Can someone explain the Alex Salmond 'thing's from the beginning please?

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is the independent public prosecution service for Scotland, and is a Ministerial Department of the Scottish Government. The department is headed by Her Majesty's Lord Advocate, who under the Scottish legal system is responsible for prosecution, along with the area procurators fiscal. In Scotland, virtually all prosecution of criminal offences is undertaken by the Crown. Private prosecutions are extremely rare.

Copied from Wikipedia

Alegrias1

Alex said something happened. All Alex's friends agree with him. He says Nicola tried to get him put in jail (honestly, he does say that)

Nicola said it didn't happen. All Nicola's friends agree with her.

Some people hate Alex, some people hate Nicola.

None of us has a clue what happened and I have no idea how this will end.

This is by far the best explanation I have read so far. Thank you Alegrias1.

for the poster who said Alex was "sleazy" 30 years ago .This is 1987.
Now for anti Independence folk,note they used the same rubbish then as they do now .
youtu.be/bPNasRD_X0Q

I have no idea. He is a slease bag and makes me squirm to look at him. I have no doubt he did what he was accused of by the women and this is a deliberate way of deflecting his manly pride so the emphasis is on someone and something else, meanwhile costing us a lot of money, taking concentration away from the pandemic crisis and I do not care one iota if NS knew 5 days before or not. Who the h... cares!

Oh and throughout my life I have met men like that - even slapped one across the face in Burke and Hare Edinburgh when they pinched my bum as I walked past. Did not know him but he knew my hand! I was in my early 20s. Too many men of that age group think it's ok to do that to women!

The issue isn't about any sexual accusations that have been made about Alex. He was found innocent. End of.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202102/medium-891474-screenshot-20210224-154632-com-google-android-googlequicksearchbox2.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202102/medium-71516-screenshot-20210224-154611-com-google-android-googlequicksearchbox2.jpg

Definitely creepy and cringy ?

Oh sorry Alex it was George ?

What did Nicola know and 5 days before what?

Paddy the problem is that you have clearly taken a stance on one side of the divide, which means that one's only reaction to your explanantion is to say, with regret, that you would describe it thus wouldn't you?

Personally I am deriving considerable amusement from watching the holier than thou, SNP rolling in the gutter and scrapping with each other.

But then that is the story of Scotland from MacBeth, to Mary Queen of Scots to the Covenenters, \lways falling out with each other.

As Johnson said^The noblest prospect which a Scotchman ever sees, is the high road that leads him to England^

I write as someone of Scottish descent, with a throughly Scottish maidenname and Scottish ancestors who opted for the low road to Ulster.

Well. Although you may find this unlikely, I'm speechless.

I’m glad I’ve read this thread as I thought that I hadn’t been paying attention, as I am as clueless as the rest of you.

Dirty dealings though I suspect.

"What is the ACTUAL story about? Well, Nicola Sturgeon met Alex Salmond at her home, in early April 2018 when he told her that he was being accused of harassment. His adviser said that he had mentioned it to Ms Sturgeon four days earlier in an informal setting and it lasted only a few minutes. She hadn't recalled the informal meeting until she was reminded of it but she did, then, remember the meeting with his adviser. The head-of-a-pin argument is 'Was it a government meeting or an SNP meeting?' If the former, then she should have taken minutes. If the latter, then no notes needed to be taken. No notes were taken. Ask yourself, if a long- time colleague and friend turned up at your house to let you know that he/she has been accused of harassment of other colleagues, would you immediately assume it was a personal conversation or a business one? Yes, THAT is what the issue relates to. World shattering it is not but it is all the media has got"

.... * tiptoes out *

Two small fish in an even smaller pond.
All I know is I would not get into a lift on my own with Alex Salmond.

The only snag is that the first meeting wasnt an informal one. The witnesses to that are the ones being redacted out. None of it adds up. Just publish everything then this could all be sorted out. Why not publish? What's the problem? Scottish govt have made things ten times worse by these obfuscations.
They got it wrong going after Salmond. Their process was found to be 'tainted by bias' and they had to cough up £500,000 plus expenses of taxpayers money. The cases went to court and the jury found him innocent apart from from one not proven case. He didn't emerge smelling of roses.
The committee is trying to find out where the initial process went wrong. As a part of this there is an accusation that NS broke the ministerial code.
It's a mess. Why can't everything be published (apart from the names of the women that were found to charge him of course).
No secrecy no problem but it's too late now.

Mr Salmond and his supporters claim Nichola Sturgeon has misled parliament over the government inquiry into the allegations of sexual harassment. Sturgeon denies the claim.

The Scottish government eventually admitted it had botched its investigation and had to pay Salmond’s legal fees of more than £500.000 after it had acted unlawfully.?

If found guilty of lying to the courts she would have to resign.

There's no suggestion anyone lied to any courts. There is an assertion the the First Minister misled parliament over the nature of a meeting.
And the woman's name is Nicola.

I suppose if Sturgeon wins, Salmond’s career is over. If Salmond wins both careers are over.
Such a mess which will cause so much disruption if the latter is the case.
Something is not right, we’ll know soon enough.

Nightsky2

Mr Salmond and his supporters claim Nichola Sturgeon has misled parliament over the government inquiry into the allegations of sexual harassment. Sturgeon denies the claim.

The Scottish government eventually admitted it had botched its investigation and had to pay Salmond’s legal fees of more than £500.000 after it had acted unlawfully.?

If found guilty of lying to the courts she would have to resign.

After the governments defence collapse Ms Sturgeon told her MSPs she had 3 meetings with Mr Salmond while he was under investigation by her officials, Apr, June, July 2018. Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff Geoff Aberdain told the jury he raised the subject with Ms Sturgeon in her Hollywood office on the 29th, March 2018. She claims to have forgotten this meeting despite the explosive subject matter. Make of that what you like.

Replying to Alegris1.

Nicola Sturgeon made the final decision to appoint Leslie Evans following consultation with the Head of Civil Service and is answerable to Scottish ministers
Sorry I can’t do links ... Freedom of information request on Scot Gov Website 25 th August 2017 .
Quote from Leslie Evans on 4th Oct 2017 in speech to Year 12 in her old school of High Storrs
I am the new Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government. Devolution means I work for the Scottish Government and not for the U.K Gov. So I don’t work for Theresa Mays Government, I work directly for Nicola Sturgeon.
Lots of misinformation going around about who she is responsible to .

With reference to Paddy-Anne’s post

Nightsky2

Nightsky2

Mr Salmond and his supporters claim Nichola Sturgeon has misled parliament over the government inquiry into the allegations of sexual harassment. Sturgeon denies the claim.

The Scottish government eventually admitted it had botched its investigation and had to pay Salmond’s legal fees of more than £500.000 after it had acted unlawfully.?

If found guilty of lying to the courts she would have to resign.

After the governments defence collapse Ms Sturgeon told her MSPs she had 3 meetings with Mr Salmond while he was under investigation by her officials, Apr, June, July 2018. Mr Salmond’s former chief of staff Geoff Aberdain told the jury he raised the subject with Ms Sturgeon in her Hollywood office on the 29th, March 2018. She claims to have forgotten this meeting despite the explosive subject matter. Make of that what you like.

Nightsky2 I'm making no comment at all about who did what or who said what. What I'm saying is that there is a assertion that the First Minister misled Parliament, not that she lied in Court.

Thank you all - I think.

What will happen now?