had been disciplined, who resigned soon-after a complaint or who had been removed from office and previously named publicly.

The Ministry responded with the names of the two JPs, Daljit Singh and Agnes Arti, who were forced from office by the Governor-General and had already been publicly identified.

Singh was removed from office in 2014 after being convicted for electoral fraud. Arti was forced from office last year after she admitted to insurance fraud.

The Ministry declined to name any others.

Anonymous said...


Jeff Orr, the Ministry's chief legal counsel, wrote a letter to the Herald saying they would not identify JPs who resigned after a complaint because they no longer held office.

"Similarly I do not consider that the public interest outweighs the privacy interests of those who were rebuked for minor infringements," Orr wrote.

Four JP association presidents believed the discipline of JPs should be handled out of the public eye.

"Why would you want to offer your expertise to help the public if in the event of making a mistake you are going to be pilloried through the media?" asked Canterbury JP association president Ken Shields.

Leading administrative lawyer Graham Taylor, of Wellington, said JPs facing complaints deserved anonymity while they were investigated

But, if the complaint was upheld, he said, the JPs right to privacy should automatically diminish.


• In Auckland in 2011, a JP was sent a letter of rebuke for writing a business letter in an "aggressive tone" that misused the title 'JP' for personal gain.
• In the West Coast in 2013, a JP resigned from office after declaring bankruptcy following involvement in a property development which owed large sums to creditors.
• In Auckland in 2013, a community group called for the removal of a JP from office when he was arrested in India on terrorism charges. The charges were dropped and no action was taken.
• In Central Otago in 2013, a JP resigned from office after a police complaint that they made false allegations.
• In Auckland in 2015, a JP resigned from office after a complaint from a finance company that they had improperly witnessed loan documents.

Anonymous said...

So FIVE HUNDRED JUDGES were intentionally left out of the recusals register?

This is no mistake.Sounds more like the corruption corruption Carloway kept harping on about does not exist.Yes it does.You dont conceal FIVE HUNDRED JUDGES for nothing Mr Judge who does not want to be judged.

Anonymous said...

As your brave and praiseworthy 5 YEAR campaign to see the Scottish Public given what should be theirs as a matter of right, namely confidence in the impartiality of the Courts which effectively rule - and can destroy - their lives, it is no surprise to see not one but 2 Lord Presidents stubbornly fighting against any improvement and progress tooth and nail.

Such conspicuous obstruction and procrastination - aided by an incompetent Scottish Parliament - speaks to the truth of the sham legal system currently in place in Scotland.

Anonymous said...

I remember one morning a certain JoP Court was closed off to the press while Mr P for the Crown and a trainee put down a case involving one of their former colleagues.
Later found out charges related to supply of Class A substances so I get what you are saying about JoP courts.My boss likes your blog!

Anonymous said...

Cherbi brings more reforms to the law than LCarloway can we swap you around?

ofc you are well motivated to help others rather than his nibs banging on about decades as a judge and pocketing millions for himself and his pals on the bench

Diary of Injustice said...

@ 16 October 2017 at 20:28

Agreed. Lord Carloway & Lord Gill's personal disposition towards myself and the petition is clearly a factor in their determination to resist transparency.

It is sad, that a top judge, can turn to a top thug so readily.Very concerning, given we are talking about the administration of justice and the public and media's right to inspect the courts, and hold those institutions to account who serve only their own interests rather than the community at large.

However, the point remains ... those who operate in the business of judging others - for it is a business - must be transparent and declare their full interests, financial, property, links to business and other - regardless of anger, hate or other personal feelings to those asking for the equivalent level of transparency which our democratically elected politicians must subscribe to.

@ 16 October 2017 at 20:38

Yes, I have noticed a few, wholly unsuitable to being in a position to judge alleged offenders when they themselves have brushes with the law, and in some cases criminal convictions, and black marks against them during previous service in other areas of public & corporate life.

@ 16 October 2017 at 20:59

Was that PC Ian Anderson by any chance? One of the two.arresting officers who took away the remaining assailant. Terrible time, that was when a local law firm were using the Police and still in service PF to harass my family over a Law Society investigation. Worthy of a book on it's own, how the state was used in this manner and continues to be used against others to this day in the same manner.

@ 16 October 2017 at 23:56

Should be further activity soon ... clearly the current state of the judiciary dictating whether they require to disclose their interests or not is unsustainable. Judges cannot act as Judge in their own cause.

@ 17 October 2017 at 00:24

Thanks, yes I am aware of that article. Some time later Lord Gill said he was going to take control of judicial spending on overseas junkets.

However, Lord Carloway doubled the cost of judge's overseas junkets to nearly £50,000 of public cash.

@ 17 October 2017 at 01:09
@ 17 October 2017 at 01:21

Thanks for this ... very interesting

There was an attempt to bring in a register of judicial interests in New Zealand, however it foundered after the legal fraternity started intimidating New Zealand politicians keen on the idea.

@ 17 October 2017 at 02:03

As you say, no mistake.

@ 17 October 2017 at 09:03

Yes, well .. team work of course, many journalists, newspapers, two Judicial Complaints Reviewers and cross party MSP support for this petition has sustained it through various attempts to close down the public debate and the petition itself.

Hopefully there will be further developments soon, and on issues relating to recusals.

@ 17 October 2017 at 15:53

Would like to hear more about that, please contact the blog.

@ 17 October 2017 at 16:41

Again, it takes teamwork to bring change and reform in the justice system.

The petition and those hard working journalists who write about it and support it, along with those within the justice system such as JCR Moi Ali and MSPs, and even some solicitors who get the idea of a register of judicial interests, are to be supported, along with of course, victims of injustice who bear the greatest burden of all when the state stands back, or perhaps even targets those who speak out.

Lastly, in relation to several unpublished comments, if persons leaving tips in the comments section or via email to the blog are more happy contacting directly journalists who feature in articles on this site, please go ahead and do so ... and of course, keep the blog informed of progress.

Anonymous said...

This is very interesting, You are a very skilled blogger. I
have joined your feed and look forward to seeking more
of your magnificent post. Also, I have shared your site in my social

Anonymous said...

You explained that very well much better than Carloway why are you not an msp could do with people like you in public life