Sheriff Principal Bowen a proven paedophile enabler
Posted on 25. Jan, 2012 by admin in Information
When Sheriff Principal Edward Farquharson Bowen QC presided over the trial of Robert Green, he did so as a lawman with a track record of coming to the aid of a paedophile.
Donald Smith, 35, of Printfield Terrace, Aberdeen, was charged with indecency against a nine-year-old boy in October 1998.
When the case called in 2001 at Aberdeen Sheriff Court his lawyers claimed his human rights had been breached because of a failure to bring him to trial within a reasonable time.
Sheriff Noel McPartlin rejected the plea but allowed leave to appeal.
That appeal was upheld by Lord Kirkwood, sitting with Lord Abernethy and Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen QC.
Note the similarities with the Hollie Greig case: Aberdeen in the late 90s – long delay before looking at the case etc.
Sources
Donald Smith Appeal (1.1 MiB, 9 hits)
(BBC News July 4, 2002 (here):
Delays scupper child abuse trial
Three appeal judges overturned the ruling.
A man accused of sexually abusing a young boy has escaped prosecution because of a 25-month delay in bringing him to trial.Lawyers for Donald Smith had argued that his human rights had been breached by the length of time the Crown took over the case.That submission was initially rejected by a sheriff in Aberdeen.
However, three appeal judges have now ruled that the charges should be dismissed.Lord Kirkwood, the senior judge, said no satisfactory explanation had been given for the “unreasonable” delay.
We have been struck by what appears to be a lack of urgency throughout on the part of the prosecution
Lord Kirkwood
He said: “We have been struck by what appears to be a lack of urgency throughout on the part of the prosecution.
“Further, as time went on, there was no indication that significant action was taken to remedy the situation and bring the case to trial at an early date.
“It is not apparent that the case was subject to a prioritisation process at any stage.”
Leave to appeal
Mr Smith, 35, of Printfield Terrace, Aberdeen, was charged with indecency against a nine-year-old boy in October 1998.
Donald Smith has protested his innocence.
When the case called last year at Aberdeen Sheriff Court his lawyers claimed his human rights had been breached because of a failure to bring him to trial within a reasonable time.
Sheriff Noel McPartlin rejected the plea but allowed leave to appeal.
That appeal was upheld by Lord Kirkwood, sitting with Lord Abernethy and Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen QC.However, Mr Smith remains angry that he has not been given the chance to clear his name – and the opportunity to be reunited with his children, who were taken from him following the allegations.
He is now considering legal action against his lawyers and the fiscal service.
“I thought I would be given a fair hearing and once I had proved my innocence I would be given my children back,” he said.
“Now I am told that I will never see my children again. Where is the fairness in it?
Backlog of cases
“If they think I will take that lying down they are living in a dream.”
The Justiciary Appeal Court in Edinburgh heard that Mr Smith was arrested and charged in May 1999, but his trial would not have started until June 2001.
The appeal judges were told that the procurator fiscal’s office in Aberdeen was suffering chronic staff shortages which led to a backlog of 500 cases at one point.
It seems to me this case shows yet again how our justice system fails children
Margaret McKay Children 1st
Defence counsel Andrew Brown said the “inactivity and error” by the Crown had not been satisfactorily explained.He said there had been three periods of delay before the papers were passed on to a team dealing with more serious cases – where they were “lost track of” for three months.
There was “very little activity” between 25 November 1999 and 1 June the following year, added Mr Brown.
He said it was not a complex case and that his client was not responsible for any of the delays.
Advocate depute Ian Armstrong QC argued that the delay was not so unreasonable that it amounted to a breach of Mr Smith’s human rights.
Fast-track arrangement
He said there had been “significant pressure of business” on the fiscal’s office in Aberdeen and that the case had been further complicated because of the involvement of another man.
Margaret McKay, the chief executive of the Children 1st charity, said she was “shocked but not surprised” by the case.
“It seems to me this case shows yet again how our justice system fails children.
“We believe cases where children are victims and witnesses ought to be part of a fast-track arrangement within our courts,” she said.
The Crown Office said problems at the Procurator Fiscal’s office in Aberdeen had been addressed and stressed that child abuse cases were given priority.
This WAS an OFFICIAL site for Hollie GREIG
Monday, 30 January 2012
Sunday, 29 January 2012
SHERIFF BOWENS CV
QC opinion No 1: "There is a fraud taking place in this court..."
QC opinion No 2: "I would be very surprised if there were two Sheriffs at Glasgow with such similar signatures"
Click Here to read part of a legal opinion by Peter Ferguson QC
So what did Sheriff Principal Bowen decide to do about this fraud? Nothing! The perpetrators were, after all, "respected" Glasgow legal professionals...
Details to follow...
Thursday, 26 January 2012
ROBERT GREENS REPORT ON THE SET UP...SORRY TRIAL
THURSDAY, JANUARY 26, 2012
Justice?
I would like to take this opportunity to bring everyone up-to-date regarding recent events but would first like to thank again all of you who have offered their support and expressed their objection to Sheriff Principal Bowen`s personal decision to convict me on a Breach of the Peace charge.
Especially I cannot really find appropiate words to express my thanks to those of you who came to the court, day after day, to witness what I believe to be another unacceptable incidence of bias against me by the Scottish justice system. Those of you in Scotland who have so gallantly stood by me represent the true face of Scotland - brave, loyal, fair-minded and thoroughly decent and compassionate.
I have no doubt that my prospects of a successful defence were impaired unacceptably by the Sheriff`s decision to deny me the testimonies under oath of two key defence witness who had both been formally cited, Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan and former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini.
As events progressed, it became clear that the integrity of the trial was compromised by the fact that McGowan, leading for the prosecution, was himself being protected from having to answer pertinent questions about his own conduct and influence.
In the case of Angiolini, in many ways the central figure whose failings led directly to my being charged, she would have had to face some telling questions on oath had our citatation not been blocked by Bowen`s intervention. Under Scottish law, it would not have been necessary for her to answer questions that may incriminate herself, but it would surely have been in the interests not only of the defence, but for Scotland in general as to how she would respond to the matter of who paid Levy &McRae for her private legal actions, a question she has persistently failed to answer to a formal request from a senior public official, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion.
As we were denied Angiolini`s opportunity to speak on this specific topic, amongst others, I formally made a complaint yesterday at the police station in Dunblane, where she resides, having been invited to take this course of action by a letter from Lothian and Borders Police. The constant evasions by Angiolini in responding to a perfectly simple official question would strongly indicate, in my view, that a serious criminal offence has taken place, which I have been given to understand should be termed the misappropriation of public funds.
Regardless of opinions on the Hollie Greig case or on mine, surely no one can reasonably take a view other than that the former Lord Advocate has conducted herself in an unacceptable manner leading to the gravest suspicion of her culpability over the likely criminal misuse of public funds.
One of the most important facts to emerge from the trial was that following Hollie`s lengthy interview with PC Lisa Evans on the 8th September 2009, which I witnessed, not one of the named alleged perpetrators, not one of the alleged victims, nor any of the expert medical witnesses whose reports completely supported Hollie`s allegations were ever questioned by Grampian Police. Of course, contrary to police procedures in such cases involving the sexual abuse of children were the computers of the alleged perpetrators seized or examined. One of the main reasons for this is that whilst rape is inevitably a complex issue as far as proof is concerned, the downloading of child pornography is not. It is a known fact that abusers generally avail themselves to this type of crime and given the sheer number of those named by Hollie, there can surely be no rational explanation for Grampian Police`s failures.
As we have said so often, Hollie`s competence and honesty has never been in any doubt, as admitted by Grampian Police themselves. The condition of Down`s Syndrome leads to those who have the condition to describe past events exactly as they have experienced them, without the facility to fabricate or embellish. Hollie Greig is therefore the best type of witness one could have in acase such as this, unlike any of her alleged attackers.
Thanks to extra information alluded to or gleaned during the trial, particularly from witness Rosemary Murray, someone certainly not involved in the abuses, I have every reason to believe that two specific witnesses in particular, committed perjury during the course of the trial.
Naturally, I have always stressed that my chief objective in the campaign is to secure a proper public inquiry into the repeated failures and obstructions of the authorities in dealing adequately with all the allegations and other matters, including the death of Robert Greig.
Indeed, if any proper police investigation had taken place it would have exonerated those who professed to be innocent in court long ago.
I must attend Stonehaven Court on 17th February at 10.30 hours for sentencing.
I shall just end by repeating these facts.
Following Hollie`s indescribably brave conduct and precise allegations on 8th September 2009 to DC Lisa Evans relating to most horrendous crimes, the police took no action whatsoever.
In January 2010, when I circulated a letter highlighting the police`s failure in this matter and the potential danger to the public, Grampian Police interviewed no fewer than 61 witnesses within five weeks and I was thus arrested and charged.
Justice?
Posted by Robert Green at 9:26 AM
Justice?
I would like to take this opportunity to bring everyone up-to-date regarding recent events but would first like to thank again all of you who have offered their support and expressed their objection to Sheriff Principal Bowen`s personal decision to convict me on a Breach of the Peace charge.
Especially I cannot really find appropiate words to express my thanks to those of you who came to the court, day after day, to witness what I believe to be another unacceptable incidence of bias against me by the Scottish justice system. Those of you in Scotland who have so gallantly stood by me represent the true face of Scotland - brave, loyal, fair-minded and thoroughly decent and compassionate.
I have no doubt that my prospects of a successful defence were impaired unacceptably by the Sheriff`s decision to deny me the testimonies under oath of two key defence witness who had both been formally cited, Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan and former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini.
As events progressed, it became clear that the integrity of the trial was compromised by the fact that McGowan, leading for the prosecution, was himself being protected from having to answer pertinent questions about his own conduct and influence.
In the case of Angiolini, in many ways the central figure whose failings led directly to my being charged, she would have had to face some telling questions on oath had our citatation not been blocked by Bowen`s intervention. Under Scottish law, it would not have been necessary for her to answer questions that may incriminate herself, but it would surely have been in the interests not only of the defence, but for Scotland in general as to how she would respond to the matter of who paid Levy &McRae for her private legal actions, a question she has persistently failed to answer to a formal request from a senior public official, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion.
As we were denied Angiolini`s opportunity to speak on this specific topic, amongst others, I formally made a complaint yesterday at the police station in Dunblane, where she resides, having been invited to take this course of action by a letter from Lothian and Borders Police. The constant evasions by Angiolini in responding to a perfectly simple official question would strongly indicate, in my view, that a serious criminal offence has taken place, which I have been given to understand should be termed the misappropriation of public funds.
Regardless of opinions on the Hollie Greig case or on mine, surely no one can reasonably take a view other than that the former Lord Advocate has conducted herself in an unacceptable manner leading to the gravest suspicion of her culpability over the likely criminal misuse of public funds.
One of the most important facts to emerge from the trial was that following Hollie`s lengthy interview with PC Lisa Evans on the 8th September 2009, which I witnessed, not one of the named alleged perpetrators, not one of the alleged victims, nor any of the expert medical witnesses whose reports completely supported Hollie`s allegations were ever questioned by Grampian Police. Of course, contrary to police procedures in such cases involving the sexual abuse of children were the computers of the alleged perpetrators seized or examined. One of the main reasons for this is that whilst rape is inevitably a complex issue as far as proof is concerned, the downloading of child pornography is not. It is a known fact that abusers generally avail themselves to this type of crime and given the sheer number of those named by Hollie, there can surely be no rational explanation for Grampian Police`s failures.
As we have said so often, Hollie`s competence and honesty has never been in any doubt, as admitted by Grampian Police themselves. The condition of Down`s Syndrome leads to those who have the condition to describe past events exactly as they have experienced them, without the facility to fabricate or embellish. Hollie Greig is therefore the best type of witness one could have in acase such as this, unlike any of her alleged attackers.
Thanks to extra information alluded to or gleaned during the trial, particularly from witness Rosemary Murray, someone certainly not involved in the abuses, I have every reason to believe that two specific witnesses in particular, committed perjury during the course of the trial.
Naturally, I have always stressed that my chief objective in the campaign is to secure a proper public inquiry into the repeated failures and obstructions of the authorities in dealing adequately with all the allegations and other matters, including the death of Robert Greig.
Indeed, if any proper police investigation had taken place it would have exonerated those who professed to be innocent in court long ago.
I must attend Stonehaven Court on 17th February at 10.30 hours for sentencing.
I shall just end by repeating these facts.
Following Hollie`s indescribably brave conduct and precise allegations on 8th September 2009 to DC Lisa Evans relating to most horrendous crimes, the police took no action whatsoever.
In January 2010, when I circulated a letter highlighting the police`s failure in this matter and the potential danger to the public, Grampian Police interviewed no fewer than 61 witnesses within five weeks and I was thus arrested and charged.
Justice?
Posted by Robert Green at 9:26 AM
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
STRIKEBACK
BREAKING NEWS!!!
Robert Green has filed charges with Dunblane Police in respect of the financial regularities (misappropriation of public funds) of 'Dame' Elish Angiolini in securing the law firm Levy & McRay. Therefore, Angiolini is now a suspect in a criminal investigation!
Robert Green has filed charges with Dunblane Police in respect of the financial regularities (misappropriation of public funds) of 'Dame' Elish Angiolini in securing the law firm Levy & McRay. Therefore, Angiolini is now a suspect in a criminal investigation!
MORE FROM MR QUINN ON THE VILE STINKING CULPABLE DWARF WATKINS
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
Cover up tight kiddies...
Who is trying to cover up what in the Hollie Greig case?
Face it; there is a cover up going on with regard to the Hollie Greig scandal. Victims of crime have been failed. Worse still they have been ignored, bullied, abused brutalised. And not just by criminals, but by the very systems and agencies that are there supposedly to protect them. Approaching half a million pounds or thereabouts was spent by the state in order to ‘punish’ Robert Green. ...For what exactly? ...Stupidity? It seems so!
Half-baked childish tales of mystical societies can and should be discounted; the corruption we seem to see evidenced is the product of a culture of injelitance, dishonesty and well... The general corruption that our public services have become sodden in.
At the root of the Robert Green fiasco stands the twisted evil that is Greg Lance-Watkins. Watkins is the man who deliberately infiltrated the campaign under the false flag of being a seasoned and experienced rights campaigner. With his cut glass accent and (it later emerged) ‘Walter Mitty’ tales of glory Greg Lance Watkins is the man who duped Robert Green...
It is notable – and in my view evidence that there is indeed something very wrong and very corrupt going on within the Scottish Justice system – that much was made in the case against green of material published on the ‘Stolen Kids –Hollie’ Blog... Greg Lance-Watkins was not only the man with sole and absolute control over that blog, it was he who actually published to the world not only the names of Hollie’s alleged abusers but of her alleged co-abused...
The sad, shambling wreck is crawing about Robert’s conviction claiming...
'Robert Green of Hollie Greig notoriety was found guilty in Stonehaven Court today – vindicaping [sic] my stance on the issue totally.'
“It IS a criminal action to announce at a public meeting the names of claimed abusers even with proof - Robert Green and Stuart Usher named innocent men and women claiming they were abusers.”
With proof or otherwise there is currently no criminal law preventing the public naming of alleged sex offenders. There is as I have often repeated one against naming alleged victims – and it’s to be noted that Greg Lance-Watkins broke it!
By way of example I quote from the South Wales Argus of January 22nd 2012...
“A NEWPORT man accused of raping a pregnant teenager before stabbing her to death was "fixated" with her, a court heard yesterday.
Carl Whant, 27, of no fixed abode, is on trial at Newport Crown Court charged with murder, child destruction, rape and arson. He denies all the charges. “
Is the editor of this paper about to face the same treatment as Robert Green? – Of course not!
Let’s be VERY clear about this - Robert Green was NOT prosecuted for naming anyone - he was prosecuted because his claims supposedly placed members of the general public in a state of fear and apprehension for the safety of their family.
Had Green taken proper advice – instead of pursuing the utterly mad conspiracy theorist agenda he did - there is every possibility the Procurator Fiscal would have been forced to drop the case long before it got near a court...
Far from being ‘vindicaped’ [sic] or even vindicated – Greg Lance-Watkins’ position is falling apart just like the fabric of lies his Walter Mitty back story is woven from. SERIOUS questions now need to be asked of the authorities why this man – who is evidently a serious danger to society given is macabre fascinations – is apparently immune from prosecution.
In my opinion, serious credible inroads to the web of corruption that has lead to the conviction of Robert Green, the mal-treatment of Anne and Hollie Greig and possibly a host of other ‘issues’ may well be made by exploring and discovering what ‘hold’ Greg Lance-Watkins has that immunises him from prosecution...
For the avoidance of any doubt I am laying squarely at the allegation that Greg Lance-Watkins breached Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 and the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 (as amended by the Criminal Justice Act 1988) by publishing on an internet site, under his sole control, the names of persons who are allegedly the victims of sexual assault. - This actually is a criminal offence.
Remember WHAT sort of animal we're talking about here - This is the man who once entered a primary school with the intention of KILLING the headmaster - This is the man who boasts of his track record of firearms offences - This is the man who infiltrated the Hollie Greig case and ran it off the rails... This is the man who duped Robert Green... This is the man who intimidated Anne Greig online with images of a grotesque funerial-style 'Birthday' cake and chilling messages from the people she says raped her child... This is the man who until quite recently was still canvassing for other abuse victims to 'come to him' so as he could 'help'...
PRATT ABOUT WITH SILLY STORIES ABOUT SAD OLD MEN WHO SPEND THEIR EVENINGS PONCING ABOUT IN APRONS IF YOU LIKE - BUT HERE IS A CLEAR, PRESENT AND VERY VERY REAL DANGER. - THE MAN ADMITS TO PLANNING A MURDER - THE MAN ADMITS TO SALTING AWAY FIREARMS... REAL DANGER OR IMAGINED DANGER?
If YOU as an individual are actually serious about doing something credible to help Hollie Greig - and abused children in general - You may care to make enquiries with your local police as to why that matter has not been investigated.
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
MATT QUINNS TAKE ON IT
The Hollie Greig Case... And the people behind it sinking...
Greg Lance-Watkins – Liar, and real-life Walter Mitty, has engineered a situation where the rape of a disabled child is left unreportable; the mainstream press can't touch it! - Thus protecting at least two Paedophiles But is he facing the music? Nope! He set up another man as stool pigeon for that! Robert Green, who he duped into actions that would see him stand trial in January 2012 for Breach of The Peace. We ask what hold Watkins has on those behind the persecution of Robert Green?
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
The Robert Green Trial – Day 6 Defence? What defence?
The first news, received early this afternoon from Stonehaven was that Sheriff Bowen had upheld the prosecution’s view that calling Eilish Angiolini to the witness stand is irrelevant... No doubt the mob will be crying ‘foul’; but it is no surprise and, to be honest a perfectly reasonable position...
Late this afternoon the news reached us that Robert Green has been found Guilty - In my view he is entirely the author of his own misfortune since, instead of trying to mount a cogent and logical defence, instead of trying to bring the Hollie Greig case back on track - he ignored all professional advice.
Instead he pursed a mad agenda - spurred on by non-educated conspiracy theorists. An agenda constructed more from fantasy and fiction than ANY understanding of the law or acceptance of reality...
Never mind! We have the cannonisation of 'St Robert of Green' coming to an internet site near you soon - The people behind this travesty are just too bound up in their imaginary world to feel shame at the devastation they have caused!
From the outset Green's so-called defence was doomed to failure...
Who instigated the action had absolutely nothing to do with the matters in hand. And really it is all this nonsense about Angiolini, Masons, Satanists and Uncle Tom Cobley and all that has exhausted the patience of the court, made Robert Green's position non credible and forces Hollie's cause to drift further and further out to sea!
Sources close to Stonehaven Sheriff Court have expressed pity for Andy Lamb, Q.C. – sent to the slaughter in terms of having (it’s said) been press-ganged into defending Green at the 11th hour. I say that because Lamb has had to present Green’s ludicrous and ill-advised line of defence... Credible reports from Stonehaven tell of a man obviously rather embarrassed to be doing what he has to do! Quiet... “Squirming almost” to quote one observer...
Day 5 of the trial had concluded with the prosecution having constructed what is to my mind a fairly weak argument to satisfy the fairly normal Breach Of the Peace mens rea and actus reus ; no precedents were harmed in the making of this mockery! - It seems members of the general populous of Ferryhill were rendered fearful for the safety of their families thanks to Green’s efforts. And certainly there was somewhat inflammatory material presented that we had been previously unaware of ... NOT I stress the massively conclusive evidence we had been forewarned to expect; but enough...
As previously reported much of the prosecution's case relied on the contentious material that was published naming Hollies alleged abusers and more troublingly her alleged co-abused. As regular readers are aware we, have clearly stated that this action is not defensible; particularly with regard to the alleged co-abused. However we have also made it clear that the correct remedy lies in the Defamation Act and the Sexual Offences Act...
Likewise it is fact that Green’s efforts were actually of very limited effect – his wee piles of leaflets, ‘round robin letter’ and public pronouncements seem to have reached a few flocks of sheep, a random tile fitter, a Collie dug and a wee man in a flat cap who mistakenly thought the mobile library was in town!
24/7 worldwide coverage of the material was provided though by Greg Lance-Watkins via his Stolen Kids Blog. Frankly piss-poor ‘evidence’ was presented to paint Robert as the author of the troublesome blog. Which, from extrapolation of current figures, had probably had 30,000- 40,0000 ‘hits’ at the time of Green’s arrest.- but of course there is no way Green actually was the author! It seems odd to us that Green is so readily hounded for reaching at most maybe two hundred people with his claims – Yet Greg Lance-Watkins’s efforts are into the tens of thousands, and he suffered no raids on his house, no seizing of his notes and computers...
And you would reasonably think that discrediting the prosecution’s claims would be the main tack taken in defence – sadly no...
“Robert would like it stressed that it is very important to keep in mind that this trial is not to determine whether those accused by Hollie of abusing her or assisting and/or facilitating in the abuse, were guilty. It is simply to determine if Robert’s actions have caused the accused some level of harm or distress. Nothing more, nothing less.”
Actually the prosecution didn’t need to prove harm and they did need to prove something rather more serious than mere distress; but otherwise yes; the trial was about one issue only. Breach of the Peace... “Conduct which [presents] as genuinely alarming and disturbing, in its context, to any reasonable person” (Smith v Donnelly 2001 SLT 1007 at [17])
Why Robert Green imagined for a moment he would be allowed to present a load of spurious matters not directly relevant to the charge into the court record by way of defence is simply beyond imagining! It was MADNESS from the outset!
- don't doubt for so much as a second that his legal team made this perfectly clear to him. He lost counsel after counsel for the plain and simple reason; no one wanted to be the one to have to present this tosh to a court...
To be fair the somewhat bizarre line of questioning in cross examination by the defence has established some fairly useful facts on record. The matter of the Police investigation in relation to Hollie’s allegations is now on balance proved as claimed by Green... Great though that is it doesn’t really help his case!
- But a sane defence was not ever on the cards here. By rights Green should have been refuting the prosecution’s evidence on the basis of his behaviour not being of a nature that was genuinely alarming or disturbing to reasonable people... He should have been pointing out to the court that it was another party who was primarily responsible for disseminating the contentious material...
Is that what’s happened? – Nope!
As I have tried to get through many times – it simply didn’t matter, in terms of a defence to the charge, whether Green was justified in his actions... Not one jot! It didn't matter who exactly was behind the prosecution... And there was never any prospect of him being allowed to 'hijack' procedings to use the court as a platform for his own ends...
Perhaps, since he’s on the North East Coast, home to much of Scotland’s fishing fleet, he imagined herrings of the finest scarlet are the order of the day? Doing himself up like a right Kipper is the notion that springs to mind – or should that be a Smokie?
- At the moment I reckon he’ll get 3 months suspended for the breach and will probably get another 3 inside for the Bail offences...
However; take a direct warning Robert - Given the tack you have just taken, given the nonsense you have spouted, there is a REAL possibility of the court formally challenging YOUR mental health.! - Sure, that will play just great with the crowd; but they won't be the ones facing the real-life consequences! - They'll be sitting in their nice cosy homes key-tapping away as usual!
LAST POST
Well done to the utter scum that help bring this about
LAST POST!
Ian McFerran
ROBERT GREEN’S TRIAL - (WEEK TWO) – DAY SIX
VERDICT: “GUILTY”!
I’m speechless! I will just write this in simple terms, as words fail me!
Robert Green was found GUILTY today Sheriff, Bowen of 2 out of the 5 charges against him.
I spoke with Robert over the phone just now and it was cut off about 30 seconds into the call. I called him back and after a few moments, it was cut off again. Robert was clearly tired, so I didn’t call back as I thought it best to allow him time to rest, ready for the long drive back home tomorrow. From what little I could get from Robert, the matter of Elish Angiolini is still to be resolved, as are a number of other issues.
A note of special thanks must go out to the individuals who attended the hearing throughout and, of course, the enormous level of support and interest shown around the world in this case and the case of Hollie Greig herself, which, of course, is what Robert’s trial has been all about – an attempt to silence Robert and worry potential victims from coming forward to expose their paedophile attackers.
Robert is due before Sheriff, Bowen, on 17th February 2012 for sentencing. According to the Sheriff, what Robert has done is ‘extremely serious’. It’s strange that the various websites and individuals who did AND CONTINUE TO DO exactly the same thing as Robert intended doing (but never got to) have not been questioned, or faced charges, indeed have not even had their websites taken down or been ordered to remove the ‘offending’ content. If Robert receives a custodial sentence (prison) questions will have to be asked regarding due process (Robert being denied the opportunity to call some of his witnesses) as well as the fact that NO ONE was hurt as a result of Robert naming the alleged paedophiles and, after almost two years (and a further 3 weeks before sentencing – bringing it up to 2 years and one day since Robert was first arrested) he has caused no one any harm and is clearly NOT a threat to society. Therefore, prison, surely, can not be justified as a punishment.
The official website is currently preparing a full report on the proceedings today, which will be online later this evening. The link will be the same as always:www.holliedemandsjustice.org
I must make a minor correction from yesterday’s blog: Yesterday, I said Terry Major and his wife were called as witnesses, both of whom were identified by Hollie as having abused her. Only Mrs Major was a witness yesterday, as her husband, a Police Officer with Grampian Police Force, died in 2005. My apologies, I was taking notes too quickly as Robert was talking and miss-read my own handwriting.
LAST POST!
Ian McFerran
ROBERT GREEN’S TRIAL - (WEEK TWO) – DAY SIX
VERDICT: “GUILTY”!
I’m speechless! I will just write this in simple terms, as words fail me!
Robert Green was found GUILTY today Sheriff, Bowen of 2 out of the 5 charges against him.
I spoke with Robert over the phone just now and it was cut off about 30 seconds into the call. I called him back and after a few moments, it was cut off again. Robert was clearly tired, so I didn’t call back as I thought it best to allow him time to rest, ready for the long drive back home tomorrow. From what little I could get from Robert, the matter of Elish Angiolini is still to be resolved, as are a number of other issues.
A note of special thanks must go out to the individuals who attended the hearing throughout and, of course, the enormous level of support and interest shown around the world in this case and the case of Hollie Greig herself, which, of course, is what Robert’s trial has been all about – an attempt to silence Robert and worry potential victims from coming forward to expose their paedophile attackers.
Robert is due before Sheriff, Bowen, on 17th February 2012 for sentencing. According to the Sheriff, what Robert has done is ‘extremely serious’. It’s strange that the various websites and individuals who did AND CONTINUE TO DO exactly the same thing as Robert intended doing (but never got to) have not been questioned, or faced charges, indeed have not even had their websites taken down or been ordered to remove the ‘offending’ content. If Robert receives a custodial sentence (prison) questions will have to be asked regarding due process (Robert being denied the opportunity to call some of his witnesses) as well as the fact that NO ONE was hurt as a result of Robert naming the alleged paedophiles and, after almost two years (and a further 3 weeks before sentencing – bringing it up to 2 years and one day since Robert was first arrested) he has caused no one any harm and is clearly NOT a threat to society. Therefore, prison, surely, can not be justified as a punishment.
The official website is currently preparing a full report on the proceedings today, which will be online later this evening. The link will be the same as always:www.holliedemandsjustice.org
I must make a minor correction from yesterday’s blog: Yesterday, I said Terry Major and his wife were called as witnesses, both of whom were identified by Hollie as having abused her. Only Mrs Major was a witness yesterday, as her husband, a Police Officer with Grampian Police Force, died in 2005. My apologies, I was taking notes too quickly as Robert was talking and miss-read my own handwriting.
Saturday, 21 January 2012
Friday, 20 January 2012
BAD DAY AT BLACK ROCK
Oh dear the chookie gets to stay,they really dont get it
Grampian Police chief constable 'could extend contract'
Colin McKerracher could stay on beyond his retirement dateThe Grampian Police chief constable could stay on beyond his official retirement date.
The joint police board has agreed to recommend to the justice secretary that Colin McKerracher stays on after summer to oversee the transition to a single Scottish force.
The board's convener, Martin Greig, said Grampian needed stability.
Grampian Police is also to give more than £1m back to local councils after building up an under spend.
The force will be able to resume the recruitment of officers.
ROBERT GREENS REPORT E AND OE
The Stonehaven Trial So Far
An extended adjournment until Monday has allowed me to post this update on the trial`s progress.
To begin with, I must thank all those kind, loyal and courageous people who had come again to Stonehaven yet again to support me. They have come from other parts of Scotland and even England in their own time and at their own considerable expense. I am deeply moved by such support, which has been a source of great strength to me.
Perhaps a very pertinent and basic question that is arisen as to why I have been prosecuted at all for a Breach of the Peace, which is intended to protect the public in general, not a specific number of individuals who have been identified by letter of other means of communication. Virtually all of the civilian witnesses brought by the prosecution who claim to have been upset by me comprise some of those named as alleged abusers or victims by Hollie.
A perfectly adequate legal remedy exists for those concerned - defamation.
I have always invited anyone who regards my publication of the allegations to be unfair or inaccurate to challenge me.
No-one, either individually or collectively has chosen to take this logical civil route that would have the most appropriate one, at no cost to the people of Scotland. Instead, even prior to the trial, an estimated half a million pounds of taxpayers` money has been spent on prosecuting me on a simple summary charge. It is an issue of possible misuse of much-needed public funds that may justifiably be put to the Scottish establishment, including leading politicians.
The most interesting cross-examination so far has been that of DC Lisa Evans by defence counsel Andy Lamb QC. The prosecution in fact attempted to obstruct Mr Lamb from doing so in the manner he intended, which led to an unexpected adjournment on Wednesday.
DC Evans was the Grampian Police officer who interviewed Hollie on 8th September 2009, at which I was present. Hollie, displaying an astonishing degree of courage and composure, clearly related her rape ordeals during the formal questioning that lasted three and a half hours. It was the most harrowing discussion I have ever witnessed and left me with a lasting admiration for the fortitude under pressure of this extraordinary young woman.
Such was the power and sincerity of Hollie`s evidence, backed by the knowledge that the state had earlier accepted the overwhelming probability of the truth of Hollie`s allegations by paying her £13, 500 from the CICA, that I then believed that even Grampian Police could no longer ignore the necessity for a full investigation. An action of this type would naturally have led to all those named being interviewed, along with the seizure or examination of their computers of those that used them, a normal procedure where serious allegations of child-sex crimes exist.
During the cross-examination of the alleged abusers and victims, all stated that they had never been approached by the police following Hollie`s allegations.
In the circumstances, it may be of significance that DC Evans was among the four officers who raided my home whilst I was held in custody in Aberdeen. No inventory of the items removed was ever left with me, but among the missing items were two notebooks which I used to record details of Hollie`s interview with Evans. Neither of these important documents was returned to the defence by the Crown. Under pressure from my legal team, it is understood that one has now been "found", but there is still no sign of the other.
When cross-examined by Mr Lamb, Evans even attempted to mislead the court about the exact layout of the area where the interview took place.
Much was made by the prosecution of the items seized from my home that day, including a list of the alleged perpetrators that I had sent out that has been used against me. In his quiet but penetrative way, Mr Lamb asked DC Evans if any of the names that appeared on that list corresponded with any of the names provided to her by Hollie.
The officer admitted that there were.
Thus, there can be no rational explanation for the total lack of action in Grampian Police not contacting named individuals following the 8th September 2009 interview.
The alleged abusers all stated in court that they were entirely innocent. If this is true, then Grampian Police has failed them also, because if they had been questioned, had their computers checked and it had been found that no evidence existed to justify a prosecution, I could have no longer been in a position to realistically continue my subsequent actions in support of Hollie`s case and there would have been no grounds to prosecute me at all
Naturally, the matter of the true facts behind death of Robert David Greig is an issue that cannot possibly go away.Only a full and reliable investigation is acceptable
To begin with, I must thank all those kind, loyal and courageous people who had come again to Stonehaven yet again to support me. They have come from other parts of Scotland and even England in their own time and at their own considerable expense. I am deeply moved by such support, which has been a source of great strength to me.
Perhaps a very pertinent and basic question that is arisen as to why I have been prosecuted at all for a Breach of the Peace, which is intended to protect the public in general, not a specific number of individuals who have been identified by letter of other means of communication. Virtually all of the civilian witnesses brought by the prosecution who claim to have been upset by me comprise some of those named as alleged abusers or victims by Hollie.
A perfectly adequate legal remedy exists for those concerned - defamation.
I have always invited anyone who regards my publication of the allegations to be unfair or inaccurate to challenge me.
No-one, either individually or collectively has chosen to take this logical civil route that would have the most appropriate one, at no cost to the people of Scotland. Instead, even prior to the trial, an estimated half a million pounds of taxpayers` money has been spent on prosecuting me on a simple summary charge. It is an issue of possible misuse of much-needed public funds that may justifiably be put to the Scottish establishment, including leading politicians.
The most interesting cross-examination so far has been that of DC Lisa Evans by defence counsel Andy Lamb QC. The prosecution in fact attempted to obstruct Mr Lamb from doing so in the manner he intended, which led to an unexpected adjournment on Wednesday.
DC Evans was the Grampian Police officer who interviewed Hollie on 8th September 2009, at which I was present. Hollie, displaying an astonishing degree of courage and composure, clearly related her rape ordeals during the formal questioning that lasted three and a half hours. It was the most harrowing discussion I have ever witnessed and left me with a lasting admiration for the fortitude under pressure of this extraordinary young woman.
Such was the power and sincerity of Hollie`s evidence, backed by the knowledge that the state had earlier accepted the overwhelming probability of the truth of Hollie`s allegations by paying her £13, 500 from the CICA, that I then believed that even Grampian Police could no longer ignore the necessity for a full investigation. An action of this type would naturally have led to all those named being interviewed, along with the seizure or examination of their computers of those that used them, a normal procedure where serious allegations of child-sex crimes exist.
During the cross-examination of the alleged abusers and victims, all stated that they had never been approached by the police following Hollie`s allegations.
In the circumstances, it may be of significance that DC Evans was among the four officers who raided my home whilst I was held in custody in Aberdeen. No inventory of the items removed was ever left with me, but among the missing items were two notebooks which I used to record details of Hollie`s interview with Evans. Neither of these important documents was returned to the defence by the Crown. Under pressure from my legal team, it is understood that one has now been "found", but there is still no sign of the other.
When cross-examined by Mr Lamb, Evans even attempted to mislead the court about the exact layout of the area where the interview took place.
Much was made by the prosecution of the items seized from my home that day, including a list of the alleged perpetrators that I had sent out that has been used against me. In his quiet but penetrative way, Mr Lamb asked DC Evans if any of the names that appeared on that list corresponded with any of the names provided to her by Hollie.
The officer admitted that there were.
Thus, there can be no rational explanation for the total lack of action in Grampian Police not contacting named individuals following the 8th September 2009 interview.
The alleged abusers all stated in court that they were entirely innocent. If this is true, then Grampian Police has failed them also, because if they had been questioned, had their computers checked and it had been found that no evidence existed to justify a prosecution, I could have no longer been in a position to realistically continue my subsequent actions in support of Hollie`s case and there would have been no grounds to prosecute me at all
Naturally, the matter of the true facts behind death of Robert David Greig is an issue that cannot possibly go away.Only a full and reliable investigation is acceptable
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)