Friday 30 December 2016

Police Don't Want The Public To Surrender Weapons

After tomorrow (31st December 2016) it will be illegal to keep or own an airgun in Scotland without a licence. Anyone caught with an unlicensed weapon will face a fine and up to two years in prison.

This law is not only most welcome but it is absolutely essential for public safety, especially after the deeply shocking case of two-year-old Andrew Morton who was tragically killed by an airgun pellet in Glasgow in 2005.

It's pretty disgraceful that it took them more than 10 years to outlaw these dangerous weapons but I suppose that's another story for another time. The wheels of justice move slowly as they say.

Anyway, thankfully the ban on these weapons is about to become law now, and not before time.

And in anticipation of the new law, Police Scotland have set up an 'air weapons surrender scheme' where anyone who wants to hand in their weapon can do so.

It's supposed to be a very simple process - as you'll see from the Police Scotland informational video at the end of this post - but as I have found out, it is NOT quite as simple as police claim it to be.

The process is most definitely NOT the same as police described in their video. They have not been honest with the public at all about how they're conducting the 'air weapons surrender scheme'.

I know.

Because today, 30th December 2016, I telephoned Police Scotland on 101 to inform them that a family member (who has since sadly passed away) owned an airgun that I would like them to dispose of.

The officer I spoke to on the 101 number, Katie, was very pleasant and informative. She asked me to wrap the weapon up in a black bin bag (just as they show in the police video) so as not to alarm members of the public as I transport it to my nearest police station (Shettleston police station in Glasgow's east end).

She also advised that if I didn't feel comfortable walking in to a police station with an airgun in my hand(!) I should leave it in the boot of the car, locked, safe, and out of sight, while I go in to the police station and inform them about it. Officers would then simply come out to my car and get the weapon and dispose of it for me.

Good sound advice. So far, so good.

So off I went a few minutes later, down to Shettleston police station in Glasgow with the weapon safely wrapped up in a couple of black bin bags in the boot of my car, just as PC Katie had advised.

However when I arrived at the station, the process turned out to be NOT quite as straightforward as you'd think. It was most certainly NOT the easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy way of surrendering a weapon you see police describe in their video.

Heres' what police really do when you try to surrender an airgun weapon to them.

First, as soon as you walk in to the police station and tell them you would like to surrender an airgun they ask you for ALL your personal details, your name, your address, your date of birth, and your telephone number. Hmmm, no mention of that in the police video. How strange.

They then ask you to take a seat in the reception area and disappear in to the back office of the police station for a few minutes, no doubt to run your name, address, date of birth, and telephone number  through their police computer to see  who's handing this weapon in and if you may be a 'person of interest' to them.

Now if you're like me and have had very unpleasant dealings with untrustworthy Police Scotland in the past, you'll know from experience that when a copper disappears in to the back office of a police station with a bit of paper on which he's written your name, address, date of birth, and phone number (especially when you've just turned up there to surrender a firearm), he's probably not adding you to his Christmas card list!

No, it's a no brainer - he's checking you out and entering your info in to the police 'intelligence' database. So now police have, forever more, a 'note' on their intelligence files that you are someone who used to possess a weapon in the past (and I'll go on to tell you exactly why they do that a little further down the page).

Finally, they return from the back office and ask you to put your signature at the bottom of a blank form. Yip, you read that correctly - a blank form.

All the other questions/details on the form are to be left blank and you're not given any opportunity to fill any of them in, except for your signature. So let's be frank here. This means police can, if they so wish, fill out the other details on the form themselves afterwards with whatever information they want...and it will have your signature at the bottom of it.

Not good.

It's all very suspicious indeed, especially when - as in my case - I have a rich 'history' with my local police station. Remember, I was the victim of a false accuser some years ago, falsely arrested by police who didn't bother to check my false accusers story. I was completely cleared in court yet I still had to fight for justice from them every step of the way. I made official complaints against police officers who are or were based at that very same Shettleston police station where I handed the weapon in to today so I'm not Mr Popular down there. Oh dear.

I have grave concerns and a very uneasy feeling deep down in my gut that by doing the correct, honest, and responsible thing today, it may not have been to my best advantage! Just look at the stories I publish on this blog about corruption in Police Scotland. Police Scotland don't like my criticism of them and they are very vindictive people. Very vindictive. That has been my experience.

So, dear readers, if you are thinking of popping in to see Police Scotland to take them up on their so-called 'air weapons surrender scheme', you now have it in black and white from the horses mouth exactly how you'll be treated - and it's NOT the way police tell you in their video.

Police Scotland have falsely lead the public to believe that this is some sort of amnesty type of scheme. It's not. By asking for all sorts of personal information from you Police Scotland have been very dishonest.

The scheme is a chaotic shambles and all it has done is prompted good people to hand in weapons.

The bad guys out there will NOT have handed in their weapons - not under those circumstances anyway, I guarantee.

It's been a disaster.

Police have only succeeded in taking thousands of airguns off the streets that were never on the streets to begin with!

These are mostly old airguns which were stuck away and largely forgotten in peoples garages and in their lofts (or in my case, I found my family members airgun stuck at the back of a cupboard that no-one ever goes in to which houses the central heating boiler)!

So why would untrustworthy Police Scotland act in a way which effectively encourages good people to hand in their weapons but dissuades bad people from handing in their weapons?

I have a couple of ideas why this may be:

1. Police don't really want members of the public to surrender their weapons, even though they say they do. They are secretly quite happy for many of these weapons to remain out there on the streets - especially with the baddies - so that when the new law comes in to effect on 1st January 2017 they can then arrest everyone who still has a weapon.

Police believe that more arrests makes it look - to the wider public - like they are doing a good job. Every time they successfully target and arrest a member of the public it's yet another feather in the cap for a police officer. Don't believe police target the public? When you look in your rear view mirror and you see a police car behind you, do you feel safe or do you feel anxious? Yip, thought so. 'Nuff said.

So by encouraging baddies to keep their weapons it gives police an excuse to arrest them at a later date (after 1st Jan 2017) which helps them to achieve future arrest targets.

Of course, pity the poor public who Police Scotland are quite happy to put in harms way by these weapons being on our streets in the hands of baddies. But hey, protecting the public has always been of much less importance to Police Scotland than targeting the public.

2. Police Scotland are simply using the 'air weapons surrender scheme' to gather intelligence information about innocent members of the public to add to their already bulging database (which also includes road camera pics of 800 million innocent Scottish drivers going about their daily business which police keep for no reason).

And how do they justify all this intelligence gathering against members of the public who have done absolutely nothing wrong?

Well, in police's eyes if you have a weapon you're probably some sort of a baddie or, at the very least, 'a person of interest' to them for even having one in the first place. Police Scotland just love to arrogantly mistreat members of the public and are always happy to brutally ride roughshod over every single legal right that the public have. They don't care. They view everyone with suspicion - it's their default setting. You are guilty until proved innocent as far as they are concerned instead of the other way round as it should be. So in their warped minds, why would you own a weapon? You must be up to something if you have an airgun.

In reality what they're really doing is covertly garnering as much information about you and logging it for future use against you.

And here's how they make it all work:

You see Police Scotland are very vindictive people and are infamous for using a little trick called 'bundling' - a process where they add lots of little snippets of information to your 'intelligence file' over a period of time. The idea is that some day in the future when they eventually manage to arrest and charge you for something silly or insignificant (like being drunk in charge of a fish supper or whatever), they can 'bundle' together all the little tid-bits of intelligence they have collected on you in the past to embellish the case against you and make it in to a bigger case than it would normally be.

A piece of intelligence in your file which says you used to own a firearm in the past is akin to evidential gold for someone like untrustworthy Police Scotland, especially when they're trying to push their boss, the Procurator Fiscal, to prosecute you.

The idea is that when the evidence against you is insufficient, all these little tid-bits of intelligence from the past are 'bundled' together to help tip the balance of flimsy evidence a bit more in their favour. It's all there, in their intelligence database, just sitting waiting for them to use against you any time they need to in the future.

It's designed specifically to help their buddies in the corrupt Crown office get a successful conviction against you for what would normally be an otherwise minor or even a false charge. And these little tid-bits of intelligence can often make the difference between the Procurator Fiscal going ahead with a prosecution against you in an otherwise evidentially flimsy case as opposed to 'penning' it as would normally happen due to lack of evidence.

 In short, 'bundling' evidence helps inflate and falsely fabricate 'a sufficiency of evidence' where it did not exist before.

It shouldn't happen but it does.

It's no secret that Police Scotland have illegally spied on journalists in the past. The investigation in to the Emma Caldwell scandal is still ongoing (her murderer is still out there) and we still haven't had any satisfactory answers from Police Scotland about their illegal spying escapades even though they have now accepted and fully admitted that they did indeed spy illegally. In fact, very recently we have seen very high ranking officers in Police Scotland contradicting each other publicly as one by one they squeal on each other to try and save their own skins while running to the hills for cover.

So it has been proved beyond any doubt that the intelligence police collect on us is not always collected legally.

It has also been proved beyond any doubt that the intelligence police collect on us is not always correct or reliable. Nor do they use it properly or efficiently or for the right reasons.

It's also no secret that Police Scotland don't like me, my journalism, and the information I publish about them on this blog.

I get stopped by police in my vehicle on a fairly regular basis. Oh yeah, they always claim it's just routine, they check my details, and then let me continue on my way, so it's nothing more than a minor inconvenience to me.

The problem is, it's an inconvenience that I never used to experience from police - until of course I took on the might of untrustworthy Police Scotland and the corrupt Crown office in court and won against them - they don't like you doing that, I can assure you! Perhaps it's just co-incidence. Or, as I suspect, police still have some old false and outdated intelligence on me on their files which has me wrongly tagged as still being 'a person of interest' to them.

Their botched case against me a couple of years ago when I was the victim of a false accuser resulted in Sheriff Douglas Brown being quoted as saying "Mr Campbell should never have been brought before a criminal court". That's a very damning criticism of Police Scotland if ever I've heard one from a senior judge. Police's case against me was thrown right out of court, so I'm an innocent man and should be of no interest to them whatsoever.

Funny thing is that I drive more than one vehicle but police only ever stop me when I'm in one particular vehicle, never the others. Hmmm. They even stopped a family member who was driving the vehicle one day and seemed surprised that it wasn't me - they even asked the family member "does anyone else drive this vehicle?". Strange eh?! Do you think perhaps police have the registration plate of that vehicle on their intelligence files and are just being vindictive? I'll let you decide.

Either way, you can understand why I am deeply suspicious about Police Scotland's 'air weapon surrender scheme' and very curious as to why Police Scotland would purposely lie in their informational video about the scheme (and why they wanted so much personal information from me today and made me sign a blank form)?

And I'm worried.

Worried because police don't care that it wasn't my weapon, it was someone else weapon that I surrendered, so I'll perhaps see yet another re-invigorated little flurry of negative activity from police towards me and my journalism now.

Trust me, police are very dishonest and extremely untrustworthy. You can bet your pension that the weapon has now been 'earmarked' against me personally with my name, my address, my date of birth, and my telephone number. Goodness knows what they've added to my intelligence file now and goodness knows what they wrote on the blank form after I left the station today (which I've signed at the bottom)!

Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence does it?

Of course there is one way I could have avoided all this potential hassle and there's a way you too can avoid all this hassle.

If you have a weapon, don't take it to the police, just throw it in to the nearest wheelie bin.

There will be no police enquiries in to who you are.

You won't have to give your name, address, d.o.b, and phone number.

You won't have to expose yourself to the potential risk of becoming a targeted name on their intelligence database.

You'll be free to go about your every day business as normal without any hassle or problems from the police...

But stop, wait, hang on. No, no, no, please don't do that - I'm being facetious of course!

I'm obviously NOT advocating that you do that!

God forbid some hooligan or worse, a child, could fish it out of the wheelie bin and try to use it wth disastrous or even life threatening consequences.

Please, please think of little two-year-old Andrew Morton and dispose of any weapons responsibly just as I did today.

The point I'm making here to untrustworthy Police Scotland (should they choose to listen) is that they need to be honest with the public if they ever hope to have the support of the public in getting these weapons off our streets.

The Police Scotland video, their very own video from their own 'air weapons surrender scheme' page on their own website (which I've embedded in to the end of this post), is not honest. Go watch it.

To conclude, today I acted with propriety, rectitude and responsibly. I got well-rid of a very dangerous weapon belonging to a deceased member of my family who obviously had no opportunity to dispose of it I did.

It wasn't my weapon, I didn't own it, I've never used it (and wouldn't know how to anyway). In short, it wasn't my responsibility. It had nothing to do with me...yet still, I did it.

I acted the way I would hope and expect every decent member of the Scottish public who cherishes public safety to act.

Just as important, and as a bit of an aside, it is my understanding from others in my family, that the weapon probably hasn't been used or fired in 20 or 30 years. Can you imagine if I'd just dumped it in to any old wheelie bin in Shettleston Road to avoid untrustworthy Police Scotland taking down all my details and to prevent them abusing the act of responsibility I showed today in order to to harm me and use it to my detriment in the future (which, hey, who knows, they may still do)?

Not only could the weapon possibly be used to kill someone, a person who tries to fire that weapon could very possibly be injured or killed themselves. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the damn thing blows up when someone tries to pull the trigger, because if it hasn't been fired in 20 or 30 years it probably hasn't been cleaned or maintained in 40 or 50 years!

So today I did the correct, proper, honest, and responsible thing. And yet I've probably done myself no favours in doing so.

How ironic.

Police Scotland had a duty to me today - and a duty to every other member of the Scottish public - to make the 'air weapons surrender scheme' easy, but they didn't. Police Scotland have failed.

Instead, they lied to me and the Scottish public about the disposal of these weapons.

That leads me to have grave suspicions about their motives.

Police Scotland should have made the process happen in exactly the same way they show it to be in their informational video below. But they didn't. That concerns me greatly and it should concern every member of the Scottish public who value their safety and who, like me, wants to see ALL of these dangerous weapons completely off our streets.

How many of these weapons are still out there just because the people who own them don't trust Police Scotland enough to hand them in?

According to recent press reports, tens of thousands of honest members of the public - like me - have taken advantage of the 'air weapons surrender scheme' and handed in weapons to police for disposal.

That's good.

What's not so good is that the 'baddies' out there will have very quickly learned that Police Scotland demand to know all your personal details such as your name, address, date of birth, and telephone number when you hand a weapon in.

The baddies will NOT have handed all their weapons in, that's for sure!

So it's highly probably that right now all the weapons belonging to good, honest, decent members of the public which have been kicking around lofts, garages, and cupboards, untouched and unused for years are now in police possession...while the 'baddies' out there still have their weapons and will continue to use them to commit criminal acts, day in and day out, for the foreseeable future.

That's a serious concern for public safety and the Scottish public should be appalled at how Police Scotland have handled this debacle.

Mind you, knowing untrustworthy Police Scotland as well as I do, it would not surprise me at all if they've purposely done all of this by design rather than by accident...

Police Cars Held Together With Duct Tape

This is the shocking story that Police Scotland's patrol cars are being held together by 'duct tape'.

This is a terrible waste of duct tape and I must protest most strongly.

The 'duct tape' would be far more usefully employed if they would use it to tape over the mouths of all those lying Police Scotland officers who, every day, take an oath to tell the truth in the witness stand yet then proceed to lie through their teeth in courts of law up and down our country (read my shocking story about a police officer lying under oath here).

Tuesday 27 December 2016

Twisted Police Twisting Words

Let's just cut to the chase here. The one-size-fits-all Police Scotland project has been an abject failure on EVERY level.

So it's no surprise that the Scottish Government are getting a wee bit concerned about the state of Police Scotland.

So concerned in fact that the Justice Secretary Michael Matheson has urged Police Scotland to "focus on local communities."

Of course, in their twisted minds, Police Scotland would argue that they do focus on local communities. Because untrustworthy Police Scotland love to boast about how great a job they're doing in local communities, how they're making lots of arrests, locking up lots of bad guys etc.

In reality though, what's really happening is that police make lots of arrests - and their buddies over at the COPFS make lots of prosecutions - which they then point to as 'proof' that they're doing a good job.

The fact that these arrests and prosecutions are made against the most vulnerable members of the public - easy targets, 'wee guys', who come from our poorest communities - is ever-so quietly ignored.

The poorest and the most vulnerable in our society are an easy peasy lemon squeezey victim for police and the Crown office to get a successful prosecution against. The 'wee guy' doesn't have the education or the money to fight against the combined might of Police Scotland and the Crown office.

The Crown office are Police Scotland's boss. The Crown office have their pick of 17,000 police officers - all willing to back each other up in court - to help the Procurator Fiscal get a successful prosecution. It's your word against two coppers - who's the court gonna believe? Yeah.

The Crown office have a £112 million per year budget at their disposal they can dip in to at will to ensure any charges the police make will succeed in court.

The Crown office have a large team of legal professionals to work on cases against the 'wee guy' including hundreds of backroom staff and experienced fiscals and advocates who all work within the courts every day and know how to game the system.

In contrast, the 'wee guy' from a poor community who finds himself up against the law has nothing anywhere near those resources. The system is rigged against the 'wee guy' right from the very start.

He does not have police officers on his side to help him. In fact police are there to pursue him, charge him, and give evidence against him in court to help the Procurator Fiscal convict him, not help him.

Nor does he have £112 million in his pocket to pay for his defence.

He does not have a team of top legal advisers and hundreds of backroom staff at his disposal to help with his defence.

In fact, knowing very little or nothing about the law, the 'wee guy' will more than probably walk in to the nearest estate agent office and employ a 'solicitor' from there, not realising that the Perry Mason he thinks he's getting is better suited to notarising title deeds than conducting a proper professional criminal defence in a court of law.

The poor 'wee guy' doesn't realise he's being shafted from both sides and the only reason Perry Mason has advised him to plead guilty to something he didn't do is because he's only really experienced at writing wills and selling houses so is incapable of actually performing in court of law, calling witnesses, and preparing a proper legal defence for him.

By the time the 'wee guy' also learns that Perry Mason will actually earn exactly the same money from the legal aid certificate no matter whether he had pleaded guilty or innocent (and therefore only advised him to plead guilty so he could trouser the legal aid money without doing any work), it's all too late.

Make no bones about it, the most vulnerable people in our poorest communities get railroaded regularly by Police Scotland, the Crown office, and too many of these 'bottom of the food-chain' solicitors.

The 'wee guy' has no voice and no chance.


It's not right.

And it all begins when untrustworthy Police Scotland barge in to the poorest areas of our communities and make arrests just so they can achieve arrest targets.

So I suspect that when Justice Secretary Michael Matheson urged Police Scotland to "focus on local communities" he probably didn't mean for them to focus on targeting local communities.

But I damn well know which way untrustworthy Police Scotland will be taking his words...

Saturday 24 December 2016

Police Refuse To Arrest A Murderer

Oh dear, another couple of top cops are contradicting each other over leaks (and I don't mean winter burst pipes at the local nick).

Chief Constable Phil 'Gormless' has written to MSP's stating that the bungled investigation into the unsolved murder of prostitute Emma Caldwell had not been "live" in the month officers carried out an illegal spying operation against journalists reporting on the case.

But the former deputy chief constable Neil Richardson gave evidence to MSP's saying that at the time of the leaks, it was a "live murder inquiry".

So one of them is telling porkies.

But which one?

Actually, it doesn't matter.

Because this murder will never be solved. Never.

You see, the poor sods that the police were so desperate to 'fit up' and 'do' for this murder didn't actually do it. The police got it wrong. Very wrong. And the police don't like being wrong. No siree.

So police will allow the real murderer to remain free and at large just so that they can stick like glue to their original (wrong) opinions on who they thought committed this crime.

Hey, better a murderer roam our streets than police admit they are wrong.

Yes, I know, it's not very good for the Scottish public to know that we have a murderer out there in our midst who is on the loose and roaming free.

But on the plus side, the police can't be accused of making a mistake as long as the real murderer never gets caught.

Nighty night folks. Don't have nightmares now, y'all.

Tuesday 20 December 2016

Police Anti-Corruption Unit Under Investigation... For Corruption!

It's a well known and accepted fact that Police Scotland are corrupt to the core (as are their bosses and buddies in the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service).

It's also well known that they also investigate themselves when there are any allegations of corruption in their ranks so no prizes for guessing how that usually turns out!

Police Scotland have a special anti-corruption unit set up to investigate in to police corruption and you probably won't be surprised to learn that there have been more than 100 allegations of wrongdoing against Police Scotland.

But what you WILL be surprised to learn is that those 100+ allegations of wrongdoing against Police Scotland are actually complaints against officers who work IN the anti-corruption unit.

The anti-corruption unit is full of corrupt officers itself!

As they say, you couldn't make it up.

Rotten to the core, the lot of 'em.

Saturday 17 December 2016

SPF Use Your Money To Help Fellow Labour Councillors

I have always disagreed with politicians having any control over the money in our pension funds.

That money is important. It's for our retirement, not for them to play with.

When members of the public work hard and pay in to a pension fund, they have an absolute right to demand that their money be invested wisely to give a good return that will ensure a healthy pension pay out when they retire.

Put simply, when you hand over that very large chunk of your wages each month you expect that your money will be invested wisely by financial experts to provide for your retirement - you don't want a bunch of sticky fingered politicians playing with it.

But they do.

And when politicians get their grubby little hands on your money and politicians decide where it gets 'invested' then you just know it's gonna end up getting channeled in to 'investments' that benefit them, not you.

A story about Strathclyde Pyramid Pension Fund - and where they have decided to make an investment of your money - has sparked my interest.

It seems SPF have made a new investment in a Port Glasgow retail park.

Nothing wrong in that at all, as long as it is a good investment which will deliver high returns for our pensioners.

But councillor Philip Braat - chairman of SPF - has curiously said that the development would deliver real benefits to Port Glasgow and Inverclyde as well as pension fund members.

My interest was piqued by the 'order' he placed the benefits of this SPF investment in his statement above. Because if I didn't know any better I would think he had placed the benefits to Port Glasgow before the benefits to the pension money (which he should be investing wisely to give the pensioners a good return on their money).

It becomes a little bit more suspicious when he goes on to gush that "The expansion of the retail park will not only be welcomed by local shoppers, it will boost employment and keep more money in the local economy."

Perhaps I'm overthinking this and worrying about nothing but let's look a bit closer at this...

Councillor Philip Braat is a labour councillor. Surely he wouldn't be over generously throwing a few quid of other peoples pension money over to the Port Glasgow area to help boost a fellow labour councillor in a labour area would he? That would, in effect, be saying something like hey, look what a great job your local councillor is doing for you here in Port Glasgow - vote our party back in at the next election please.

Hmmmm. Well, I just checked, and deary, deary me. Turns out the leader of Inverclyde council is a gentleman by the name of Stephen McCabe...and he's a labour councillor (see here).

What an amazing co-incidence. Who'd have thunk it.

Mr McCabe is also quoted as saying that "it is a very welcome show of confidence in Inverclyde and Port Glasgow as retail locations."

Perhaps he should have added " a fellow labour councillor using pensioners money".

Hmmm. Move along now, nothing to see here.

Wednesday 14 December 2016

Police Won't Lift A Finger To Help The Public

The Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC) have launched an investigation in to the way police responded to reports of concern about a man's welfare in Glasgow (article here). They are also investigating in to another recent police response to the death of a woman in St Andrews too (article here)

As yet we don't know what happened in either of these cases, nor do we know the circumstances (and we won't know until the investigations have been completed).

But that's not the focus of this particular blog post.

The problem with these stories and the PIRC investigations is that these are not isolated incidents. The PIRC are increasingly having to investigate in to police failings when it comes to responding to the public. It's almost becoming daily news now.

So what's the problem?

Why are our police so unwilling to help the public these days?


Police Scotland have developed a 'jobsworth' culture in which they will only respond to situations which involve crime. If it doesn't involve some sort of criminality, they don't want to know. "Not my problem guv', I'm just here to arrest criminals" and all that kinda stuff. They are no longer willing to help the public and it's a national disgrace.

Those of us of a certain age will fondly remember when the police used to be polite, helpful, respectful and responsive to the public. Ah the good old days. Back then, police saw their role as being there to help, support, and protect the they would put the bad guys away for us too.

But today untrustworthy Police Scotland are only interested in arresting as many members of the public as possible - because lots of arrests mean they can 'claim' they are doing a good job.

Helping, supporting, and protecting the public doesn't add to their figures.

So...if you find yourself collapsing in the street with a heart attack, don't expect anyone in untrustworthy Police Scotland to lift a finger to help you.

Unless your heart attack takes place when your TV licence is overdue for renewal. Oh yeah, they'll soon step in to 'assist' then.

But they're more likely to handcuff you to the defibrillator than use it to save your life.

Monday 12 December 2016

Police Failings Let Serial Killers And Rapists Walk Free

POLICE Scotland have serious flaws in their crime reporting system which is helping to create situations where opportunities are being missed for police to catch serial killers and rapists.

And it's not me who's saying this.

The warning comes from one of Police Scotland's top officers, Chief Superintendent Gill Imery.

An investigation has revealed that the number of officers who are failing to record crimes within the stipulated 72 hours period is rapidly on the increase. Just 83.9% of sexual crimes - a large number of which involve children - are recorded within 72 hours, in essence, preventing detectives from being able to link serious crimes and causing dangerous offenders being at large for longer than necessary.

A big public thank you must go out to CS Imery for bringing this to our attention.

However her colleague, Deputy Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick, on the other hand says that "incident and crime recording complies with the Scottish Crime Recording Standards" and that "we have effective processes in place to record information about crimes and incidents so that we can deliver the right service to individuals and communities".

Hmm. So, two very high ranking Police Scotland officers with very different views.

Which one should we believe? Chief Superintendent Gill Emery or Deputy Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick?

Take your pick, it doesn't really matter.

Because we all know which one will get further promotion after these comments - and which one's career has just hit the skids for what she has just revealed...

Friday 9 December 2016

Police Scotland Should Be Scrapped - So Say Police Scotland!

You could be forgiven for thinking that I and my fellow campaigners are a small bunch of lone voices in the wilderness who are alone and isolated in our calls for Police Scotland to be disbanded and rebuilt from scratch.

But we're not.

Even police officers themselves (or to be exact, the few honest and fine upstanding officers who are still left in Police Scotland) agree that the force is not fit for purpose and should be disbanded.

More than a dozen officers and former officers from north and north-east Scotland have signed a petition - set up by James Montgomery - calling for the failed project that we call Police Scotland should be scrapped.

It's good to know that there are a few good, decent, honest coppers out there who recognise that public confidence in police is at an all-time low and that serious steps are needed to save Police Scotland from imploding and descending in to farce (if it hasn't already).

But astonishingly, instead of the top brass at Police Scotland listening to the genuine concerns from their very own officers - perhaps even thanking them for bringing these crucial issues to their attention - Phil 'Gormless' and his high-hied-yins are warning that the officers will face disciplinary action for speaking out!

You couldn't make it up.

One Police Scotland worker from Aberdeen is quoted as saying "The single force is not working. Many of my colleagues are losing their jobs and those that are left are doing the work of four or five. It wasn’t thought out correctly and rushed through."

Another says "I left Grampian Police before the amalgamation as I could see the writing on the wall. Having worked in other industries before and since I can hand on heart say had they not created one force I would still be in the job now."

An officer from Bonnyrigg, Midlothian is quoted as saying "Police Scotland, worst decision ever. Used to love my job, not anymore. Bring back Lothian and Borders."

Yet another has called Police Scotland "disgraceful" and an "utter shambles".

A constable from Newton Stewart, Dumfries and Galloway, says "I’m a serving police officer and feel our community is not receiving the care/support it used to have with legacy forces."

Another says "I am a police officer under increasing pressure from an organisation that is failing on a daily basis."

One former Lothian and Borders officer who served the force for 28 years said: "Former colleagues now cannot believe how much things have changed and are constantly working against the tide, embarrassed to be part of a monster that is simply too big and not functioning. Please reinstate the former forces."

Another ex-Lothian and Borders employee now living in Drumnadrochit, Highlands, wrote: "I have seen the disgraceful slide of efficiency into the utter shambles that is Police Scotland and the broken morale of the longer serving officers who actually knew their job."

And Police Scotland's response to their concerns?

Discipline them. Show them who's the boss, put them back in their place, and make an example of them so that no other officers will dare try to criticise Police Scotland ever again.

These whistle-blowing officers now know what we, the public, have had to put up with from Police Scotland for years.

When we, the public, dare to criticise untrustworthy Police Scotland, vindictive and corrupt Police Scotland hunt us down like dogs in the night and target us for doing it.

When good, honest, and decent Police Scotland officers themselves dare to stand up and criticise Police Scotland, they get thrown out the door quicker than you can say "illegal spying".

And the top brass sit and wonder why the public have no confidence in untrustworthy Police Scotland and don't want to help them.


Tuesday 6 December 2016

Disgusting Glasgow City Council Conning Pensioners

If you are a pensioner living in Glasgow and you are over 80 years old you can apply to Glasgow City Council for what's known as the "Affordable Warmth Dividend".

Basically it's a £100 payment the council give to pensioners over 80 to help them with their winter heating bills to hopefully stop many of our old folks getting hypothermia during our harsh Scottish winters.

Charity organisations say that many pensioners - especially older pensioners in their 80's - find themselves having to choose between eating and putting the fire on to keep warm during the winter so the £100 Affordable Warmth Dividend from Glasgow City Council is an absolute God-send to these poor pensioners.

So, Glasgow City Council should be applauded for this wonderful and kind act of generosity to our old folks, right?

Eh, well, not quite.

Because there's a catch (good old Glasgow City Council, there's always a catch to everything they do eh)!

You see the application form that the old folks needed to fill in to apply for the 'Affordable Warmth Dividend' last year told them where to return the completed form to. But the letter they received this year asking them if they would like to apply for it again does NOT say where it should be returned to.

In fact it doesn't even tell them to return the form (and if they don't return they don't get the £100).

So picture the scene. A pensioner in his or her 80’s receives a letter from Glasgow City Council asking if they would like the £100 Affordable Warmth Dividend again, and if so, they should complete the section on the back of the letter.


They are not told to return the form.

They are not given any address or indication where the form should be returned to.

There isn't even an addressed envelope enclosed for them.


So the pensioners (and remember we're talking about people in their 80's) are expected to:

- Guess that the form should be sent back to Glasgow City Council.

- Guess where it should be sent back to.

- Go out and buy an envelope.

- Go out and buy a stamp.

Oh yes, certainly, there is an address on the letterhead which has the usual generic Glasgow City Council address on it but that address is just a PO box and not labeled to any department in particular so gives no indication that this is where the form should be sent back to.

So why would Glasgow City Council offer our oldest, poorest, and most vulnerable pensioners £100 to help heat their homes and keep them warm in the winter but then stack a host of obstacles in front of them and make them leap over hurdles to get it?

Oh that’s an easy one.

Glasgow City Council don’t really want to give £100 to pensioners in their 80's to keep them warm in the winter.

Glasgow City Council only want to give the illusion that they are giving pensioners in their 80's £100 to keep them warm in the winter.

Here’s how it works.

Councillors need to be re-elected to keep their power and their cushy jobs and all the lovely wee “extras” that comes with being an elected official ;-)

When it comes to election time, they need to be able to stand up and tell you, the voter, what wonderful people they are and how they gave our poor pensioners money to help keep them warm in the harsh Scottish winter.

Yes folks, our hearts are supposed to melt at the sheer generosity of these wonderful elected officials who care so much for our grannies and grandpa's (hey councillor, watch that halo doesn’t slip and choke you).

But what they don’t tell you is that the council is facing unprecedented budget cuts and they really don’t want to be giving anyone £100 if they can possibly avoid it.

So they purposely make it difficult and confusing for the poor and vulnerable old folks to claim the £100 in the hope that many won't do it.

See how it all works now?

The councillors get to make themselves out to be heroes who are doing wonderful things but in fact are doing very little or nothing.

Politics eh!

And as per usual, when they read this post and realise they've been found out, you can guarantee that their PR department will go in to overdrive. They will, no doubt, shriek in mock horror and profuse that they honestly didn’t realise the form didn’t tell the old folks to return it, they didn’t realise the form didn't tell them where to return it to, they didn’t realise there was no return envelope enclosed, and it was all just an innocent and unfortunate error...and they'll apologise for it.

Job done.

But in reality, all our councillors ever apologise for is getting caught out.

Glasgow Crooked City Council has been a hotbed of corruption for as long as I’ve lived in this great city. We all know that their corruption will continue no matter which political party leads the council - it’s too engrained in their culture to change any time soon.

But come on folks, trying to con pensioners in their 80’s - the poorest and most vulnerable in our society - out of warmth for their homes in the winter just so they can make themselves look good and get re-elected has to be a step too far.

This is a seriously new low - even for Glasgow City Council.

Friday 2 December 2016

Sir Stephen House's Atrocious Legacy

They say history will judge you.

In 2013 the former Scottish Chief Constable Sir Stephen ‘I’ve got an ego as big as a’ House was responsible for a series of raids by police on Edinburgh saunas.

This halfwit and abomination of a man stood on his high horse and, like all jobsworths of his ilk, proclaimed "The law is the law" and ordered his officers to target the saunas.

As far as Stephen House was concerned, these saunas were merely fronts for prostitution and police had turned a blind-eye to their going-ons for far too long in his book.

But what the idiot Stephen House didn't bother to do first was look in to WHY police and prosecutors in Edinburgh had turned a blind-eye to the saunas and their prostitution for so long.

If he had, he would have realised that there had been an alarming rise in HIV and Aids in the city so a policy of turning a blind-eye to prostitution in Edinburgh saunas was actually a conscious and official attempt to try to minimise the impact of HIV and Aids in the city.

It was an essential public health issue.

Saunas were (rightly) deemed to be far better and safer places for the girls to work than being on the street. Saunas were providing workers with condoms and critical health advice so for important public health reasons, they were allowed to operate without interference from police.

Even the local Procurator Fiscal in Edinburgh knew that the local authority, health bodies and officers of Lothian and Borders Police were working closely together to further these vital public health measures. He purposely turned a blind-eye to cases that fell on his desk and refused to prosecute many of them (and rightly so).

However Sir Stephen House and his big one-size-fits-all failed Police Scotland project had NO local knowledge of the critical public health situation in he told his officers to go raid the saunas and lock 'em all up. The law is the law and all that etc.

So, not only was Sir Stephen House an idiot, but a dangerous one at that.

Look folks, none of us are comfortable with the subject of prostitution. But let's be grown up about it here. They don't call prostitution 'the oldest profession in the world' for nothing. So whether we like it for not, prostitution is here to stay. The police, the crown office, and the courts have and always will fail to change this sad fact of life and it takes no stretch of the imagination to suspect there's more than a few members of our police, crown office and courts who probably even use these services themselves.

But if police, the Crown office and the courts want to claim that they work in the public interest (as they do), then they need to do what's best for the public here.

And in the interests of public safety and public health, the old Procurator Fiscal in Edinburgh's decision that saving lives and protecting the publics health (plus the safety of the girls who work in this profession) was the right decision.

Sir Stephen House and his politically correct brigade chose, on the other hand, to take the moral high ground at the expense of peoples lives. He was wrong. Plain and simple.

I'm sorry, but the protection of human life exceeds all else in my book.

In a very short space of time, history has already judged Sir Stephen House as the most arrogant, most corrupt and worst Chief Constable this country has ever seen.

The news of how he played around with peoples lives and endangered the health of the public just adds to his atrocious legacy.

Let's hope and pray that the failed project which is Police Scotland can be dissolved some day soon and a proper fit-for-purpose, honest police service put in its place.

And if by some stroke of bad luck our new police service still ends up lumbered with a few left-over cronies and jobsworths from the bad old Sir Stephen House days, at the very least let's make sure we give them a little bit of schooling in the ancient art of common sense.

Wednesday 30 November 2016

Hey COPFS, Why The Secrecy?

This is the slightly strange news that Police Scotland - on instructions from the COPFS - have started secret inquiries in to the Royal Bank of Scotland asset stripping scandal.

Now there's nothing strange about the Crown office instructing Police Scotland to investigate in to something. That's their job, that's what they do.

The strange thing is that the investigation is secret.

Very strange.

Could it be that the corrupt Crown office have already decided the outcome of the investigation before police have even started the investigation?

Because I reported some time ago how the Crown office have already squandered an unknown amount of public money investigating RBS - estimated to run in to £millions, they refuse to tell us exactly how much - only to conclude that none of the bankers at RBS who we, the taxpayers, bailed out to the tune of £43 Billion did anything criminally wrong in 2008 (see article here).

We also know that the Crown office never admit they're wrong and stick like glue to bad decisions they make even when they know they are wrong and it has harmed or even killed innocent members of the public (Lockerbie, Emma Caldwell, Glasgow bin lorry anyone)?

So it's more than fair for us to conclude that the reason the police probe in to RBS is being kept secret is because the COPFS have already decided the outcome of the investigation, no matter what police find.

We know for a fact that the Crown office have already thrown at least £3 Million at so-called financial experts for those 'experts' to then reveal that there was nothing wrong with the way RBS acted in 2008 and no one should be prosecuted (see article here).

And let's face it, it would be very embarrassing for the Crown office if it turned out that they had got it all wrong, messed up the original investigation in to RBS, and wasted millions of our money while doing it.

The corrupt Crown office are very skilled at "investigate but do nothing". Very skilled. It's the most famous trick in their book and the oldest. They use it all the time when they need to deflect criticism from themselves. The idea is that they will always point to the so-called 'investigation' and claim that it has been 'thoroughly' investigated and conclude that it's 'not in the public interest to prosecute' or there is 'insufficient evidence in law' to prosecute (take your pick - it always comes down to one of those two magical phrases).

A secret investigation makes it even easier for the corrupt Crown office to bury the results of a sham investigation and hide it from public scrutiny.

Tuesday 29 November 2016

Viva Scotland

The situation in the middle-east between the Israelis and the Palestinians is decades (in fact centuries) old and, quite frankly, it's unlikely to be resolved any time soon.

I don't have any particular opinions on the Israeli-Palestinian problem and I don't support one side or the other. Instead, I tend to be of the opinion that we in the West should keep our noses out of the middle-east altogether as our involvement there has caused more harm than helped this tragic region (Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia, Syria anyone)?

However I do understand that the middle-east is a thorny issue issue which produces very emotive and explosive opinions from those on both sides of the barrier. Most people I speak to have genuine heart-felt opinions on the Israel/Palestine issue and I believe that in a free and fair democratic country like Scotland each person has a right to voice their opinion.

Alister Coutts is 56 years old and he happens to be a supporter of the Palestinian side of the argument. Fair enough, that's his opinion and he has a right to hold it and freely express it.

At a recent rally/protest in Aberdeen, he chanted "Viva Palestine"...and was arrested!

Yes, that's right, Police Scotland and the Crown office have decided that Alister having a political opinion and freely and peacefully expressing it here in Scotland constitutes a crime.

A policeman ordered Andrew to leave the shopping mall in Aberdeen where he was peacefully protesting. Being a good citizen and not wanting to cause any trouble, Andrew did exactly as the policeman ordered. But as soon as he stepped outside the mall he was handcuffed, held for seven hours, and charged.

At first glance, it all seems very strange. After all, the police and the Crown office are supposed to be non-political. The right to peaceful protest is not only perfectly legal in Scotland but is the absolute cornerstone of our democracy and should be encouraged.

So why would Police Scotland and the Crown office act in such a clearly politically biased and dictatorial manner? After all they have no legal right or mandate to act in such a political way. They cannot just arrest members of the Scottish public for their political beliefs.

Well, a Freedom of Information request made to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in Edinburgh may just have revealed the murky answer.

The FOI reveals the disclosure of a host of secret email exchanges between the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal service and Zionist organisations. It turns out there exists what has been described as a very 'cosy relationship' between the COPFS and the pro-Israel lobby in Scotland.

So Police Scotland and the COPFS have now made it clear to the Scottish public that:

1. Police Scotland will arrest you if you express a political opinion that they and their friends don't agree with.

2. The Crown office will prosecute you if you express a political opinion that is different from the one that they and their friends hold.


Absolutely astounding.

Here's something else you may not be aware of which makes this whole situation even more bizarre and, quite frankly, very worrying.

Many readers of a similar age to me (i.e. the over 50's) may remember an old 1970's song by Sylvia called "Y Viva Espana". Many of you will have, I'm sure, happy memories of those package holidays to the Spanish Costas back in the seventies where you probably belted out the song "Y Viva Espana" at the top of your voice with a San Miguel in one hand and a jug of Sangria in the other. Admit it, some of you probably had a toy donkey under your arm and a sombrero on your head at the time too!

"Viva Espana" translates to "long life to Spain". Nothing wrong with that. Wishing a long life is rather a nice sentiment to wish to anyone or sing to anyone.

The song "Y Viva Espana" was the most popular holiday song of 1974 and even made it to number 4 in the UK hit parade (the 'hit parade' is what we used to call the singles charts back in those days in case you young 'uns don't know what I'm talking about by the way).

Hey, I even remember the lovely Sylvia singing "Y Viva Espana" live on Top Of The Pops at the time (by the way, "Y" simply translates to "and" so the "Y" bit in "Y Viva Espana" just means "and long life to Spain", just in case you were wondering).

Here's the important bit though.

You see by singing "Viva Espana" and wishing long life to Spain, the seventies singer Sylvia was most certainly not wishing, by default, a short life or harm to everyone else who isn't Spanish. That would just be ridiculous. It's a line from a song, it's a simple phrase, it means what it means and it is what it is.

Yet untrustworthy Police Scotland and the corrupt Crown office are trying to claim in Alister Coutts case that because Alister wished a long life to Palestine he was also wishing, by default, a short life or harm to everyone else who is not Palestinian.

It's a total nonsense.

In another interesting similarity to Alister's case, Sylvia Vrethammar, the singer of the song "Y Viva Espana" is actually Swedish, she's not Spanish (and the song was written by a pair of Dutch songwriters).

So the person who sung and proclaimed "Long life to Spain" isn't Spanish, just the same as Andrew who chanted "Long life to Palestine" isn't Palestinian.

Go work it out Police Scotland!

And as if that wasn't enough, in yet another related snippet of historical information and fact about the phrase "Y Viva Espana", we find that it was actually adopted by the dictator and Spanish ruler General Franco.

Like most dictators, Franco ruled Spain with an iron fist and executed thousands of his political opponents. Not a nice guy by any means.

Many Spaniards still feel the phrase "Y Viva Espana" evokes connotations of the bad old days where you could be jailed or killed by Franco's police for your political views. Other Spaniards feel different of course and yearn for the old days of Franco-ism where you could leave your front door open and nobody would steal anything from your house. Yip, like all political issues, people have political opinions on both sides.

But the most important thing to take from this here is that Spain no longer has a dictator! Spain is now a democracy and has been for the last 30-odd years.

You are perfectly free to chant, shout or sing "Y Viva Espana" in Spain if you so wish. You will not be arrested for it. Whereas here in Scotland...

Untrustworthy Police Scotland and the corrupt COPFS need to get a grip.

Look, I'm Scottish and I love the Scottish people. I wish all my fellow Scots a long and happy life. I hope our great country of Scotland has a long and happy life span and continues to prosper forever.

So today, on this blog, I say, "Viva Scotland" - I wish a long life to Scotland.

And be assured that when I say "Viva Scotland", it doesn't mean that I wish everyone who is not Scottish and every country which is not Scotland a short life or any harm.

However I do realise that according to untrustworthy Police Scotland and the corrupt Crown office, I now risk being arrested for my patriotism.

So I have an important message for Police Scotland:

"If you are coming to arrest me for wishing the Scottish people well in this post today, can you make it a mid-week day please - I'm a bit fed up with you purposely arresting innocent members of the Scottish public on a Friday so that you can hold them in a custody cell all weekend till the courts open on the Monday. PS I'll wait in for you..."

Saturday 26 November 2016

77,670 Calls To Police Abandoned IN A YEAR!

When you phone the police you expect them to at least answer don't you?

Well, a Freedom Of Information request by Heart FM has revealed that in a one year period, 77,670 telephone calls to Police Scotland resulted in the callers abandoning their call and hanging up - no doubt in sheer frustration that their calls were being ignored by police.

In the same month Police Scotland came under fire for failing to respond to a member of the publics call about the M9 car crash that killed John Yuill and Lamara Bell, one caller waited 16 minutes before police eventually answered his call.

I'm sorry folks but the 'sorry, we were busy' excuse just doesn't wash.

When a member of the public calls the police - no matter whether it's via the 101 or the 999 numbers - they expect to be put through to the police, no excuses. End of.

Scottish Labour justice spokeswoman Claire Baker said: "Everyone wants to feel safe in their own community yet when that safety is challenged it is vital that the public have the confidence in their local police to respond. That confidence is being lost."

So ok, now that it's all out in the open and the truth about police and their failures to answer calls from the public has been exposed for all to see in plain hard facts and figures, have Police Scotland apologised for their dangerously inefficient and sloppy service?

Have they apologised to the 77,670 members of the public who tried to get through to them but ended up having to abandon their calls (slamming their phone down in frustration no doubt)?

Don't be silly - this is untrustworthy Police Scotland we're talking about here!

Instead of apologising, Assistant Chief Constable John Hawkins has said: "It is misleading and inaccurate to suggest that in excess of 77,000 non-emergency calls are 'unanswered' by Police Scotland."

He goes on to add "Calls referred to as 'abandoned' are defined as a call where the caller has disconnected without speaking to an advisor. This is not a suggestion that calls are routinely being unanswered but rather that the caller has chosen to disconnect the call."

Thanks for that explanation John.

I'm sure we'll all sleep safer in our beds tonight now that we know that those 77,670 unanswered calls which members of the public tried to make to you and your officers weren't really calls from the public to you and your officers and the calls didn't really go unanswered.

When I was a boy my parents always told me "If you want to know the time, just ask a policeman."

Perhaps those 77,670 members of the public were simply phoning you to ask the time?

Perhaps they thought they were calling the 'speaking clock'?

One thing's for certain.

You and your buddies at untrustworthy Police Scotland didn't give them the time of day.

Wednesday 23 November 2016

Chief Inspector Gary Ogilvie - The Arrogant Dictator

The residents of Ryehill and their West End community council are not too happy with Police Scotland's plans to close their local police station. In fact over 200 people have signed a petition asking for the station to remain open.

As the one-size-fits-all Police Scotland charges ahead with its flawed and failing agenda of centralising everything to do with law enforcement in Scotland - at the expense of local community policing with local officers who have local knowledge - the residents have a right to be upset and concerned.

Police should listen to the community's concerns. They have a perfect right to say how they feel about how Police Scotland are spending our money. And just in case you've forgotten, Police Scotland use our money for their resources - remember, we employ them.

However Police Scotland seem hell-bent on shutting down the local Ryehill station regardless.

No surprise there - local station closures has been Police Scotland's agenda since day one. After all, that's what the centralised Police Scotland project has always been about and everyone knows it.

But what is absolutely astonishing has been the response from Chief Inspector Gary Ogilvie to the members of the public in the community council who have voiced their concerns.

CI Ogilvie has said that "The force would not be 'dictated to" by the community council.




How dare he!

I have an important message for Chief Inspector Gary Ogilvie.

Listen up Ogilvie, you arrogant jobsworth. You will, I repeat WILL be dictated to by the public and that includes members of the public on the West End community council. In fact you WILL be dictated to by every member of the Scottish public who pays your generous Chief Inspectors salary and your over-generous early retirement pension.

You will do as we say, not the other way around.

And if you don't like it, remember that we, the public, only allow you to work for us at our convenience, not yours. You can be replaced very easily and don't you forget it.

Know your place Ogilvie. Apologise to the Scottish public NOW for your comments.

And if no-one at the Scottish Parliament, or the council, or Police Scotland is willing to meet with you face to face and put you firmly in your place (which, by the way, is firmly beneath the public, not above us) then set up a meeting with me.

I'll tell you.

And I will not mince my words.

Tuesday 22 November 2016

Top QC Blasts Crown Office Decision Making

The Crown office are corrupt. Every day, up and down Scotland, they attempt to prosecute innocent members of the public even when they know them to be innocent.

At the very same time, they refuse to prosecute their friends and connections.

Wanna complain about it? You can't. Because they, and they alone, decide who sees the inside of a court room and who doesn't.

Their decision to prosecute or not to prosecute a case are based on two fatally flawed 'tests':

a) Is it in the public interest to prosecute?

b) Is there a sufficiency of evidence in law to prosecute?

It's no co-incidence that these two so-called 'tests' are purely subjective. They are nothing but opinions. And that's exactly the way the corrupt Crown office like it - because you can't argue against someone's opinion.

Their answer will always be "I know you don't agree with what we have decided, but that's our opinion". End of.

Clever eh.

If you don't like the Crown office's opinion there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Zilch. If they decide that it's "not in the public interest" to prosecute or that there is "insufficient evidence in law" to prosecute, you're stuffed.

You can't argue with an opinion.

Just think for a moment how the families of the Glasgow bin lorry tragedy feel today. The bin lorry driver has never been held accountable for his actions. Do you believe it to be in the public interest that he should stand trial? I do. Do you believe there is enough evidence that he lied to the DVLA so should not have been driving that day that he should stand trial? I do.

So does the overwhelming majority of the Scottish public.

But the Crown office don't. So that's where it ends.

Let's be clear here, this isn't some sort of vigilante style witch-hunt we're talking about here. No one is asking for the bin lorry driver to be thrown in jail. All the Scottish public are asking for is that the Crown office allow it go to court - and the court will then decide whether he has committed a crime or not (and we, the Scottish public will accept and abide by the courts decision whichever way the court may decide).

It's called justice.

But the corrupt Crown office refuse to allow the families justice.

They continue to hide behind their 'opinions' based on their flawed 'tests' which they know they can spin any way they want, any time they want, to suit any case they want.

I have said from day one that I believe the Crown office, Police Scotland, and the Health & Safety Executive conspired to prevent the bin lorry driver facing trial in order to protect their friends and connections in Glasgow Crooked City Council being sued by the families of the victims (the bin lorry driver was driving for GCC at the time of the incident).

Glasgow City Council have been facing serious budget cuts for many years so the prospect of the families of six dead victims suing them for millions is not something GCC welcomed. So a deal was done - and that deal was done within hours of the tragedy happening. It's common knowledge that the very next day after the tragedy the Crown office, police, and the HSE (who GCC legislate for) all got together and agreed that this should be treated as a traffic incident rather than a Health & Safety incident (therefore letting GCC off the hook and leaving the families with no recourse against GCC for employing the driver).

To this day, the corrupt Crown office are still trying (unsuccessfully I might add) to convince the Scottish public that they knew ALL the facts about the incident just hours after the incident happened. It's a nonsense of course. Procurator Fiscal David Green was still clueless to facts about this terrible tragedy WEEKS after it happened (as he clearly showed during a disastrous meeting with the families and their lawyers)!

There is no doubt that the Glasgow bin lorry tragedy marked a very special mile-stone for me and my crusade for justice against the corrupt Crown office.

You see, that was the time that I finally realised that my 'little' case and complaint against the corrupt Crown office paled in to insignificance compared to the tragic devastating loss of life and issues with the Crown office that these families faced with their case.

And in what I can only describe as one of those 'aha' moments, I realised that if the bin lorry families were unable to get justice from this motley crew at the corrupt Crown office, then I would have absolutely NO chance of getting any kind of justice from them for my (by comparison) insignificant little case.

That was the day that this blog really took off in earnest.

I stopped wasting my time and energy struggling in an uphill fight to sue the Crown office over my case and then started to use that time and energy to fight the Crown office on behalf of ALL the Scottish public in ALL cases in which they act corruptly.

So it's no surprise to me when I heard recently that one of Scotland's top QC's, Gordon Jackson has stated that the independence of Scotland's prosecution service is being "eroded".

He says that "In the real world, any Lord Advocate will be aware of others, press and politicians, looking over his shoulder. To ignore that would be naive". 

He then goes on to say that he believes "correct decisions are not made" and that "the balance is wrong."

I couldn't agree more.

I was wrongly arrested and wrongly prosecuted in order to fulfil political aims, ambitions, and press headlines which the Crown office and their police colleagues had aimed to achieve at that particular time (the upcoming Glasgow Commonwealth Games being one of them).

The fact that I was innocent and had done nothing wrong - nothing, not a single thing - was totally unimportant to them.

That's wrong, so very, very wrong.

Thank goodness I defeated them. That's right folks, I took on the might of the crown office and my false accuser in a court of law and I won.

The issue here is that I should never had had to do it. I should never have had to fight to prove my innocence in a court when the Crown office had all that evidence of my innocence in their hands (which, by the way, corrupt Procurator Fiscal Calum Forsyth tried to illegally withhold from the defence in order to stop the court hearing the truth). Disgraceful and shameful behaviour on their part. Procurator Fiscal Calum Forsyth should in jail for what attempted to do.

Gordon Jackson QC goes on to say that "It needs to be stressed that the prosecutor is NOT the victim's lawyer, but an independent prosecutor in the public interest. I know everyone pays lip service to this principle but I also believe it, too, are being eroded in practice."

How true.

My false accuser insisted that the Crown office attempt to prosecute me even though she knew she was lying. The Crown office knew she was lying too. They had all the evidence in their possession, they knew I was innocent (they had her sworn statement full of provable lies, a number of other witness statements showing a time-line of events that just didn't fit, the transcript from my mobile phone which proved she was the abuser, not me - you couldn't make it up as they say).

You would think with top lawyers all over Scotland telling the corrupt Crown office that they need to change their ways that the COPFS would sit up and take notice.

But no.

Predictably, Lord Advocate James 'the big bad' Wolffe responded by trotting out his usual silly soundbites saying how he has the "utmost confidence" in prosecutors and that Scotland had "good reason to be proud of its public prosecution service".

He then completed his medley of nonsense (that no one except him and the COPFS believe) with such gems such as how Scotland has "skilled and dedicated prosecutors" and how he has "the utmost confidence in them and so should everyone who lives in Scotland".

His most hilarious one though was when he said "There is no inconsistency between respecting the rights and interests of victims of crime and exercising the independence which is inherent in prosecuting in the public interest."

What an absolute load of old tosh.

What planet does this idiot live on?

Saturday 19 November 2016

Is This Really The Type Of Procurator Fiscal We Want?

My biggest fear has always been that many of the corrupt Procurator Fiscals who work in the Crown office today will eventually become Sheriffs and Judges tomorrow.

At the moment, Judges and Sheriffs are the only people who can stand up to and block these corrupt charlatans from the Crown office. Judges and Sheriffs throw COPFS cases out of their courts up and down Scotland every day in life, and thank God they do.

But there is an inevitability that tomorrows Judges will be chosen from todays corrupt Crown office PF's and that's worrying.

Very worrying.

We could avoid this catastrophe happening if we could clean up the Crown office right now. I've certainly been campaigning tirelessly for that to happen. But what if it proves to be too little too late?

We already have a whole generation of corrupt judges in the making sitting in the Crown office right now who sorely need weeding. But the cull will probably never happen.

That's a very depressing situation for the Scottish public and for Scottish justice.

If I'm correct and the current crop of bent fiscals are too engrained in to the Crown office and have been allowed to become too powerful to be routed out, then the next best thing we can do is try to stop the rot wherever we can.

We need to stop new fiscals who enter the Crown office from being mislead in to following the poor examples set by their superiors. We must prevent these new fiscals who come through the door from becoming as corrupt as their predecessors.

So what types of fiscals are being attracted in to the Crown office these days?

What types of law students of today are gearing up to become our next generation of prosecutors (and eventually our future judges)?

Well, LawScot have published an article about one particular student, Carol Doherty.

Ten years ago she started at COPFS as a temporary Fiscal Officer and is now a part-time LLB student starting her 4th year at Edinburgh Napier University.

Carol says "Never give up on your dream, no matter your age or background. I actually can see myself working within the High Courts of Scotland dealing with very different and complex cases"

That's quite an ambition.

But what is it that drives her ambition to do so well in the Crown office?

A desire to work for the public good?

A wish to get bad guys off our streets?

A need to help, support, and protect the Scottish public?

Mmmm, well, not quite.

Carol states (and I'm not making this up - it's a direct quote from her) that:

" main reason for choosing a career in law was to provide a very secure lifestyle for myself and my daughter – and hopefully to prove to her and others that you can enter back into education at any stage in your life and be successful. (But I have to admit a nice big house,  a few holidays a year, a house abroad and my dream car are also reasons for wanting to become a lawyer)".

Not a single mention of her doing it for the good of the public. Not one.


So, it looks like the ten years she's been working in the Crown office has already shaped her attitude. Perhaps then it's not surprising that she's all set to fit in very nicely thank you very much with the rest of the motley crew at the COPFS when she qualifies and gets her degree.

Sadly, the future for Scottish justice and the Scottish public has just taken yet another bash.

Tuesday 15 November 2016

Top Legal Experts All Claim COPFS Is A Mess

I have already stated in a previous post that the Holyrood justice committee's current inquiry and investigation in to the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service is unlikely to make any difference whatsoever to the way this corrupt, inefficient, and incompetent motley crew of rogues run themselves.

And now it's not only me who's calling their investigation a waste of time.

A host of top Scottish lawyers are saying so too, many of whom have come out and said it publicly (which is unusual, perhaps even unprecedented, but never the less, very, very welcome):

- The Faculty of Advocates have expressed concerns about the "decision-making processes" of a "struggling" prosecution service. Roughly translated, the COPFS pursue stupid non-winnable cases where people are quite obviously innocent (like in my case) yet won't pursue other cases where it's as plain as the nose on your face that there has been obvious wrong-doing (like in the Glasgow bin lorry tragedy).

- Brian McConnachie QC, a former senior prosecutor at Crown Office, has said: "there are cases that are not being properly prepared, cases having to be put off on numerous occasions because COPFS has had trouble finding witnesses or providing full disclosure to the defence."

- Advocate Niall McCluskey says "There are huge delays in fixing high court trials as the court service doesn’t seem to have enough resources, while on the defence side, legal aid is also under-resourced"

- Gordon Jackson QC has said "the decision-making processes are not as good as they once were".

That's pretty damning conclusions from some very top people who are right up there in the know.

But, as you would expect, the corrupt Crown office see it a wee bit differently (surprise, surprise).

In yet another of their bizarre 'the emperor has no clothes' scenarios, a spokesman for the Crown Office said it looked forward to:

"working with the committee" to highlight COPFS "strong track record in prosecuting crime in Scotland".

Someone at the Crown office is having a laugh surely.

I'm reminded of the Monty Python movie where the Black Knight has his limbs chopped off one by one yet still maintains "it's only a flesh wound". This describes EXACTLY how the Procurator Fiscals in the Crown office see themselves.

I'll leave the final word to Brian McConnachie QC who, in his analysis of the Crown office's situation, states that the current investigation in to the Crown office will likely prove to be little more than a "long involved talking shop with very little impact".

Well said Brian.

Unfortunately for the Scottish public, you just know that even after this investigation it will still end up being business as usual at the corrupt, incompetent, totally blinkered, and unflinching Crown office.

Saturday 12 November 2016

Police Illegally Using Spit Hoods

Police have a new weapon in their arsenal for restraining innocent members of the public.

They are called 'Spit Hoods' and as the name suggests, they are hoods which they put over the innocent member of the public's head to prevent him or her 'spitting' at the police officer(s) trying to restrain them.

I say 'innocent' members of the public because we often forget that in this country members of the public are innocent until proved guilty - a fact that police tend to gloss over and ignore with alarming regularity.

I'm a member of Liberty and their campaign group director Martha Spurrier has described the spit hoods as "primitive, cruel and degrading tools that inspire fear and anguish belong in horror stories".

She is correct.

However many people, including I have to say myself, will have a little bit of sympathy with the police here regarding this particular issue. No one, and I mean no one, takes kindly to being spat at. It's a disgusting thing to do to anyone at any time never mind a police officer or anyone else simply going about the business of doing their job.

If someone spat at me I would react and take counter measures to protect myself so police are no different.

But as is usual with police, there's always another more sinister angle to what they do.

If the spit hoods were only being used for neds who want to throw a gob at their local plod because he's spoiled their Saturday night by trying to 'lift' them, that would be one thing.

But as Martha from Liberty adds, "We have seen many cases where the police use them unnecessarily and without justification, including on children and disabled people".

Yes folks, you read that correctly.

Police are quite happy to use these hoods on innocent children and disabled people.

And that's a disgrace.

The problem with police is, has, and always will be, that they always take things too far.

Every time they get a new law with a new power, they abuse that power.

Every time they are given a privilege they abuse that privilege.


No one likes to be spat at, but police already have extensive powers to use force against citizens including tasers, handcuffs, arm restraints, leg restraints, pepper spray, and batons. Police abuse every one of these methods of restraint every single day in life.

So these spit hoods are merely another instrument of abuse that police have used and will use against innocent members of the public when it's not appropriate to do so. Guaranteed.

They always do.

Wednesday 9 November 2016

Public In Fife have No Confidence In Police

Police Scotland recently asked the public to rate the level of confidence they had in police responding to their concerns.

And the good people in the wonderful Kingdom of Fife gave them a clear answer.

More than 40% of Fifers told them in no uncertain terms that their confidence in police is either 'low' or 'very low'.

Only 28% said they had high or very high expectations of Police Scotland.

This is absolutely damning for Police Scotland and completely confirms why this blog is absolutely correct in constantly referring to Police Scotland in every post as 'Untrustworthy Police Scotland'.

So will the results of this survey encourage Police Scotland to change their ways and start helping, protecting, and supporting the public rather than targeting them?


As always, Police Scotland will completely ignore the results of the public survey. Because it criticises them.

Police Scotland don't like criticism.

The only lessons police are likely to 'learn' from this fiasco is to stop asking the public how they think police are doing - because they're unlikely to get the answer they want.

Instead, they'll just keep 'tweeting' and 'facebooking' their own silly propaganda to us in the hope that if they bombard us often enough with these messages of what a fandabiedozie job they're doing, eventually the public might actually just start to believe it.

No Investigation In To Failed £60M Police IT Project

Question: When is an investigation not an investigation?

Answer: When that investigation does not, and cannot, hold any party responsible or accountable for their actions.

It's also known as 'a whitewash' and rest assured our good friends in the corrupt Crown office and untrustworthy Police Scotland are seasoned experts when it comes to whitewashing investigations in to their failings.

The so-called 'investigation' I'm referring to here is of course the predictable news that Audit Scotland will conduct a so-called independent review into Police Scotland's failed £60m IT contract.

In a letter (reprinted below) you can clearly see that the fix is already in and the whitewash has begun even before the investigation has gotten underway!

Note the phrase in the last paragraph where it says that the Audit Scotland investigation will take the form of an "Independent Lessons Learned Review".

'Lessons learned' really means that the investigation will be restricted to only looking at how Police Scotland can prevent such expensive failures from happening in the future.

Which means no-one at Police Scotland will be prosecuted, no-one at Police Scotland will be held responsible, and no-one at Police Scotland will be held accountable for the wasting of tens of millions of pounds of our money.

Yip, close ranks, give the 'illusion' that an investigation has been carried out, and ensure no-one gets held responsible.

Just the way untrustworthy Police Scotland like 'independent' investigations to be...

Sunday 6 November 2016

My Dossier For Holyrood's Justice Committee

Holyrood's justice committee are currently conducting an inquiry into the effectiveness of the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service and have asked members of the public to contact them with any issues they feel the committee should look at to regarding how COPFS is run.

Mmmm. Where do you want me to start guys?!

However, you may be surprised to hear that after I began working on a dossier for the committee, I abruptly stopped and ditched the idea completely.

Here's why.

Upon closer inspection, I discovered that Holyrood's justice committee will not really be investigating in to the workings of the Crown office. They have only given the illusion that they will be investigating in to the workings of the corrupt Crown office.

In reality their investigation is only investigating in to whether the Crown office have sufficient resources (i.e. money) to do their job.

In their own words, Holyrood's justice committee say that their inquiry will examine how effective and efficient the organisation is "and whether it has the resources it needs to carry out its work".

So if Holyrood's investigation decides that the Crown office are doing a great job, nothing will change.

And if Holyrood's investigation decides that the Crown office are doing a sloppy job, they'll give them more money.

The Crown office are the most corrupt, inefficient, and incompetent organisation in the history of Scottish justice and the job they do is so sloppy they are nothing short of a national disgrace.

My dossier would have proved that - and would result in the Crown office getting more money to continue with their corruption, inefficiency and incompetence.

No thank you.

Thursday 3 November 2016

The Cannabis Dilemma

A British government study has concluded that CBD oil - a chemical compound found in cannabis - can be used with great effect for medical purposes. Most importantly, it does not contain THC which is the psychoactive substance so therefore does not produce a 'high' for the user.

This news about how cannabis oil can benefit patients with a variety of ailments is nothing new. Many medical professionals have argued for years that marijuana extract has a number of beneficial medical effects.

The news that they can now separate the 'medicinal' part from the 'high' part of cannabis is ground-breaking though.

In fact, a company called MediPen already produce and sell a CBD oil vaporiser in an e-cigarette format. Jordan Owen. the managing director of MediPen told The Independent that the company has "...worked hard to obtain our goal of breaking down the negative connotations surrounding cannabis to lead to a reform in the law for medicinal use…now this is finally becoming a reality."

On the face of it, it looks like good news.

But here's the problem.

There are a lot of myths about cannabis, its benefits, and its uses.

Many people - and not just young people - believe cannabis to be a 'soft' drug, much less harmful than alcohol. Many people, including many high profile and eminent people, campaign for cannabis to be made legal claiming these very reasons.

They are wrong.

Cannabis is a dangerous drug. It is rightly illegal and should remain so. Cannabis is a 'stepping stone' drug to harder drugs.

Need proof?

I do voluntary work with addicts every day and I have almost two decades of experience in this field. I have never, repeat NEVER met a drug addict who did not begin his drug taking life in a nonchalant manner by taking a little bit of the ole 'wacky baccy'.


In the interests of balance, I should also mention that I have also met a few people who have taken cannabis on a regular basis and have never progressed to any harder drugs. Good for them. They're the lucky ones.

But make no bones about it, just because YOU have never experienced the horrendous results that many others experience from cannabis use, that does NOT make a case for it to be decriminalised. Just thank your lucky stars that you have been able to use it with relative impunity and stop being so selfish, uncaring and ignoring to the damage this dangerous drug does to others.

Doctors train for years to understand drugs and their effects on human beings. That's why a drug which works for one patient can give horrendous side effects to another patient. Doctors are professionals who are trained to spot this type of thing and every day in their surgeries they alter the drugs they prescribe from person to person for this very reason.

Not every person reacts the same to any given drug, so this fact MUST be taken in to account when we talk about cannabis.

And that brings us to the medical benefits of cannabis and the question of whether doctors should be allowed to prescribe it.

I believe that our medical doctors - who are highly trained to administer drugs in a very controlled and professional way - should be allowed to prescribe cannabis when and where they see fit.

So in my opinion, we must make cannabis legal for medical use but keep it illegal for any other type of use.

This shouldn't be a problem as such. Most drugs that doctors give to patients are only available on prescription anyway and are not available legally over the counter. So most drugs are, in fact, legal to prescribe but illegal to buy or use in any other way.

However this is where the cannabis dilemma comes in.

You see, if the government decriminalise cannabis it sends a message to the public that the drug is safe.

And that would be a wrong message to send out to the public because cannabis is most definitely NOT safe.

With ever increasing drug problems in our communities - especially among our young folk - sending a message that this stepping stone drug is safe is not a good idea, especially when it has been proved time and time again that it often leads to harder drug use.

I really don't know what the answer to this dilemma is. I truly don't.

But what I do know is that our government needs to get it's thinking cap on and deal with this problem in a much more informed and responsible way because if they get it wrong, the results will be disastrous for public health.

Many members of the public with a variety of medical ailments will benefit greatly from cannabis if it is legalised and their doctors are allowed to prescribe it.

But a lot more of our young people will become addicted to harder drugs and it'll happen to them a lot quicker if cannabis is legalised and they think it's safe to take it.

Let's have a proper debate about this where both sides can at least accept each others perfectly valid arguments about this drug.