[0762]

Come on yourself, 0762.

I am absolutely certain that you and the people involved in this case have the nous to realise that slimy scumbags are all around waiting to pounce on any indiscretion, especially in this age of instant social media transmission. In fact, slimy scumbags have been with us for thousands of years doing exactly the same thing.

I have no beef with you about your reaction towards these people, but Gordon Jackson didn't need to be trapped into his comments by underhand means. He managed to do it all by himself. Add in the fact that, as a defence counsel, Jackson will have dealt with and defended a few slimy scumbags on occasions, so will be well aware of the lower end of human behaviour.

I'll quickly add that this kinda covert action is a blatant breach of any citizen's human rights and privacy! That is a fact and it should be condemned "out of hand" by any free-thinking citizen. It is alright saying it exists but it should be "stamped out" and offenders charged with such unlawful action anyway - a basic human right. Re Jackson, sources close to him and the Dean of faculty have said the remarks were "taken out of context and misreported" esp in many unionist newspapers. Lets "turn this debate on a sixpence" and look at the post trial media response. Ecky was cleared in the High Court of all the charges against him, but it appears that that's not good enough for some people, esp in RW press circles. Ever since the verdict was announced there's been a constant sniping against him, and aspersions cast upon him by people who were clearly "rubbing their hands in glee" at the prospect of a guilty verdict and who now are frustrated and angry that they've been deprived of a much longed for scalp. I hope Ecky takes many of them to a lawsuit much like Cliff Richard did against the bbc - similarly accused, innocent but NOT ANONYMOUS UNLIKE HIS ACCUSERS!!! Yet since his detractors can't get the conviction that they sought in court, they now seek a conviction in the "court of public opinion"!!! It is of course right and proper that anyone who alleges that they are the victim of a sexual assault is guaranteed anonymity - instrumental in encouraging victims to come forward and to report the abuse. However, IMO that same guarantee is not extended to those who are accused of said crimes. What an imbalance in justice, as we have seen in the fall-out from Ecky's trial. He left the High Court in Edinburgh an innocent man with no legal stain on his character but his political opponents have continued to say "ah but"?????? Don't be drawn into this nonsense!! There have been those who have claimed that in effect he might not be criminally guilty, but nevertheless he's still guilty??????? Absolutely outrageous but the RW press have been allowed to malign his character in lotsa stories thereby subverting the verdict of the court by asserting that "in their eyes" he is a person who should be condemned and rejected by the public - a highly political stance btw. WHILE THOSE WHO MADE THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM REMAIN ANONYMOUS, HE IS LEFT EXPOSED TO THE FULL GLARE OF MEDIA COVERAGE. Given that the charges against him were unanimously rejected by the jury, THIS IS A GRAVE INJUSTICE!!!! Also A VERDICT OF NOT PROVEN ON ONE OF THE CHARGES DOES NOT MEAN "WELL WE THINK HE'S GUILTY ANYWAY BUT WE'RE GOING TO LET HIM OFF WITH IT"!!!!!??????? A majority verdict for not guilty does not mean "We think he's a little bit guilty". It means that the prosecution failed to prove their case and the accused has been found not guilty, 100% NOT GUILTY!!!
The only legal or moral verdict is that Ecky is innocent, totally innocent - not "innocent but a bit guilty really". There is no shade of grey in the verdict in a criminal trial and in this case the accused left the court a free and innocent person!!! Hence it is unseemly in the extreme for people involved in the case, or for those who have commented upon it, to try to gainsay the jury after the fact of the verdict. It is worth noting that had anonymity been extended to the accused, namely Ecky, as well as to his accusers, none of this would be an issue albeit in the case of a high profile individual such a right of anonymity would be difficult to enforce. Note for info such a practise is common in the Spanish judiciary system and I can see exactly why they have it embedded in their system of criminal law for years.