Alex Salmond Trial Verdict

After all, it has been a resounding victory for Salmon over his what now are proven to be wrongful accusers. should have been a quote, it was in preview, not sure why it didn't post as such.

Sue I agree wholeheartedly with your post of 16:27. I don’t know if you’re aware that you often come across as misogynistic Grandad but your posts on this and similar demonstrate a worrying lack of insight on issues facing women.

Grandad43, it’s unbelievable that you find it hilarious to mock women who have endured vile sexual encounters with a man who should have known much, much better. You are misogyny personified.

I wouldn't waste energy. It serves no purpose and doesnt help women or children. Those views are ten a penny, anyone involved in safeguarding women and children will have heard the plea for the status quo to remain as it is at least a thousand times before.

SirChenjin, in regard to your post @18:06 today in which you accuse me of being misogynistic in my posts, I certainly feel that is not the case.

Indeed with many women on this thread being outright in demonstrating their total non-acceptance of a legal judgment of not guilty which was brought forward by a jury made up of both men and women in regard to justice for a man, then I believe there is much misandry being demonstrated by many posting in this thread.

And yet again grandad totally ignores a question I put to him!

The wrangling over the verdict isn't going to achieve anything.
The important thing is to stop Alex Salmond ever holding a public position again, and that depends on people in Scotland.

Did the women involved in this case use the complaints procedure at work about his behaviour, and if they did, why were their complaints not acted on?
If they did not make complaints, why not?

eazybee in regard to your post @19:19 today I believe that the substance of the second paragraph in that post very much brings forward the real outside of criminal court options that could and should have played a leading role in this matter.

In the first option taking out a series of single grievance hearings or one large joint grievance against the Scottish National party in regard to lack of duty of care towards them, they would have had three separate levels hearings available to those putting forward those grievances.

The final hearing would have taken place outside the auspices of the Scottish National Party and within the jurisdiction of an industrial court (Industrial tribunal).

I have in my role within Industrial Safety had over many years a large amount dealings with the industrial courts and have always held great confidence in their tribunal hearing setup. Indeed had the complainants in this matter proceeded along the industrial court route then their grievances may well have been better served.

Still ignoring my question grandad I'll take that as having no answer. Of course as soon as you can tell of your role in Industrial Safety, the post is forthcoming. So obvious.

Yes I’m sure you do think that Grandad - as I said, your lack of insight is very concerning and demonstrated over and over again in your posts on the subject (and we’re well aware of what you do for a living by now).

janipat I have today made many posts in this thread and answered many questions from anniebach and others alongside working from home for our business.

Therefore if I have not got round to your series of questions in your post @17:52 today so be it. However, I believe that I have placed considerable effort into this thread today and therefore your constant demands i will make wait until tomorrow if I have time for that then.

However, in short, I have served on jury service in the 1990s. That service did involve a sexual assault case and that experience left me with little confidence in the jury system.

However, that system is the bases of justice in our criminal courts in the United Kingdom and there is nothing else available at this point in time other than anarchy

SirChenjin I take it that you must be envious of my occupation and a great follower of me on the forum as you are so so aware of my posts. ???

I am still waiting for those that so criticise the criminal justice system in this country to inform me what they would have to replace it despite me asking a number of times.

The lack of insight in that matter is very concerning considering the level of criticism of the present system by many in this thread. ?

There was an inquiry into sexual harassment In January which Salmon won because of a technicality. The possibility that this came to court because of that can't be dismissed. I'm afraid the women have been badly treated and used by everyone.

Women are campaigning up and down the country grandad to change the system. In the way they campaigned to make rape illegal in marriage. That strangely didnt result in anarchy although many people opposed it at the time. We are used to people being frightened of women fighting for change.

trisher, did the "inquiry" take on the tenure of a full grievance hearing as under the terms of the Equality Act, and if so did it proceed to an industrial court?

Of was it just an SNP internal inquiry which could not be taken further forward?

Galaxy sadly I don't think in this case campaigning will help. It's a complicated case. Some of the things it was proved couldn't have happened, some were admitted to but regarded as consensual by AS. I think losing this case has probably set back the stuation for women as it will now be widely claimed as an example of women lying. Grandad1943 the criminal justice system in this country is all we have but that doesn't mean it should be above criticism.

It was brought by the Scottish Government Grandad1943 and lost because one of the people appointed was connected with the case www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46428570

Only 8 people thought the women were lying. That was all that was needed. A different 8 people might have thought differently.

Jane10 but that is the jury system in Britain. Those eight people made up the majority of the jury that had been vetted and selected prior to the case starting.

Eight other jurors may have come to a different conclusion but they were not the people who made up this jury.

That is the system and there is nothing else.

I dont mean campaigning re this particular verdict trisher, I mean the work that is being done around sexual assault/rape cases in general.

I think education for jurors on rape myths for example would be a start.

Not at all Grandad - I notice you because of your misogynistic posts and because you’re one of the few men on here. You tend to talk a lot about your work and often shoehorn it into posts.

Galaxy hear hear. These women are to be commended for taking on the might of AS and risking their safety and security. The SNP are a powerful force in Scotland and their extremist supporters will stop at nothing when they perceive that someone has challenged the party. I’m sure these women were well aware that the odds of a successful outcome were very much against them but they were prepared to take the stand and for that I applaud them. Any woman who has been on the receiving end of this kind of behaviour will recognise what was described by the prosecution only too well - so yes, he’s been found not guilty of criminal behaviour but his behaviour has been made public and he’s been shown for what he is. I hope he crawls back under his sleazy little rock and that this case serves to show women that we do not have to tolerate this from any man. The justice systems across the UK will catch up with these men one day.

The recent legal proceedings against the cps failed, but womens groups will continue to pursue legal challenges and gradually things will change. Its a long game but women are tenacious in achieving protection for women and children.