The Burden of Knowledge

 

I'm sure I am not alone in knowing the identities of all or at least some of the women who made accusations of inappropriate behaviour against Alex Salmond.

I'm sure many of you are also aware that Craig Murray faces the prospect of 2 years imprisonment for contempt of court because of his reporting on the case, so I will have to tread carefully here. 

The burden of knowledge that Craig Murray had to deal with was indeed great, as I have found. And I'm sure Craig's burden was greater as he will know much more than I have been able to piece together.

But I don't think it's the knowledge of who that is the burden, it's the knowledge of why.

To make it clear, I was not able to identify any of the women from anything Craig Murray published. 

Craig Murray was taken to court on 3 charges, 2 of which were rejected by the court.

He has been found guilty despite the court acknowledging that there was no evidence that his articles led to anyone being able to identify any of the women.

He has been found guilty on what the Court called an “objective test” which decides whether something written might notionally identify a witness.

I will not discuss specifics on how I was able to identify the women as this might also be considered jigsaw identification.

But I will say that the sources of information that allowed identification were the mainstream media, the Crown Office, the Scottish Government, the SNP, and in one case, one of the women themselves.

So Craig Murray is guilty because it might be theoretically possible to identify the women from his articles, although I would argue you can only identify who Craig talks about if you already know who they are, but hypocritically, none of the sources that actually allowed me to identify the women are considered by the authorities to be in some way guilty or even complicit.

When I first read Craig Murray's account of what had happened little of it made sense, it is only when I knew who the women were that everything clicked into place.

The corruption, the motivations of those involved, the reason why Alex Salmond was a perceived threat.

I believe this is why Craig has been found guilty, not because of identification, but because it exposes the motivations, the abuse of power, and how the accusers were persuaded to make false accusations (as proven in court).

It is very difficult to explain the ramifications of what happened without risking being in contempt of court, and of course, that is the intention.

Because if I was able to explain it fully, it would not only call into question the suitability of the current holders of power, both within the Scottish Government and internally in the SNP, it would call into question the suitability of certain SNP candidates and future potential leaders of the SNP and our country.

Let me finish with this, I believe that Scotland needs a major overhaul in its democratic institutions and that requires our country to be fully independent.

For me that means the ideal outcome of the forthcoming election would be an SNP minority government with Alba as the next largest party, to be there to hold them to account.

So naturally, I recommend voting SNP on the constituency vote and Alba on the list vote.

But in some constituencies, knowing what I know, I cannot in all good conscience recommend voting for the SNP on the constituency vote.

And this is where my burden is felt at its heaviest.

I know who is unsuitable to hold office and I know why (and it isn't Alex Salmond).

But if I told you it could lead to jigsaw identification and contempt of court charges.

This is not an example of a functioning democracy.

Voters can only make informed choices if they are informed by the facts and in this election, we are being denied that.