7 ms·

Craig Murray, friend of Julian Assange, was just released from a Scottish prison for the crime of jigsaw identification of some of the accusers in the trial of

Craig Murray, friend of Julian Assange, was just released from a Scottish prison for the crime of jigsaw identification of some of the accusers in the trial of former First Minister, Alex Salmond despite the fact that many journalists from mainstream media had published information that allowed their readers to identify some of the accusers explicitly. So it's not just a problem of dictatorships in second or third world countries. But then again, maybe it is. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/

pydry 5y ago
What's crazy about his case is that he was sentenced to more time than somebody who just outright named an accuser on twitter. Leonna Dorrian should be disbarred. What she did was a blatant abuse of her power.
- gadders 5y ago
  I'm English, and pretty far from Murray politically, but from what I've read in other places as well the Scottish Government, the SNP, and the Scottish judiciary seem very close - probably too close.
  - FridayoLeary 5y ago
    The Scottish Government is the most useless, unnecessary body imaginable. The only office less important then that of the First Minister must be the Vice President in the US. It's not surprising that petty officials will abuse their power as much as they can.
  - smackay 5y ago
    The fundamental problem is that there is no separation of powers between the government and the judiciary as you might find in most (all?) modern democracies. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) acts as the governments lawyers and the prosecution service. Most of the accusers in the trial of Alex Salmond, for which he was acquitted on all charges, are close associates of the leadership of the Scottish National Party which are currently in power in the devolved parliament. The risks are clear and obvious.
    - 1cvmask 5y ago
      Isn’t that one of the definitions of dictatorships in other non-white countries according to neocon NGO/CIA/white savior class. The separation of powers that may exist de jure but no de facto when it comes to the power structure like in the US.
    - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
      I'm a bit confused by this statement about separation of powers. The function of a prosecutor is not a judicial function in the context of an adversarial legal system such as the common law.
      - pjc50 5y ago
        Moreover, how is this really different from the CPS in the rest of the UK?
        gadders 5y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Prosecution_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Prosecution_Service "The Attorney General for England and Wales superintends the CPS's work and answers for it in Parliament, although the Attorney General has no influence over the conduct of prosecutions, except when national security is an issue or for a small number of offences that require the Attorney General's permission to prosecute." So yeah, it's much more arms-length than Scotland.
      - gadders 5y ago
        True, but I think choosing which cases to prosecute (or not prosecute) based on political expediency rather than weight of evidence could be the danger here.
        NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
        The notion that (theoretically independent in either case) prosecutors who are part of the judicial branch rather than the executive branch are less likely to be influenced by political considerations is worth examining. I have real doubts it is valid.
- ajb 5y ago
  Yeah that judgement was crazy. It has been spun as being about protecting the identity of victims of sexual offences, but I don't believe that for a moment because the judgement contained a detailed account of how you could find the accusers from Murray's articles. So I personally had no idea who they were when I read his article originally, but it was easy to figure out from the judgement. If what they cared about was protecting the identities, the judgement would never have been written that way.
  - pydry 5y ago
    IIRC the argument was that by "identifying" the supposed victims he "could have" prejudiced the trial. The UK has exceptionally strict laws surrounding interference with an ongoing trial. It's much easier to get somebody on that than it is most crimes if you're motivated. The judge seems to have been lashing out after failing to convict Alex Salmond and reading the blog posts which lampooned her. They didn't come after him while the trial was in progress. Tommy Robinson was also convicted on similar charges of attempting to prejudice a trial.
  - teh_klev 5y ago
    Not only this. Before the criminal trial there were no restrictions on reporting the identity of the accusers. Murray had even pointed this out in his affidavit to the court that he had chosen not to though it would have been quite legitimate to do so at that time.
  - BehindBlueEyes 5y ago
    I'm not surprised. I haven't had much faith in the system protecting identities since the time I had to move for witness protection only to find my new address revealed to all parties in the summons to the hearing.
gampleman 5y ago
Sadly looking at the map in the OP, the UK is reported as 0 journalists imprisoned. Between Julian Assange and Craig Murray that seems low.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Usual problem - how do you define a journalist and how do you say whether they've been jailed for being a journalist or not.
  - delecti 5y ago
    How to define a journalist is a tough problem I can't easily solve, but I'd be inclined to say that once you do, any of them being in jail for any reason should count. The risk of overcounting the few journalists who might genuinely commit crimes unrelated to their journalism seems lower than the risk of undercounting journalists who were in reality jailed because of their journalism, but were officially for invented crimes.
    - boringg 5y ago
      Are you suggesting a (jailed journalist) / (total journalists in the country) ratio to determine the level of control that the government is trying to exert?
    - golemotron 5y ago
      "Journalism" was a temporary artifact of the transition from industrial to technological economy. There was a brief time when communicating broadly was hard and required capital. Now, anyone can do it. It's important to remember how vulgar early (and pre) 20th century journalism was. Largely opinion, hearsay and sensationalism. Later, journalism consolidated and developed standards to sell itself. Once technology put it in everyone's hands, it became so cheap that standards could no longer be a moat. We're back to vulgarity. I don't think there is any significant difference in the market between someone who went to the Columbia School of Journalism and a blogger.
koheripbal 5y ago
Wait, it's doxxing a witness a bad thing? This seems like a legitimate crime.
- pjc50 5y ago
  Accusers, who in Scotland are afforded legal protection from being named in the press in cases of sexual assault.
laydn 5y ago
Well a journalist -a US citizen- (Jamal Khashoggi) was killed in a foreign (Saudi) embassy; evidence (including, Audio evidence) was presented of the killing and was found to be credible, CIA concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing.... then.... what happened? Nothing. In a world where you can kill a US journalist so brazenly without any repercussions, would you be surprised journalists being jailed for $reasons ?
- tc313 5y ago
  Not to notpick, but while Khashoggi was a US resident, he was not a US citizen.
  - jaywalk 5y ago
    That's not a nitpick, it's a very important point. It doesn't justify the killing in any way, but it does shed some light on why the US response was what it was.
- finiteseries 5y ago
  A “US journalist” whose grandfather was the personal physician to the house of Saudi’s founder, whose billionaire arms dealing uncle was involved in Iran Contra, whose first cousin was in that car with Princess Diana… He was hilariously Saudi!
  - birdyrooster 5y ago
    Hilarious is a strange adjective to use. So to you a person is defined largely by their extended family.
  - tootie 5y ago
    His billionaire uncle Adnan also sold a yacht to Donald Trump.
  - driverdan 5y ago
    How is that relevant?

pydry 5y ago

What's crazy about his case is that he was sentenced to more time than somebody who just outright named an accuser on twitter. Leonna Dorrian should be disbarred. What she did was a blatant abuse of her power.

gadders 5y ago
I'm English, and pretty far from Murray politically, but from what I've read in other places as well the Scottish Government, the SNP, and the Scottish judiciary seem very close - probably too close.
- FridayoLeary 5y ago
  The Scottish Government is the most useless, unnecessary body imaginable. The only office less important then that of the First Minister must be the Vice President in the US. It's not surprising that petty officials will abuse their power as much as they can.
- smackay 5y ago
  The fundamental problem is that there is no separation of powers between the government and the judiciary as you might find in most (all?) modern democracies. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) acts as the governments lawyers and the prosecution service. Most of the accusers in the trial of Alex Salmond, for which he was acquitted on all charges, are close associates of the leadership of the Scottish National Party which are currently in power in the devolved parliament. The risks are clear and obvious.
  - 1cvmask 5y ago
    Isn’t that one of the definitions of dictatorships in other non-white countries according to neocon NGO/CIA/white savior class. The separation of powers that may exist de jure but no de facto when it comes to the power structure like in the US.
  - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
    I'm a bit confused by this statement about separation of powers. The function of a prosecutor is not a judicial function in the context of an adversarial legal system such as the common law.
    - pjc50 5y ago
      Moreover, how is this really different from the CPS in the rest of the UK?
      - gadders 5y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Prosecution_Service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Prosecution_Service "The Attorney General for England and Wales superintends the CPS's work and answers for it in Parliament, although the Attorney General has no influence over the conduct of prosecutions, except when national security is an issue or for a small number of offences that require the Attorney General's permission to prosecute." So yeah, it's much more arms-length than Scotland.
    - gadders 5y ago
      True, but I think choosing which cases to prosecute (or not prosecute) based on political expediency rather than weight of evidence could be the danger here.
      - NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
        The notion that (theoretically independent in either case) prosecutors who are part of the judicial branch rather than the executive branch are less likely to be influenced by political considerations is worth examining. I have real doubts it is valid.
ajb 5y ago
Yeah that judgement was crazy. It has been spun as being about protecting the identity of victims of sexual offences, but I don't believe that for a moment because the judgement contained a detailed account of how you could find the accusers from Murray's articles. So I personally had no idea who they were when I read his article originally, but it was easy to figure out from the judgement. If what they cared about was protecting the identities, the judgement would never have been written that way.
- pydry 5y ago
  IIRC the argument was that by "identifying" the supposed victims he "could have" prejudiced the trial. The UK has exceptionally strict laws surrounding interference with an ongoing trial. It's much easier to get somebody on that than it is most crimes if you're motivated. The judge seems to have been lashing out after failing to convict Alex Salmond and reading the blog posts which lampooned her. They didn't come after him while the trial was in progress. Tommy Robinson was also convicted on similar charges of attempting to prejudice a trial.
- teh_klev 5y ago
  Not only this. Before the criminal trial there were no restrictions on reporting the identity of the accusers. Murray had even pointed this out in his affidavit to the court that he had chosen not to though it would have been quite legitimate to do so at that time.
- BehindBlueEyes 5y ago
  I'm not surprised. I haven't had much faith in the system protecting identities since the time I had to move for witness protection only to find my new address revealed to all parties in the summons to the hearing.

gampleman 5y ago

Sadly looking at the map in the OP, the UK is reported as 0 journalists imprisoned. Between Julian Assange and Craig Murray that seems low.

chrisseaton 5y ago
Usual problem - how do you define a journalist and how do you say whether they've been jailed for being a journalist or not.
- delecti 5y ago
  How to define a journalist is a tough problem I can't easily solve, but I'd be inclined to say that once you do, any of them being in jail for any reason should count. The risk of overcounting the few journalists who might genuinely commit crimes unrelated to their journalism seems lower than the risk of undercounting journalists who were in reality jailed because of their journalism, but were officially for invented crimes.
  - boringg 5y ago
    Are you suggesting a (jailed journalist) / (total journalists in the country) ratio to determine the level of control that the government is trying to exert?
  - golemotron 5y ago
    "Journalism" was a temporary artifact of the transition from industrial to technological economy. There was a brief time when communicating broadly was hard and required capital. Now, anyone can do it. It's important to remember how vulgar early (and pre) 20th century journalism was. Largely opinion, hearsay and sensationalism. Later, journalism consolidated and developed standards to sell itself. Once technology put it in everyone's hands, it became so cheap that standards could no longer be a moat. We're back to vulgarity. I don't think there is any significant difference in the market between someone who went to the Columbia School of Journalism and a blogger.

koheripbal 5y ago

Wait, it's doxxing a witness a bad thing? This seems like a legitimate crime.

pjc50 5y ago
Accusers, who in Scotland are afforded legal protection from being named in the press in cases of sexual assault.

laydn 5y ago

Well a journalist -a US citizen- (Jamal Khashoggi) was killed in a foreign (Saudi) embassy; evidence (including, Audio evidence) was presented of the killing and was found to be credible, CIA concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the killing.... then.... what happened? Nothing. In a world where you can kill a US journalist so brazenly without any repercussions, would you be surprised journalists being jailed for $reasons ?

tc313 5y ago
Not to notpick, but while Khashoggi was a US resident, he was not a US citizen.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  That's not a nitpick, it's a very important point. It doesn't justify the killing in any way, but it does shed some light on why the US response was what it was.
finiteseries 5y ago
A “US journalist” whose grandfather was the personal physician to the house of Saudi’s founder, whose billionaire arms dealing uncle was involved in Iran Contra, whose first cousin was in that car with Princess Diana… He was hilariously Saudi!
- birdyrooster 5y ago
  Hilarious is a strange adjective to use. So to you a person is defined largely by their extended family.
- tootie 5y ago
  His billionaire uncle Adnan also sold a yacht to Donald Trump.
- driverdan 5y ago
  How is that relevant?