Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Sheriff Principal Bowen and Elish Angiolini - Conflict of Interest?

Followers of my trial will know that Sheriff Principal Bowen decided to support Crown objections to deprive me of two key cited defence witnesses, Stephen McGowan and Elish Angiolini.

It has now been discovered that Bowen and Angiolini are co-directors of the Northern Lighthouse Board and have been present together at three meetings since I was arrested, 22 February 2010, 01 June 2010 and 28 February 2011.

Therefore, at the very least, they can be said to be acquainted.

Sheriff Principal Bowen has made no effort to disclose his personal connection with Angiolini. I believe that, at the very latest, he should have recused himself when Angiolini was formally cited by the defence. Justice must, of course, be seen to be done and there can be no doubt that Bowen`s impartiality is thus a matter for serious questioning, as his actions spared his personal acquaintance,the former Lord Advocate, from being cross-examined on oath, to my disadvantage.

Angiolini is perhaps the most central figure in the case against me, as it was largely her failings and worse, that led me to take the actions for which I was subsequently charged, on her personal authority.

It is also hoped to obtain the audio of the trial, which I recall will contain a rather mumbled and incoherent response by Bowen when I challenged him on the subject of Angiolini`s conduct on the last day of the hearing.

This revelation is but the latest in a transparently biased series against me by the Scottish justice system, if that is not a contradiction in terms.

I have reason to believe that I have suffered as a result of a mistrial due to an undeclared conflict of interest on the part of Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen.

Whilst there remains a good deal of focus on the injustices meted out to me, what is really at stake here is the establishment`s craven failure to protect Scottish children and the disabled from systematic rape and torture.

Monday, January 30, 2012

More on "Dame" Elish Angiolini

Today and Saturday, the Scottish Law Reporter has put up two new articles about my trial and the curious award to Elish Angiolini.

Of course, her name was put forward to be honoured by the Queen, despite it having been established that she had made false statements over Hollie`s case and even more importantly, that she had refused to respond to the FOI Commisioner`s requests over a financial matter of public interest, which may well lead to her facing a criminal prosecution.

So, in the circumstances, who would want to nominate an individual of such dubious repute?

We still don`t know, as the official document featured in today`s SLR article shows.

There is, of course, no reason at all for the details of this matter and those related to it being published in the mainstream media. I am only too well aware of the pressures being placed on editors by those in positions of considerable power and influence in Scotland, as was displayed earlier by Angiolini`s personal threats, but much of the information is already in the public domain. Such established names as The Firm, The Drum, The Scottish Law Reporter, The Scottish Sunday Express and the former Scottish News of the World have all published accounts of matters directly or indirectly connected to the Hollie Greig case.

Finally, thank you all for your continuous messages of support since my conviction. It is important to be aware that anything that happens to me will be of little account when compared to what has happened to Hollie Greig. Her account on 8th September 2009 to Grampian Police`s DC Lisa Evans is something I shall never forget, so clear and harrowing were the details,as was Hollie`s astonishing bravery.

As uncovered during the trial, that no action was ever taken by DC Evans and Grampian Police is a matter of disgrace and shame for all those whose chief objective and priority is to protect prominent and powerfully connected child-abusers at all costs.

Friday, January 27, 2012


A local police officer called at my home this afternoon, on behalf of Sergeant Hogg of Central Police, Scotland, to provide me with a crime reference number in connection with my formal complaint about the alleged misappropriation of public funds by Elish Angiolini, in order to pay Levy & McRae for legal actions on her behalf in a private capacity.

Such an alleged crime should not be difficult to solve. All Dame Elish needs to do is to provide proof that the fees in question were paid by her personally. However, it would seem that she has so far been finding this simple query difficult to address. It is now two years since the question was first put to her and for a six-month period, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion, asked her to respond. She has yet failed to do so.

Levy & McRae ought also to be able to help clear this issue up. The firm must know who it invoiced and who paid the bill. There can be no lawful reason for the Scottish taxpayer to have paid this.

Central Police say that everyone in Scotland is treated equally under the law. If Dame Elish remains unable to exonerate herself, there can be no reason why she should not be arrested and charged, as anyone unfortunate enough to have less influential allies would be in similar circumstances.

Thursday, January 26, 2012


I would like to take this opportunity to bring everyone up-to-date regarding recent events but would first like to thank again all of you who have offered their support and expressed their objection to Sheriff Principal Bowen`s personal decision to convict me on a Breach of the Peace charge.

Especially I cannot really find appropiate words to express my thanks to those of you who came to the court, day after day, to witness what I believe to be another unacceptable incidence of bias against me by the Scottish justice system. Those of you in Scotland who have so gallantly stood by me represent the true face of Scotland - brave, loyal, fair-minded and thoroughly decent and compassionate.

I have no doubt that my prospects of a successful defence were impaired unacceptably by the Sheriff`s decision to deny me the testimonies under oath of two key defence witness who had both been formally cited, Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan and former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini.

As events progressed, it became clear that the integrity of the trial was compromised by the fact that McGowan, leading for the prosecution, was himself being protected from having to answer pertinent questions about his own conduct and influence.

In the case of Angiolini, in many ways the central figure whose failings led directly to my being charged, she would have had to face some telling questions on oath had our citatation not been blocked by Bowen`s intervention. Under Scottish law, it would not have been necessary for her to answer questions that may incriminate herself, but it would surely have been in the interests not only of the defence, but for Scotland in general as to how she would respond to the matter of who paid Levy &McRae for her private legal actions, a question she has persistently failed to answer to a formal request from a senior public official, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion.

As we were denied Angiolini`s opportunity to speak on this specific topic, amongst others, I formally made a complaint yesterday at the police station in Dunblane, where she resides, having been invited to take this course of action by a letter from Lothian and Borders Police. The constant evasions by Angiolini in responding to a perfectly simple official question would strongly indicate, in my view, that a serious criminal offence has taken place, which I have been given to understand should be termed the misappropriation of public funds.

Regardless of opinions on the Hollie Greig case or on mine, surely no one can reasonably take a view other than that the former Lord Advocate has conducted herself in an unacceptable manner leading to the gravest suspicion of her culpability over the likely criminal misuse of public funds.

One of the most important facts to emerge from the trial was that following Hollie`s lengthy interview with PC Lisa Evans on the 8th September 2009, which I witnessed, not one of the named alleged perpetrators, not one of the alleged victims, nor any of the expert medical witnesses whose reports completely supported Hollie`s allegations were ever questioned by Grampian Police. Of course, contrary to police procedures in such cases involving the sexual abuse of children were the computers of the alleged perpetrators seized or examined. One of the main reasons for this is that whilst rape is inevitably a complex issue as far as proof is concerned, the downloading of child pornography is not. It is a known fact that abusers generally avail themselves to this type of crime and given the sheer number of those named by Hollie, there can surely be no rational explanation for Grampian Police`s failures.

As we have said so often, Hollie`s competence and honesty has never been in any doubt, as admitted by Grampian Police themselves. The condition of Down`s Syndrome leads to those who have the condition to describe past events exactly as they have experienced them, without the facility to fabricate or embellish. Hollie Greig is therefore the best type of witness one could have in acase such as this, unlike any of her alleged attackers.

Thanks to extra information alluded to or gleaned during the trial, particularly from witness Rosemary Murray, someone certainly not involved in the abuses, I have every reason to believe that two specific witnesses in particular, committed perjury during the course of the trial.

Naturally, I have always stressed that my chief objective in the campaign is to secure a proper public inquiry into the repeated failures and obstructions of the authorities in dealing adequately with all the allegations and other matters, including the death of Robert Greig.

Indeed, if any proper police investigation had taken place it would have exonerated those who professed to be innocent in court long ago.

I must attend Stonehaven Court on 17th February at 10.30 hours for sentencing.

I shall just end by repeating these facts.

Following Hollie`s indescribably brave conduct and precise allegations on 8th September 2009 to DC Lisa Evans relating to most horrendous crimes, the police took no action whatsoever.

In January 2010, when I circulated a letter highlighting the police`s failure in this matter and the potential danger to the public, Grampian Police interviewed no fewer than 61 witnesses within five weeks and I was thus arrested and charged.


Friday, January 20, 2012

The Stonehaven Trial So Far

An extended adjournment until Monday has allowed me to post this update on the trial`s progress.

To begin with, I must thank all those kind, loyal and courageous people who had come again to Stonehaven yet again to support me. They have come from other parts of Scotland and even England in their own time and at their own considerable expense. I am deeply moved by such support, which has been a source of great strength to me.

Perhaps a very pertinent and basic question that is arisen as to why I have been prosecuted at all for a Breach of the Peace, which is intended to protect the public in general, not a specific number of individuals who have been identified by letter of other means of communication. Virtually all of the civilian witnesses brought by the prosecution who claim to have been upset by me comprise some of those named as alleged abusers or victims by Hollie.

A perfectly adequate legal remedy exists for those concerned - defamation.

I have always invited anyone who regards my publication of the allegations to be unfair or inaccurate to challenge me.

No-one, either individually or collectively has chosen to take this logical civil route that would have the most appropriate one, at no cost to the people of Scotland. Instead, even prior to the trial, an estimated half a million pounds of taxpayers` money has been spent on prosecuting me on a simple summary charge. It is an issue of possible misuse of much-needed public funds that may justifiably be put to the Scottish establishment, including leading politicians.

The most interesting cross-examination so far has been that of DC Lisa Evans by defence counsel Andy Lamb QC. The prosecution in fact attempted to obstruct Mr Lamb from doing so in the manner he intended, which led to an unexpected adjournment on Wednesday.

DC Evans was the Grampian Police officer who interviewed Hollie on 8th September 2009, at which I was present. Hollie, displaying an astonishing degree of courage and composure, clearly related her rape ordeals during the formal questioning that lasted three and a half hours. It was the most harrowing discussion I have ever witnessed and left me with a lasting admiration for the fortitude under pressure of this extraordinary young woman.

Such was the power and sincerity of Hollie`s evidence, backed by the knowledge that the state had earlier accepted the overwhelming probability of the truth of Hollie`s allegations by paying her £13, 500 from the CICA, that I then believed that even Grampian Police could no longer ignore the necessity for a full investigation. An action of this type would naturally have led to all those named being interviewed, along with the seizure or examination of their computers of those that used them, a normal procedure where serious allegations of child-sex crimes exist.

During the cross-examination of the alleged abusers and victims, all stated that they had never been approached by the police following Hollie`s allegations.

In the circumstances, it may be of significance that DC Evans was among the four officers who raided my home whilst I was held in custody in Aberdeen. No inventory of the items removed was ever left with me, but among the missing items were two notebooks which I used to record details of Hollie`s interview with Evans. Neither of these important documents was returned to the defence by the Crown. Under pressure from my legal team, it is understood that one has now been "found", but there is still no sign of the other.

When cross-examined by Mr Lamb, Evans even attempted to mislead the court about the exact layout of the area where the interview took place.

Much was made by the prosecution of the items seized from my home that day, including a list of the alleged perpetrators that I had sent out that has been used against me. In his quiet but penetrative way, Mr Lamb asked DC Evans if any of the names that appeared on that list corresponded with any of the names provided to her by Hollie.

The officer admitted that there were.

Thus, there can be no rational explanation for the total lack of action in Grampian Police not contacting named individuals following the 8th September 2009 interview.

The alleged abusers all stated in court that they were entirely innocent. If this is true, then Grampian Police has failed them also, because if they had been questioned, had their computers checked and it had been found that no evidence existed to justify a prosecution, I could have no longer been in a position to realistically continue my subsequent actions in support of Hollie`s case and there would have been no grounds to prosecute me at all

Naturally, the matter of the true facts behind death of Robert David Greig is an issue that cannot possibly go away.Only a full and reliable investigation is acceptable. 

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Thank You

As this will be my last blog before my trial begins, I would again like to thank all those people around the world who have offered such wonderful support to Hollie and Anne and to me in our many battles over the past three years.

I have always been a great admirer of Scotland and the Scottish people and this view has been in no way diminished by my recent experiences.  In fact, I have been extremely impressed by the sheer scale of decency, kindness, unselfishness and courage displayed by so many Scots in our efforts to secure justice for Hollie and her uncle and all the other vulnerable children and disabled of the country.

Although so many senior figures in politics, the police, medical and justice systems have consistently displayed an alarming lack of courage in protecting Scottish children and the disabled from the terrible ordeals of rape and torture, the conduct of others has been exemplary.

Although none can be said to be part of the Hollie campaign as their roles are governed by impartiality, may I congratulate in particular the Scottish Law Reporter, The Drum and The Firm, whose editor, Steven Raeburn, exemplifies the highest standards and ethics of journalism. There are other publications, too, who have helped when it has been possible for them to do so.

Finally, I must pay tribute to Mr Kevin Dunion OBE, the retiring Freedom of Information for Scotland Commissioner. His departure constitutes a sad loss to all in Scotland who hold dear the principles of democracy, freedom, justice and openness. It is sad to say that in my experience, he is the only senior official in Scotland who has remained faithful to his duty to the public and I congratulate him for his steadfast integrity and courage.

I have no idea what lies ahead in the coming days, but I am greatly moved by your thoughts and prayers.

Let us hope that our efforts will go some way in preventing at least some of the Hollie Greigs of this world from facing such unspeakable horror and evil in the future.

With best wishes and appreciation to you all.

Friday, January 13, 2012

Angiolini Cited!

It`s official, Elish Angiolini has been cited to appear for the defence!

The trial is going ahead on Monday and is expected to last for two weeks.

Thank you all for the wonderful support you have provided to Hollie and Anne and to me. It is very much appreciated and let us hope that it is not too long before these horrifying crimes are investigated fully. It has also been very moving that so many have told me that I am in their thoughts and prayers in regard to the oncoming event in Stonehaven.

All I have ever asked, apart from the removal from office of Angiolini, which has been achieved, is for a full, independent and public inquiry into why only two people named by Hollie were ever questioned, despite her competence, clarity and sincerity, why were no computers were examined, why supporting medical evidence was withheld and for a full investigation as to who was responsible for the murder of Robert David Greig, and a brutal murder it most surely was, which also involved the unlawful withholding of the revealing contents of the autopsy for twelve years to Anne Greig, his next-of-kin.

Had such an inquiry been pursued, I would have been content to keep quiet and let the lawful procedures take their course.

No one expects people to be condemned without a fair trial, should it come to that, but I have named those responsible,as the Daily Mail did over Stephen Lawrence`s killers, mainly because no adequate police investigation could have possibly taken place and by the very nature of their alleged crimes, those named were likely to constitute an ongoing threat to public safety.

It is a great shame that the good people of Scotland have been so cruelly let down by those in the Grampian Police and Crown Office, plus senior politicians, whose duty it is to protect its citizens, especially Hollie and the other children.

One hopes that a new start will begin in Scotland, where those in senior public office seem to be granted immunity from prosecution, due to their influence and connections, Elish Angiolini being an obvious candidate.

In the meantime, the trial must be dealt with. Interesting days lie ahead.

Trial on the 16th January

Although I haven`t spoken yet to my new legal team, the trial is still set to begin in Stonehaven at 10.00 hrs on Monday. If there is any unlikely last-minute change I shall let you know, as a number of kind and courageous supporters of Hollie have indicated that they wil come along, some from considerable distances.

I hope I didn`t give the impression of being a little down at the beginning of my last blog, because that definitely isn`t the case. All I wanted to convey was that the Scottish legal and political elite have a strong vested interest in shutting me up by putting me in jail. The constant violations of my human rights from the day I was first arrested is surely contrary to the terms of Article 6(1), which indicates that I have a right to a fair trial. In no way could it be said that I have been treated without bias by the Scottish justice system, if that is not a contradiction in terms. 

I have every intention of carrying on blogging, but it might be a bit difficult for me, if I`m put in prison again.

Former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini must be called as a defence witness and I believe that Sheriff Principal Bowen has already damaged my defence by refusing to allow Crown Prosecutor to be called . It is significant that in spite of our later differences, all my previous six legal advisors were convinced that McGowan should have been ordered to comply with his citation.

It has been established already, thanks to the letters of Brian Adam MSP of 27th October and 28th November 2000 and Angiolini`s own letter to Anne`s solicitor of 12th July 2001, that she publicly lied when she claimed to have no involvement in the case. It is also a matter of public record that she has failed to comply with the formal requests of the FOI Commissioner, over the last six months of her tenure, to divulge how Levy & McRae were paid for her private legal actions to silence the media over her involvement in the Hollie Greig case.

So, the head of the justice system, responsible ultimately for all Scottish prosecutions, blatantly contravenes the terms of the FOI (Scotland) Act 2002.

Quite transparently, she has misappropriated public funds for her personal use and potential private financial gain. Who would refuse to answer, when being  branded as a thief , if one could prove that such an allegation was untrue?

The recipients of the funds, Levy & McRae must know , too, but Senior Partner Peter Watson steadfastly refuses to disclose the truth.

It is, of course, a scandal in itself that Alex Salmond, in the full knowledge that she is likely to face criminal charges, not only refused to sack her immediately, but has now awarded her a plum job in assisting him. All this for someone who is not SNP and a Unionist. A valid question - what hold has she got over him?

She is a key figure in my case as all the actions I took that led to the charges against me were largely atributable to her failures and dishonesty.

This a criminal matter and I intend to see that it is dealt with appropriately.

The last word about Elish Angiolini should perhaps come not from me .but from the eminent Professor Robert Black QC, who described her term of office as "a disastrous experiment."

The good professor was being rather kind to her, I think.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

The Death of Robert David Greig

I am aware that the Scottish establishment would like nothing more than to remove me from public life and it should not be forgotten that Alex Salmond is personally implicated in the Hollie Greig case, having first lied about a letter sent from his office to Anne and then having the FOI Commissioner ruling that Salmond and his ministers had failed to comply with the regulations in Hollie`s case. It is signiicant that whilst brave English MPs like Andrew George and David Ruffley have tried to stand up for Scottish children, Salmond has remained silent. Perhaps he is more interested in protecting his cronies in the North East than Aberdeen children being raped and tortured.

Consequently, it is difficult to know how much longer I shall be able to post my blog, given the oncoming trial and its likely outcome. However, before I go, I must address in detail the circumstances surrounding what I believe to be the brutal murder of Hollie`s, Robert David Greig, just six days before the 18th birthday party he had arranged for his beloved little niece. The disgraceful and shameless cover up of his murder by the Scottish establishment is almost beyond belief.

Robert, or Roy as he was always known, was 53 when he died on the night of 17th November 1997 in a burning stationary parked car on a remote and little-used lane that runs parallel to the A90, north of Aberdeen. It was separated from the main road by high banking and a row of trees. The night was a particularly wild one with high wind and driving rain.

Roy had no known worries of any consequence at all, no mental problems and was looking forward to Hollie`s special birthday.

The emergency services were called  by Sylvester Cadger, who claimed to have seen flames above the trees whilst driving along the A90. The height of the flames would indicate that the car was already an inferno, but Mr Cadger, who still had to drive some distance to reach the scene from the A90, only suffered minor burns when he claimed to attempt to pull Roy clear. The emergency services arrived at 21.59 and Roy was taken to hospital and pronounced dead. By 01.27 hrs on the 18th November, according to the records, it had already been decided that Roy had committed suicide.

This is very curious, to say the least, as very few people take their own lives by fire, it is just too painful. When a death occurs by fire, it is normally due to accident or foul play. In fact, I have a letter from Grampian Police stating that only one death has occurred in this way in the past ten years. Subsequent enquiries have discovered that the NHS have no record whatsoever of any authority requesting Roy`s medical details, essential in assessing the state of mind before suicide can be decided on.

No mention of suicide was made to his next-of-kin, Anne Greig, nor was she ever questioned about any concerns her brother had, and she was not allowed to see the body, which had been placed in a sealed coffin..

In order to solve this apparent mystery, Anne repeatedly asked for the following 12 years for a copy of the pathologist`s report, only to be rebuffed on every occasion. The death certificate had attributed the death to smoke inhalation.When the autopsy finally arrived, it stated that Roy`s sternum, one of the body`s strongest bones, had been broken.along with several ribs and damage to the skull, consistent with having been badly beaten. It has been said that under intense heat, bones can crack, but if this was the case, how could Mr Cadger possibly have tried to drag him from the car and only suffer minimal burns?

After receiving the autopsy at the end of 2009, I interviewed the pathologist, his response was evasive and unconvincing. He is one of those who has complained to the police about me.

In 2001, Hollie Greig told her mother that Roy had walked in on her being sexually abused by her father. In the ensuing altercation, threats were issued. Anne was able to deduce that the incident had taken place just prior to Roy`s hitherto mysterious death.

It had also come to light that Hollie`s father successfully claimed £51,000 from the Scottish Widows, through a solicitor named by Hollie, on a life insurance policy taken on his brother-in-law`s life.

Meanwhile, Sylvester Cadger had been given an award for his bravery in trying to rescue Roy by the Royal Humane Society, which posed yet another question. In order to receive such an award his action must have been witnessed. It was not a member of the emergency services, although a later newspaper report mentioned a "passing nurse", odd in itself given the remoteness of the spot. However, there seems to be no record at all of this elusive individual, The Royal Humane Society does not know, the police do not know and Sylvester Cadger refuses to answer. Now Mr McGeechan, at the Crown office, has refused to disclose the identity of this person, always assuming that the individual actually exists.

Within the PCCs 2006 inquiry requested by Anne into Grampian police`s failures to investigate, no mention of  Roy taking his own life was even mentioned in the extensive report.

When I was first arrested in 2010, on the 12th February and was questioned, I disclosed my concern about Sylvester Cadger`s  role in Roy`s death. My suspicions were raised further when both the transcripts which arrived later thisfrom the Police and Crown Office had omitted the entire mention of Mr Cadger. When challenged, both stated that no omissions had been made and that the transcripts were faithful to the contents of the tape. Thanks to my solicitor, Mr Gerry Sweeney, who successfully pressed to obtain the tape, there was the section about Syvester Cadger. Why did the Police and Crown Office omit and then lie about it?

No other section had been tampered with.

It must be said that Sylvester Cadger is not among those named by Hollie and he is not one of the 61 prosecution witnesses in my case.

In May 2011, Malcolm Webster  was convicted of the murder of his wife, Claire, in 1994 in a burning car not far from Aberdeen. Quite apart from it taking 17 years to convict Webster, there are some alarming similarities with Roy`s death. Grampian police initially described her death as an accident, despite police and fire officers who were present suspecting foul play at the outset. Several testified that they were told to forget their concerns and move on by senior officers. Grampian Police and the Crown Office even refused to conduct an investigation in 2001, when approached by the New Zealand Police, after Webster had tried to kill his second wife in similar circumstances. In fact, it took an intervention by Scotland Yard years later to force Grampian into appropriate action to secure the long-overdue conviction. Even more suspicious is that some senior personnel were the same as those in Roy`s case, the same pathologist and the same Chief Constable. Ian Oliver was forced to resign in disgrace after failures in the Scott Simpson case, a nine-year-old boy murdered by a paedophile. Two of her relatives named by Hollie as abusers also came before the court, described as friends of the murderer, from whom they received an unexplained payment of £10,000, Webster also made a fraudulent insurance claim of £200,000 on his wife`s life.

What is really going on at Grampian Police?

It really looks as though two attempted cover ups of similar murders in the nineties have taken place. It is surely now time to examine the true cause of  the death of Robert David Greig.

Latest Information

I hope to have a new Senior and Junior Counsel available to represent me next week. It does appear that despite the new arrivals, the trial is likely to begin on Monday or Tuesday.

I would like to thank again all the many well-wishers who have so kindly offered their support and especially to those of you who are intending to make the long and difficult journey to Stonehaven, as has occurred on other occasions and which I appreciate so much.

Many have commented on a recent blog, where I mentioned Hollie`s interview with Grampian Police`s DS Lisa Evans on 8th September 2009, at which I was present. I would just remind everyone that Hollie gave her information very consistently with everything she has said previously, naming details of her abuse, specific individuals, other victims and locations. Of course, by this time, it had already been established that the state had accepted that Hollie had been a victim of sexual abuse by paying her £13,500 from public funds by the CICA, based on detailed analyses of Dr Jack Boyle and Dr Eva Harding, the latter naming unconditionally Hollie`s father and brother as serial abusers of Hollie. Dr Harding also mentioned one of her female abusers, a cousin of Hollie`s father who has been named by the prosecution in my case. Why was she not questioned in September 2009 and her computer examined?

Naturally, the CICA payment is based on a lower threshold of the balance of probabilities than in a criminal trial, but Dr Harding went on to say that apart from her father and brother, Hollie had "probably been abused by others who had access to her" . Given that Hollie had been accepted by the police as a competent and truthful witness, one might have reasonably expected Grampian Police to question all those named and follow normal police procedures in child sexual abuse allegations by examining the computers of all the alleged perpetrators. We now know that Grampian Police did no such thing, making absolutely no effort to carry out any meaningful investigation after Hollie`s incredible courage and clarity in reliving her ordeals before DS Evans.

In January 2010 certain individuals claimed to have been upset by warning leaflets I had sent out, with the motive of alerting people in Aberdeen of the persistent failure of Grampian Police and others to protect vulnerable citizens from a group who clearly needed to be thoroughly investigated. Immediately Grampian Police went out of its way to interview no fewer than 61 people, some of whom didn`t even want to complaint, according to their sworn statements. One of those responsible for seizing my computer whilst I was held in custody in February 2010 was the same DS Lisa Evans.

I have been asked how anyone can offer tangible help to me at the moment, as there can be little doubt that the Crown Office has consistently behaved towards me with a bias that would clearly appear to contradict Artcle 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, that requires defendants to be treated fairly.

The most practical way would be to write to your MP, asking them to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, Mr Michael Moore to examine this issue. Far, far more important than anything that may happen to me, is to press Mr Moore, through your MP, to call for inquiries into the failures to conduct adequate investigations by Grampian Police into Hollie`s allegations and to establish the true facts behind the brutal death of Robert David Greig.

Previously, we have seen how the Metropolitan Police failed to investigate the death of Stephen Lawrence and Grampian Police`s failure to do so in the case of Mrs Claire Webster, which has uncanny similarities to Robert Greig`s death and actually includes some of same personnel.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Frances McMenamin QC

May I thank all of you for the magnificent support I have received for my stance in not retaining Gary Allen QC, who refused to cooperate in calling Elish Angiolini. I must stress that I have no issue at all with Mr Allen and no reason to believe that he acted in anything other than a professional manner, but I was and remain, totally unconvinced of his argument that Angiolini`s presence in the witness box could possibly constitute any harm to the defence.

However, my earlier Senior Counsel, Frances McMenamin QC is in a very different situation. Based on the circumstances of 15th November at Stonehaven Court already published, particularly in the Scottish Law Reporter`s article of 9th December, it seems transparently clear that Ms McMenamin, along with senior Crown Office and Procurators Fiscal, conspired without my consent or knowledge, to attempt to coerce or imtimidate me into changing my plea to guilty and to disclose confidential court business to an uninvolved third party, the Scottish Sun. No responses have been received by any of the parties concerned to offer any lawful explanations to the polite questions I posed, once the Scottish Sun reporter had made his statements.

Today, I have completed my formal complaint to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission about Ms McMenamin, suggesting that in the public interest that she be suspended from the Faculty of Advocates until a full police investigation is completed, as it would appear that offences of a possible criminal nature may well have been committed. I have also informed Steve Burns, of Black Chambers, about the situation as it would be very unfair for the other members of her chambers to receive adverse publicity due to her misconduct. Black Chambers will make no comment at present over Ms McMenamin`s position.

To say that I am displeased with Ms McMenamin would be an understatement as I trusted her with defending me and regularly commented publicly on her excellent reputation. I regard myself as an easy-going person (I hope), but do not take betrayal very well.

I hope to have news of possible arrests by the police soon, if that is not too much to hope for in Scotland, but have named Procurators Fiscal Anne Currie and Stephen McGowan, who were both present in Stonehaven on 15th November, along with Ms McMenamin as likely suspects. Also, as witnesses, the Scottish Sun reporter, of course and Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen. It would not be right to accuse the Sheriff of any impropriety, but as the incidents happened under his personal jurisdiction,  I have suggested that it might be in the best interests of justice that he recuse himself from my case whilst a police investigation into what seem to be prima facie offences has been concluded.

To those who are justifiably questioning the costs to the public purse of this extraordinary case, I should emphasise that I have always stressed the need for Elish Angiolini to be called as witness for the defence. Any concern about unnecessarily wasting further money should therefore be directed at my past Senior Counsels.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Angiolini As Witness

Today, I met my legal team again in Glasgow to discuss the forhcoming trial and the witnesses required for the defence.

I had made it clear that Elish Angiolini is probably the most important witness for the defence and must be called. However, after deliberations, Senior Counsel Gary Allen QC felt that Angiolini`s appearance in the witness box would prove damaging to the defence, on the grounds that she would refuse to answer questions that may incriminate her and in that, her position would be supported by the sheriff.

I stated that whilst I had never held any great expectation of Angiolini breaking down under cross-examination and confessing, I considered it valuable both to the defence and in the public interest for her to be seen in court, failing to answer pertinent questions about her conduct in public office in connection with both my case and that of Hollie. It has been her failings and private interventions with the media, using public funds, that led to me taking the course that has resulted in the prosecution that she in fact personally authorised.

Thus I regard her as a key witness. I also failed to see how Angiolini being cross-examined could possibly harm the defence.

As a result of our difference of opinion, we have mutually agreed that I would be best served by instructing another Senior Counsel to represent me. I accept that Mr Allen and Junior Counsel, who supported his view, were acting professionally in what they deemed to be my best interests and there is hence no ill will of any kind. It is just that an impasse was reached on a single important issue that could not be resolved.

My solicitor will try to find a new team to represent me in the future, but it must be on the fundamental basis that Elish Angiolini is called as witness for the defence. I will not accept any deviation from that position.

It appears obvious that given the complexity of the case, it would be unrealistic for the trial to still go ahead on 16th January, as it would take a new team, even if it were to be assembled quickly, a considerable amount of time to examine the vast amount of documentation and to have the appropriate consultations, but I must await advice from my solicitor on that point.

I am anxious to emphasise that no criticism should be made about Counsels` decision today. It was a honest but irrevocable divergence of view.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

The Daily Mail and Stephen Lawrence

Today, some justice was finally done by the conviction of two of the murderers of Stephen Lawrence, after eighteen years of gallant effort by the poor young man`s parents and others.

The Daily Mail has been congratulated for publishing an article, some years ago, after the police had discontinued the initial investigation due to "insufficient evidence"- where have we heard that before?

The Mail decided to go ahead and name the five men it believed to have killed Stephen on the basis that it was in the public interest, that the police`s investigation was unsatisfactory and that given the nature of the crime, the public remained at risk from the perpetrators. The Daily Mail went on to invite anyone who thought the article inaccurate to take action against it. No one did.

This is precisely the position that I have always taken in the cases of Hollie Greig and Robert Greig, yet I am being prosecuted.

Let us hope that it does not take as long as eighteen years for these terrible crimes to be fully investigated.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Coming Trial, Monday 16th January.

Although there will, no doubt, be discussions involving both sets of legal representatives, at present there remains the prospect of a maximum combined total of 96 witnesses being called by the prosecution and the defence.

As far as the prosecution is concerned, the two individuals named unconditionally as sexual abusers in Dr Eva Harding`s successful report to the CICA, which resulted in the compensation award by the state to Hollie, have not been identified by the prosecution for some reason that one can only speculate upon. The pair are, of course, the father and brother of Hollie, whom one might reasonably expect to be the most distressed of all the possible witnesses, if my allegations were without substance. However, I do intend to call them for the defence.

In fairness, it must be said that one other alleged abuser of Hollie, a female relative named in Dr Harding`s report, has provided a statement for the Crown and I shall be most interested to see how she behaves under cross-examination.

It may be that pyschological and medical examinations may be required of some witnesses to establish further whether or not they are telling the truth, as I am given to understand that reasonably reliable analyses  exist in cases of ritual abuse for both perpetrators and victims.

Meanwhile, I am awaiting a response to my formal complaint to PC Vicky Henderson of the seemingly prima facie case of crime being committed in Stonehaven Court on 15th November involving the Crown, Frances McMenamin QC and a reporter from the Scottish Sun. Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen has also been named as a possible witness to the likely offences committed.  

Finally, may I wish all the kind people throughout the world who have been following the Hollie Greig case a very Happy New Year and to thank you all for your support. It means so much to Hollie and Anne.