This blog mainly covers and archives some of the material surrounding the Hollie Greig case, and explores my own, properly researched position as a legitimate media professional who has spent over five years actually working to get to the truth of it... It's main purpose is to act as a public record of my position on the case. It's not a discussion forum, I'm not here to entertain or give the oxygen of publicity to nutters... You don't like them apples? - I don't care.

If you have relevant information to provide, email it! If you have something rational to say I'll read, consider and may even respond... Possibly directly, perhaps here through the blog.

On the other hand - If you're a headcase your email will be deleted by an office junior and your address blocked - I don't suffer fools at all. Abusive rubbish is passed straight to the Police.

Unlike others, this blog is not purposed to distract attention away from the Hollie Grieg case or obfuscate the issues surrounding child sexual abuse generally... Nor am I here to promote vapid conspiracy theories! - I'm not begging for cash, there is no mechanism for you to donate money to me. There are no books or DVDs you can buy from me on the Hollie Greig case... Or for that matter any similar case...

In short, your approval of me or what I write is of no relevance or interest to me... I don't require your attention, I don't want your money and I have nothing - except reality - to promote here.

My only interest is in the truth of the case, and that does seem to scare certain people - mainly criminals and perverts - out of their wits... What have they got to hide?

Monday, 23 February 2015

6. Crime fiction has a lot to answer for...



6. Crime fiction has a lot to answer for...

Perry Mason seems to have had quite a disturbing on people of a certain generation!  

Having in my own lifetime formally studied certain aspects of the law, served for a short time as a special constable, been press observer, witness, juror and even taught media law in a Scottish college... The very little I can tell you first hand is that a court of criminal law, once rolling and in motion, runs on rails as solid and inflexible as those that guide The Flying Scotsman to its destination.  – Not without its points and branches, not without steering or brakes or for that matter scenery that is sometimes colourful and dramatic. – But the ‘judge’ is there to ensure that big train keeps on rolling and does not leave the rails; that it sticks to the timetable and the route and that it follows the rules of the railway to branch between one of two platforms... Guilty or not guilty.

As critical as I am of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) under Elish Angiolini and indeed more recently under Frank Mulholland; it needs to be understood and acknowledged that Robert Green has played straight into whatever devious agenda was behind his ridiculous persecution. Note that I do not assert the view here that our courts universally ‘run right’, are beyond corruption or even that they are not routinely abused by those within to progress the interests of ‘old boy’ and possibly other more nefarious networks. Nor do I say that Green’s prosecution was justified. I simply seek to illuminate the ridiculous folly of turning up to the ‘chess match’ that is a court of law with tennis racquet, cricket ball and football boots...

Courts are not forums where every other crime under the sun divergent from the charge in hand might be exposed and instantly examined; nor are they street-corner soapboxes. 

They are a place and event where a disciplined and single-minded process takes place; a specific charge or charges is put to the test and examined. Evidence presented either halts that process in its tracks or, more usually, informs what platform it arrives at. Matters that are separate and irrelevant are – must be as part of the process - dismissed as such with respect to the case in hand.  The notion that some tiny sliver of information causes the penny to drop and the wheels of justice to spin swiftly into motion wheeling in some odd direction is risible. Courts just don’t work that way.  

Hollywood-style sleuthery is also a fantasy.  

In reality there are no laudanum-fuelled, Holmesian, sleuths working away in their home-laboratories to whom the Police will turn in swooning (or grudging) admiration when they unearth the one spark of evidence that all of conventional forensic and criminal science missed...  Oh; there might be some who imagine themselves such. But think more weed-addled, beanie-hatted, angry-at-the world, windmill-tilting disenfranchised and deluded.

There is no role for the amateur in criminal detective work; it is not a game or a hobby.  

The reality of a police investigation is that it’s a discipline which aims to gather evidence in a professional manner. It’s almost-never ‘as seen on TV’. The reality of Police work would simply be too boring!   It’s a cold, clinical forensic process; the Latin forÄ“nsis, meaning "of or before the forum."  With both the art and science of the task being to construct a case that is irrefutable by any rational means; a case, in other words, that is presented to the court as being beyond any reasonable doubt. 

For clarity – such a case is not constructed by selectively tugging at a few loose threads and knitting them into a rough-fitting straightjacket. The truth is the truth, lies are lies, these things are not interchangeable, and if it’s the truth you seek it’s the truth you must gather and adhere to… No matter how inconvenient.

********

Much is made of the martyrdom of Robert Green in respect of him ‘doing jail time’ in relation to the Hollie Greig case.  And I will be clear that I do find his treatment at the hands of the Scottish authorities deeply troubling.  Reputedly, Green’s conviction for Breach Of the Peace was the most expensive case of its type in Scottish legal history, and I do question the motivation behind it, concluding that it is an action which contributes to the disrepute of the COPFS and the Scottish justice system. 

However – Robert Green and his cohorts are lying to the public about his conviction... 

Green did not go to jail simply for handing out leaflets or for campaigning against sex abuse, as is often promoted. Indeed I have no difficulty in saying that this is one of the most offensive affronts to the intelligence of the general public promoted by Green.  That man did not go to jail because he campaigned in the cause of ‘justice for Hollie’ or anyone else for that matter. Notions that he was gaoled for merely handing out leaflets or otherwise exercising the right to ‘freedom of speech’ are complete and utter tripe – and those promoting that myth are generally aware of the gross untruth they’re pushing. 

The crown brought a simple claim to bear against Robert Green… 

They charged that in a certain neighbourhood of Aberdeen he did utter documents which contained allegations that caused people to fear that they were living amongst a group of predatory paedophiles and that their children and grandchildren were in danger from that group. The prosecution proved that this material had frightened people; quite simply – an ordinary tradesman took the stand and testified that he had been frightened. That was enough. Robert Green offered not one sliver of an argument in dispute of that proof, it was an open and shut case save for the circus Green tried to turn his trial into…

Robert Green is largely the author of his own downfall…  

Central to the allegations contained in the material he sent our for instance is the notion that this paedophile ring included a serving Sheriff and a named senior Police Officer. It was said that much of the abuse happened at the Sheriff’s sister’s house and names were ascribed to both she and her husband; also an alleged abuser… 

Had Robert Green been half the ‘Journalist and Broadcaster’ as well as ‘Lay Legal Adviser’ he is often (self!) promoted as, he would have made some simple checks...  It takes about forty five minutes of simply going through public records to establish that Sheriff Graeme Buchanan has no sister nor even sister-in-law that might fit the bill.  Therefore there is no house where the alleged abuse could have taken place. Similarly, a few simple searches establish that the (late) ‘senior Police Officer’ Terry Major, in reality never in his life held a warrant card… There is no Jack Buchanan, No Evelyn Buchanan…  The ages of the alleged co-abused aren’t consistent with Anne’s tale…    

These are not moot points....

The story simply does not ‘stand up’!

What Robert Green put through people’s doors was a load of complete and utter bollocks that scared the living daylights out of them. That, quite simply was the case that the crown brought against him; and extraordinarily, Green did nothing to dispute that case… 

But please don’t think for a moment I  believe the crown were at all justified in doing this, these were, in my view, trumped up charges… 

For me the material Green distributed was more defamatory than anything else. And the Sheriff named, Graham Buchanan was completely justified in seeking an interdict against Green. Buchanan, quite properly, did this from his own pocket and was fully justified in seeking to recover the cost of doing so from Green. As a precursor to a defamation action – or alternatively a mechanism whereby if Green were to defame Buchanan again he would be held in contempt - this was absolutely the right and proper course of action to take.

It’s from here though that the crown steps in… And matters take a disreputable turn. 

********

Sadly, one of the features of the Scottish legal system is that it has, particularly over the past twenty or so years, become something that has more to do with the playing of Poker than the practice of law and the administration of justice. In my view the motivations behind the crown’s intervention were as questionable as the proverbial four-pound note! It strikes me that using the ‘Breach of the Peace’ route was a shabby contrivance and one that calls the entire justice system into disrepute at that; an abuse of process in other words… 

Was the motivation behind this apparent abuse of process merely to save one of their own – Sheriff Buchanan for instance – the cost of a defamation action against a man with no assets to speak of?  Bearing in mind the public purse was reputedly emptied to the tune of some half-a-million pounds, protecting the fat-wallet of some one of their cronies does not strike me as in the interests of the public and is in my view inherently corrupt. 

Or was the motivation more sinister? 

Again I’ll raise the spectre of Greg Lance-Watkins and point out that it was he who not only made the substantial publication in the first place, but continued to maintain (as he does to this day) a blog containing both illegal and defamatory material. – It’s irrelevant that Watkins was by this stage back-pedalling – Green had no control over that material at any time. In fact it took a team of ‘pro-Hollie’ hackers, working to protect Green, to eventually break into that blog and take it down. A gesture that was to prove futile as Watkins merely re-posted the offending material elsewhere…

I’ll remind readers that – in respect of the naming of Hollie’s alleged co-abused - Watkins has been reported to the police several times by several different people. Both Police Scotland and Watkins’ local force point-blank refuse to act…

A defamation action raised by any one of those named would need to visit the issue of WHO exactly was responsible for the defamatory publication. - And the strangely-protected Greg Lance Watkins is implicated in that...

Are there questions that might have been raised in the course of a defamation action that might have inconvenienced or embarrassed some ‘high ranker’? Or even led to them facing a serious criminal investigation?   

As much as the extended allegations in this case are undoubtedly a fabrication; what of the issues at the core of the matter?   

I do not doubt for a second that a defamation action would succeed against Green and/or Watkins. But let’s remember that any defence which might be constructed would require drilling seriously into the core allegations. And that any facts or findings presented in the course of that action would then become a matter of public record.

Is this something someone couldn’t risk?

Given the desperation with which certain parties have sought to deflect from those core allegations I am inclined to form the opinion that there may well be matters that might cause ‘a can of worms’ to open ! 

There is something of an irony in a man with serious convictions for firearms offences and violence, paired to an obsession with the dark and perverse calling anyone else a “criminal”.

Extraordinarily, and contrary to what Greg Lance-Watkins and his cabal would have you imagine, it hasn’t actually been proved in court that Green is a liar!  - Although one would need to concede that he is… 

It hasn’t actually been proved in court that Anne Greig’s extended allegations are a complete fabrication…  Although one would need to concede that they are just that …   

It hasn’t actually been proved in court that the Hollie Greig case is, in its entirety, a hoax – And, actually,  it isn’t!

All they proved was that Robert Green scared people; he breached their peace…   

And the troubling questions that do arise from the Hollie Greig case remain as extant as ever...