7. Ignorance is no
defence…
Call Elish Angiolini!
One of the more ridiculous cries from Robert Green in his
attempts to justify himself and his actions... Mrs Angiolini was cited as a
supposed witness against the charge that by his actions he gave the lieges of
Aberdeen a ‘terrible fright’!
I can only suppose that lurking (planted?) somewhere in the
back of Robert Green’s befuddled mind was the notion that he could – somehow –
‘prove’ some element of Anne Greig’s claims and thereby claim that his actions
were ‘reasonable in the circumstances’; always
a weak defence to a Breach Of the Peace charge at best. Just plain idiocy in this case... Green’s attempts to ‘showboat’ at his trial
were his undoing. They were also, quite frankly, pathetic!
Clearly Mrs Angiolini could have no possible input to
contradict matters such as the fear (apparently) instilled in an ordinary
Tile-Fitter for the safety of his Grandchildren; one of the key things Green
failed or refused to address in his so-called ‘defence’! The plain truth is that the court does have the right to refuse witnesses
who can have no relevant testimony - There was never any possibility of her
answering the summons or alternatively of that summons not being struck out;
the court is not about to have its time wasted.
Again – for the hard of thinking I’ll reiterate – Robert
Green was on trial for breach of the peace – not for handing out leaflets, not
for defending anyone; all that is just a lie Robert and his supporters spin to
try and distort reality. The charge against his was that he frightened the
living daylights out of people. And if –
as was the case – someone is prepared to get up onto the stand and tell the
court they were frightened by his actions than that’s it – case proved… Unless
you can discredit that testimony. Robert didn’t even try…
The prosecution case was a piss-poor collection of dried up
old bollocks. And Robert Green just let them steamroller over him while he
tilted away at the windmills of his own mind!
Could Elish Angiolini have played a part in the malicious
prosecution of Green though? That’s certainly a reasonable question to ask. Her
reaction to the wider Hollie Greig case being really quite extreme and out of
all proportion; from her conduct you might form (as I have) the opinion that
yes, she may well have a hand in the persecution of Robert Green...
For instance, perfectly valid and reasonable questions have
been asked (and not as far as I can ascertain answered) with respect to whether
she herself or taxpayers funded a series of legal actions against various
credible publications that had reported developments in the case. She allegedly threatened to sue legal trade
magazine ‘The Firm’ for simply reporting on the issue... And the well known legal heavyweights of Levy
& McRae, allegedly acting on behalf of Angiolini, reported sister magazine
‘The Drum’ to the Press Complaints Commission over a report they published on a
failed Freedom of Information request.
The PCC sensibly and tellingly, ruled against the Lord
Advocate.
As a private citizen and a taxpayer, these are not, in my
opinion, the actions of a rational, ethical professional acting in a
reasonable, measured manner. Rather they seem to me to indicate a hysterical
bully used to gaming the system to meet their own ends and agenda...
Here, apparently is someone who apparently very-much viewed
the Scottish justice system as their own personal fiefdom; and was happy to
throw her weight around to silence – and thus avoid answering - any critic
right up to and including the trade press of legal and public relations
industries.
Leaving aside for a moment the highly questionable and
unethical matter of trying to gag the press – If Mrs Angiolini paid her own
bill then all she had to do is say so and the whole matter would have ceased to
be anyone’s business but her own. If, on the other hand she expects me, you,
and every other citizen of Scotland to provide her with private legal insurance
then that becomes a very different matter! – One of the misuse of public funds.
And I’ll remind readers at this point that one of the most plausible reasons
for Green’s persecution at the public’s expense is that it might have saved
strain on certain of her associates fat wallets.
Reflecting upon reports of her actions, I can only reach the
conclusion that the woman could not provide a straight answer without
incriminating herself so moved to beat those who were calling her to account
into silence. I therefore gravitate towards the opinion that the public purse
was indeed (ab)used to pursue this private agenda.
“Unfortunate and
unnecessary” – allegedly the comment of a leading Scottish lawyer in respect of
Robert’s sentence; I cannot disagree. But
then the mercenaries of Mockingbird Lane had demanded a sacrifice…
I do – for various
reasons - believe Robert Green to be a gullible fool who has been deliberately
groomed and mislead along this path – abused essentially – by certain
individuals who make a fat living off promoting conspiracy theory. It is very much in their financial interests
that he was created and continues to be promoted as ‘martyr’. And, rather as a
pimp might keep a prostitute entrapped by the myth that there is some ‘real’
relationship there; the truth is that their interest him is entirely
mercenary. Green is, it’s said, kept destitute.
The question the court asked was simple... Did Robert Green
through his actions frighten people? The prosecution brought cogent (if rather weightless)
evidence to the table to confirm that yes, he did... Green offered no relevant challenge
to that whatsoever.
Deflecting responsibility and projecting blame is a common
enough tactic of the guilty…
Green and his motley crew have wailed and gnashed their teeth
long and hard trying to project blame for his downfall onto the judge who
presided over his case... Sheriff Principle Edward F Bowen QC is for
instance accused of racism’ because in sentencing Green he supposedly said Green – as an
Englishman – had ‘no place telling the Scottish legal system how to run its
affairs’.
To be clear – there is considerable doubt whether this was said at all. Personally, I don’t believe it was. – But honestly?
Robert Green let’s remember presents himself as (among other
things) a ‘lay legal adviser’. That isn’t (as he has latterly tried to claim) a
title foisted on him by others. There is material online where he has signed
himself as exactly that.
I have to tell you
that, even with some limited legal training… Even having actually taught one
aspect of law in a legitimate educational institution - the first thing I would tell my students is
that I’m not a lawyer and I therefore cannot give you legal advice. So what, we may well ask, gives Green the
right to present himself as a lay legal representative?
Risibly, Green regularly pleads the non-defence of ignorance
in respect of Scots law and bemoans the fact he faces prosecution under
it. We are supposed to take pity on this
clown because he’s being tried under a system he doesn’t understand! And it would indeed seem, despite all efforts
to encourage him to pick up a book and educate himself a little, that ignorance of the law is spectacularly wilful.
So were these alleged comments of Sheriff Bowen so
unreasonable? I say not!
It’s not racism but fair comment to ‘call out’ some bloody ignorant
Sassenach who goes around gratuitously slagging off the structure and heritage
of a justifiably proud nation and who – yes – does presume to tell the Scottish
justice system how to run its affairs.
Robert Green is the racist here… And I for one have grown
sick of his filthy slurs against my country; even if they are masked with
whinging, patronising back-pedalling sycophancy telling us what wonderful people we are.
Robert Green speak with forked tongue and wooly head!
Robert Green speak with forked tongue and wooly head!
If Green had bothered his lazy arse constructing a proper
defence to the charges he would not have been facing sentencing. In fact if
Robert Green had bothered his lazy arse researching the law he was so busy
criticising from a position of ignorance, he might have known better than to
break it in the first place!
If Sheriff Principle Edward F Bowen QC is guilty of any
‘misconduct’ at the trial of Robert Green it’s that he listened to rather too
much of the tripe Green tried to spout and failed to return a verdict of
‘bullshit’ much sooner! From beginning
to end Robert Green’s trial was a complete bloody farce! And really, Bowen was left with no choice BUT
to jail him! As I remarked at the time – Robert Green’s own Mother sitting in
the judges chair would have been left with no alternative but to send the
damned bloody fool to jail!
None of that mitigates the madness of the actions of the
Scottish authorities though. Half-a-million pounds or more of public money is
thought to have been spent chasing down and jailing the quixotic Robert Green
whilst others – arguably far more culpable in this farce – seem to be completely
immune from prosecution.
If I were to have to put a figure on it I would say that
around ninety-five percent of what you will hear about the Hollie Grieg case is
complete and utter tripe; and easily discredited tripe at that.
But what is it the
Scottish authorities fear from the remaining five percent that causes them to doth protest so very very much?
