5 ms·

Craig Murray identified complainants who's identity had been protected by court order. What did you expect to happen?

denton-scratch 3y ago
Not really; that's "jigsaw identification", i.e. identification is only possible by combining multiple reports. It was not possible to identify complainants just by reading Craig's blog. Other journalists, whose writings could be used to directly identify complainants, were not prosecuted.
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  Did he supply a crucial missing piece of the puzzle then?
  - denton-scratch 3y ago
    The prosecution case was that he provided a piece of the puzzle. I have no reason to believe it was a crucial piece. I was reading his blog while all this was going on. Despite my curiosity, I was unable to get any clues about who the letter-women were. But I'm not Scottish, I'm not involved with the Scottish National Party, and I don't hang around with SNP politicians (or any politicians). Perhaps someone who mixed in those circles could have found clues; I understand that several Sottish journalists published pieces from which a knowledgeable reader could deduce who was being referred to. But I believe Murray was pretty scrupulous in avoiding violating the judge's order. I think it's obvious he was persecuted for his trenchant support of Alex Salmond.
    - peterfirefly 3y ago
      That reminds me of one of the cases against Tommy Robinson (in 2018). As far as I could tell from abroad, he really didn't disclose anything that hadn't already been disclosed in traditional media. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(far-right_activist)#2018_imprisonment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(far-right_acti... And even if he did -- there is something wrong with a justice system that would let that lead to these guys going free: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddersfield_grooming_gang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddersfield_grooming_gang Reading the dates (years!) relevant to the case is enough to make anyone shutter -- first complaint taken seriously (allegedly) was in 2011 and the arrests didn't happen until 2017. Some cases seem to be more about politics than about the law (let alone justice). --- Do I have to say it? I probably do. I think Robinson is an idiot. A football hooligan who seems to have oppositional defiant disorder. He is also right that there is a problem with Muslim crime in the UK -- and their grooming gangs seem to be a huge problem and there has indisputably been a cover up of it.
  - stephen_g 3y ago
    My recollection is that there was no crucial piece that was not around the same time also reported in the mass media. Why this was dismissed as apparently not being relevant as a defence was confusing (if I recall correctly, something about media being self-regulating through a professional association and blogs not being so, which doesn’t seem to matter when a reporter in the media did the exact same thing with no consequences that Murray was jailed for)
janice1999 3y ago
> Craig Murray identified complainants He didn't. His reporting included facts that the police and judge claimed could be used to identify people. Many of these facts were also public knowledge anyone following the case likely already knew. These were the same police who brought the failed charges against Salmond. The entire case stinks of corruption and many people including Noam Chomsky have publically backed Murray. [0] https://www.thenational.scot/news/18486299.global-figures-including-pink-floyd-star-sign-letter-backing-craig-murray/ https://www.thenational.scot/news/18486299.global-figures-in...
- Marazan 3y ago
  Look, if at judge warns me that I have published information that may be used to identify an person who's identify is under legal order and I continue and repeatedly publish further information that may be used to identify the person what do you expect to happen?

Not really; that's "jigsaw identification", i.e. identification is only possible by combining multiple reports. It was not possible to identify complainants just by reading Craig's blog. Other journalists, whose writings could be used to directly identify complainants, were not prosecuted.

peterfirefly 3y ago
Did he supply a crucial missing piece of the puzzle then?
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  The prosecution case was that he provided a piece of the puzzle. I have no reason to believe it was a crucial piece. I was reading his blog while all this was going on. Despite my curiosity, I was unable to get any clues about who the letter-women were. But I'm not Scottish, I'm not involved with the Scottish National Party, and I don't hang around with SNP politicians (or any politicians). Perhaps someone who mixed in those circles could have found clues; I understand that several Sottish journalists published pieces from which a knowledgeable reader could deduce who was being referred to. But I believe Murray was pretty scrupulous in avoiding violating the judge's order. I think it's obvious he was persecuted for his trenchant support of Alex Salmond.
  - peterfirefly 3y ago
    That reminds me of one of the cases against Tommy Robinson (in 2018). As far as I could tell from abroad, he really didn't disclose anything that hadn't already been disclosed in traditional media. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(far-right_activist)#2018_imprisonment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robinson_(far-right_acti... And even if he did -- there is something wrong with a justice system that would let that lead to these guys going free: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddersfield_grooming_gang https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huddersfield_grooming_gang Reading the dates (years!) relevant to the case is enough to make anyone shutter -- first complaint taken seriously (allegedly) was in 2011 and the arrests didn't happen until 2017. Some cases seem to be more about politics than about the law (let alone justice). --- Do I have to say it? I probably do. I think Robinson is an idiot. A football hooligan who seems to have oppositional defiant disorder. He is also right that there is a problem with Muslim crime in the UK -- and their grooming gangs seem to be a huge problem and there has indisputably been a cover up of it.
- stephen_g 3y ago
  My recollection is that there was no crucial piece that was not around the same time also reported in the mass media. Why this was dismissed as apparently not being relevant as a defence was confusing (if I recall correctly, something about media being self-regulating through a professional association and blogs not being so, which doesn’t seem to matter when a reporter in the media did the exact same thing with no consequences that Murray was jailed for)

janice1999 3y ago

> Craig Murray identified complainants He didn't. His reporting included facts that the police and judge claimed could be used to identify people. Many of these facts were also public knowledge anyone following the case likely already knew. These were the same police who brought the failed charges against Salmond. The entire case stinks of corruption and many people including Noam Chomsky have publically backed Murray. [0] https://www.thenational.scot/news/18486299.global-figures-including-pink-floyd-star-sign-letter-backing-craig-murray/ https://www.thenational.scot/news/18486299.global-figures-in...

Marazan 3y ago
Look, if at judge warns me that I have published information that may be used to identify an person who's identify is under legal order and I continue and repeatedly publish further information that may be used to identify the person what do you expect to happen?