Former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond charged with attempted rape | Not Guilty

Reddy Rederson

New Member
Joined
May 11, 2018
Messages
3,809
Location
Unicorn Country.
Oh well, thats the end of him guilty or not.

Mr Salmond was accused of two charges of attempted rape, nine of sexual assault, two of indecent assault and one breach of the peace.
That breach of the peace at the end makes it sound like it was all in one night. Is there anything on whats supposed to have happened? Is this historical, new, over a period of time to one or multiple people?
 

Buster15

Go on Didier
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
13,301
Location
Bristol
Supports
Bristol Rovers
Until he has been convicted or aquitted I think it best that we keep any personal thoughts to ourselves.

The guy deserves a fair trial.
 

Barca84

Full Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
3,763
Location
NOT BARCELONA
Supports
Doesn't support Barca
Until he has been convicted or aquitted I think it best that we keep any personal thoughts to ourselves.

The guy deserves a fair trial.
Clearly he's innocent until proven otherwise. Discussion about his case is perfectly normal as is any other.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Just a reminder. The case is now active, so the legitimate UK press will stick to information from the court case, which could take months to emerge. Please don't add gossip, rumours etc to the thread and please don't quote non-UK news sources or Twitter stuff other than things from trusted UK media accounts.
 

Barca84

Full Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
3,763
Location
NOT BARCELONA
Supports
Doesn't support Barca
I was genuinely shocked by this.
I'm not overly surprised.

Sometimes people operate in a way that suggests that they believe themselves to be a step ahead of everyone else. They're smarter. And they get overconfident and feel just a little too untouchable. And people like that get taken down eventually. I'm obviously not suggesting this is the case with Mr Salmond who's humility and capacity for self effacement has never been called into question.

It will be interesting to hear if what is alleged to have occurred was a pattern of behaviour (as is so often the case) and not isolated. If the alleged behaviour occurred over a period of time there'll be questions about what the SNP knew about, when it knew about it, and what it did, or did not do, about it. Nippy does not look or sound her usual bullish self.
 
Last edited:

Red Defence

Full Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
12,940
Location
“United stands for attacking, attractive football
ALEX Salmond has accused Nicola Sturgeon of “rewriting history” after his time as First Minister was mysteriously left off the SNP website.

The “history” section of the party’s internet pages appears to have been changed on January 15.
It tells of the formation of the first SNP government in 2007 — but Mr Salmond isn’t mentioned as its leader.

An article on the 2014 independence referendum also fails to mention him.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/ne...d-nicola-sturgeon-snp-website-first-minister/
Bit much that, why have they done such a thing.
 

altodevil

Odds winner of 'Odds or Evens 2023/2024'
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
17,350
I've been doing work with the Scottish Parliament all week. SNP MSPs looking pretty glum. Have to hope Nicola distances herself a bit, she's a star, and it would be a terrific loss if she becomes embroiled.
 

Don't Kill Bill

Full Member
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
5,652
I never liked the guy or his politics but I want to see how the charges are backed up before I judge this. He has been a public figure for decades so if the charges are specific in time and place then he has a good chance of refuting them factually if they are made up as he suggests they are.

On the other hand if this is a pattern of behaviour with people he has had power over then I am going to find it hard to believe the SNP hierarchy knew nothing at all about it.

They say week is a long time in politics but if he goes to jail its going to seem like an eternity for him in comparison.
 

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,107
Location
bin
It's always the pretty men that you have to look out for.
 
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
479
BBC - Alex Salmond accused of sexual assaults on 10 women

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50486713



Alex Salmond has appeared in court charged with carrying out a series of sexual offences against 10 women while serving as Scotland's first minister.

Mr Salmond faced a total of 14 charges at the High Court in Edinburgh.

He denies all the allegations, which include one attempted rape, one intent to rape, 10 sexual assaults and two indecent assaults.

The offences are alleged to have happened between June 2008 and November 2014.

His QC, Gordon Jackson, indicated that Mr Salmond will plead not guilty, and judge Lady Dorrian set the trial date for 9 March next year. The trial is expected to last about four weeks.

Mr Salmond served as first minister between 16 May 2007 and 20 November 2014.

The attempted rape is said to have happened in June 2014 at the first minister's official Bute House residence in Edinburgh. He is alleged to have pushed a woman against a wall and to have removed her clothes and his own, before pushing her onto a bed and lying naked on top of her.

The other 13 charges allege that the 64-year-old former SNP leader:

  • Indecently assaulted a woman on a number of occasions in Glasgow in June and July 2008 by kissing her on the mouth and touching her buttocks and breasts with his hands over her clothing
  • Sexually assaulted the same woman in December 2010 or December 2011 in the Ego nightclub in Edinburgh by touching her arms and hips with his hands over her clothing
  • Indecently assaulted a woman in October or November 2010 at Bute House by repeatedly seizing her by the wrists and repeatedly pulling her towards him and attempting to kiss her
  • Sexually assaulted a woman in a car in Edinburgh in February 2011 by touching her leg with his hand over her clothing
  • Sexually assaulted a woman on various occasions between 2011 and 2013 at Bute House, the Scottish Parliament and other locations by touching her buttocks with his hands over her clothing, stroking her arms, and touching and stroking her hair
  • Sexually assaulted a woman at Bute House in October 2013 by removing her foot from her shoe, stroking her foot, lifting her foot towards his mouth and attempting to kiss her foot
  • Sexually assaulted a woman at Bute House in November or December 2013 by kissing her on the mouth
  • Intended to rape the same woman in December 2013 at Bute House by causing her to sit on a bed, lying on top of her, making sexual remarks to her, touching her buttocks, thighs and breasts over her clothing with his hands, repeatedly kissing her face, struggling with her and pulling up her dress
  • Sexually assaulted a woman in 2012 at the Ubiquitous Chip restaurant in Glasgow by touching her buttocks with his hand over her clothing
  • Sexually assaulted the same woman at Bute House in April 2014 by placing his arm around her, making sexual remarks to her and attempting to kiss her
  • Sexually assaulted a woman at Bute House in May 2014 by placing his arm around her body, placing his hand under her clothing and underwear and touching her breast, repeatedly kissing her on the face and neck and stroking her leg with his hand
  • Sexually assaulted a woman at Bute House in September 2014 by seizing her by the shoulders, repeatedly kissing her on the face, attempting to kiss her on the lips and touching her leg and face with his hand
  • Sexually assaulted a woman at Stirling Castle in November 2014 by touching her buttock with his hand over her clothing
Police began an investigation following a Scottish government inquiry into complaints of sexual harassment against Mr Salmond.

Mr Salmond launched a judicial review against the government over how it had handled its inquiry, saying he had been treated unfairly.

The government later conceded its procedures had been flawed and paid out more than £500,000 in Mr Salmond's legal expenses.
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,314
Location
Birmingham
You'd think people in the public eye would want to be extra careful around women.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Some nasty accusations in that list, though I do find the classification of touching of arms and legs as sexual assaults to be a bit much.
 

altodevil

Odds winner of 'Odds or Evens 2023/2024'
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
17,350
Legs for sure. Arms - there are natural gestures involving those, and so would depend on context. Clearly in this case they were suggestive and unwarranted.
 

NotworkSte

Full Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
687
Location
Tampa, Fl
Legs for sure. Arms - there are natural gestures involving those, and so would depend on context. Clearly in this case they were suggestive and unwarranted.
Disagree and as I tell my daughter, her body is hers and no one has a right to share it that she doesn’t want to. She decides that.
 

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,107
Location
bin
Legs for sure. Arms - there are natural gestures involving those, and so would depend on context. Clearly in this case they were suggestive and unwarranted.
Let's face it. A touch on the arm by an (alleged) sex offender would mean much more than just a natural gesture.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
He's been accused by ten(?) women of charges ranging from sexual assault to attempted rape. Whatever about the context of that one particular arm/leg touching incident itself, I think we've been given enough overall context not to begin from a position of downplaying that sexual assault charge for no apparent reason.
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
27,359
Obviously counting a leg or arm touch over clothes as sexual assault is nonsense, unwanted or not, but clearly there's a pattern there of perhaps someone getting gropey and forcing himself on women when he's been drinking. It's the attempted rape charges that are where the focus will be. The rest is presumably just to help paint a pattern of behaviour to a jury. His reputation is destroyed whatever the outcome, he always was the perfect stereotype of a sleazeball.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,446
Location
Manchester
Obviously counting a leg or arm touch over clothes as sexual assault is nonsense, unwanted or not, but clearly there's a pattern there of perhaps someone getting gropey and forcing himself on women when he's been drinking. It's the attempted rape charges that are where the focus will be. The rest is presumably just to help paint a pattern of behaviour to a jury. His reputation is destroyed whatever the outcome, he always was the perfect stereotype of a sleazeball.
Wait. What?!
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Really? Put yourself in a woman's shoes and maybe reassess?

Do you know the definition of simple assault?
No one's being dismissive of the sexual assault. A pat on the forearm or a person's leg when they're seated seems a stretch. We don't know the context or the nature of the touching but that these two charges are included among the list of other, significant and serious acts almost makes a mockery of the rest of them. They don't need to be included.

I'm not familiar with Scottish law but generally people don't need laws to protect them from simple touching. That's normal human behaviour. People can self police it if it's unwanted. Making it legally questionable to interact physically with someone is messing us up as a society.
 

Grinner

Not fat gutted. Hirsuteness of shoulders TBD.
Staff
Joined
May 5, 2003
Messages
72,287
Location
I love free dirt and rocks!
Supports
Arsenal
No one's being dismissive of the sexual assault. A pat on the forearm or a person's leg when they're seated seems a stretch. We don't know the context or the nature of the touching but that these two charges are included among the list of other, significant and serious acts almost makes a mockery of the rest of them. They don't need to be included.

I'm not familiar with Scottish law but generally people don't need laws to protect them from simple touching. That's normal human behaviour. People can self police it if it's unwanted. Making it legally questionable to interact physically with someone is messing us up as a society.
It's a shocking attitude and you're wrong. You don't even know what happened so you're arguments are pointless. If a woman has reported it and the police had enough to charge then I doubt it's just a pat on the leg or arm.

'self police'? that's just a ridiculous thing to say.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
It's a shocking attitude and you're wrong. You don't even know what happened so you're arguments are pointless. If a woman has reported it and the police had enough to charge then I doubt it's just a pat on the leg or arm.

'self police'? that's just a ridiculous thing to say.
No, I said the context was important to know. From where we sit, their inclusion seems pointless. It looks like overkill from the crown and those charges will probably be dismissed. You're reading what we're saying about two specific charges and thinking the viewpoint applies to all of them. You are wrong.

If someone touches your arm with their hand and you don't want them to, you tell them not to. It's simple assertiveness. Based on your view, I could have had at least three women charged with sexual assault in the last week. But these actions are normal human behaviour used to develop personal relationships so I don't complain. Some people, it seems, would rather live in a bubble their whole life.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
No one's being dismissive of the sexual assault. A pat on the forearm or a person's leg when they're seated seems a stretch. We don't know the context or the nature of the touching but that these two charges are included among the list of other, significant and serious acts almost makes a mockery of the rest of them. They don't need to be included.

I'm not familiar with Scottish law but generally people don't need laws to protect them from simple touching. That's normal human behaviour. People can self police it if it's unwanted. Making it legally questionable to interact physically with someone is messing us up as a society.
1) You have no idea what happened so why you're willfully choosing to imagine it as being as mild as "a pat on the forearm or a person's leg when they're seated", I have no idea. Especially in the context of all the other charges.

2) If you're saying that something that can get you a sexual assault charge isn't sexual assault then by definition you're being dismissive of the sexual assault.

3) Prosecuting a lesser form of sexual assault makes a mockery of more serious sexual assault in the same way that prosecuting minor theft makes a mockery of major theft. In other words, it doesn't.

4) The blanket notion that women can self-police unwanted physical contact or don't need laws protecting them from such is stupid beyond belief.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
1) You have no idea what happened so why you're willfully choosing to imagine it as being as mild as "a pat on the forearm or a person's leg when they're seated", I have no idea. Especially in the context of all the other charges.

2) If you're saying that something that can get you a sexual assault charge isn't sexual assault then by definition you're being dismissive of the sexual assault.

3) Prosecuting a lesser form of sexual assault makes a mockery of more serious sexual assault in the same way that prosecuting minor theft makes a mockery of major theft. In other words, it doesn't.

4) The blanket notion that women can self-police unwanted physical contact or don't need laws protecting them from such is stupid beyond belief.
Sure, that's why I've repeatedly said the context is important. Context is important for two of the points you're arguing here. I'd like to know when touching someone on the arm or leg constitutes sexual assault. The charges listed above do a good job of clarifying where all of his other actions constitute sexual assault (i.e. "placing his arm around her, making sexual remarks to her and attempting to kiss her") but the arms and legs ones do not. Some of the reactions here are as if I'm claiming these are false accusations, which is wholly erroneous.
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
27,359
It's pretty obvious the innocuous-sounding charges were just included to support and bolster the ones that actually are serious offences. Or in other words, would Salmond be facing a court date if he'd only (allegedly) touched a leg or stroked an arm? No. Of course not.