This morning's session was a bit of a stop start affair, the reasons for which we will touch on later. The only witness that appeared was Duncan Rowan, former North East organiser for the SSP and one of the eight witnesses that Mr Sheridan has received permission to re-examine after parting company with his original advocate, Maggie Scott QC.
After asking the witness of there was anything he wished to change about his original testimony, to which Mr Rowan replied no, (an account of the witnesses original testimony can be found Here ) Mr Sheridan then moved on to Mr Rowan's relationship with a Fiona McGuire.
Mr Sheridan asked the witness if, when he attended the 9th November 2004 SSP executive meeting (at which the Crown allege the accused made admissions relating to the charges he is facing) and put it to Mr Rowan that he was in a agitated state of mind that day as he believed Ms McGuire had attempted to take her own life. Mr Rowan agreed. He then asked the witness if he had visited the Stanley bar after the meeting, which the witness stated he had, and asked who else from the SSP executive had also been in the bar. Mr Rowan told the court that he recalled Rosie Kane, Alan McCombes, Carolyn Leckie and indeed "most" of the people from the meeting had been there. Mr Sheridan put to the witness Rosie Kane's statement that he had said in the bar "Tommy Sheridan has stolen my girlfriend," a statement Mr Rowan said he did not recall making.
Mr Sheridan then went on to ask the witness if he attended the SSP people's Festival on the weekend of the 27th of September (the weekend, the Crown claims, of Mr Sheridan's trip to the Cupids club in Manchester) the witness said he did not attend. On further examination the witness said that as the film director Ken Loach was due to speak he "would have remembered" if he had been there. He was then asked if he thought a convener of a political party that had such an event would be likely to appear at it. Mr Rowan said he had "no idea."
The witness was then asked about a visit he paid to the Glasgow offices of the News of the World (notw) on the 19th November 2004, the day after the SSP executive meeting. He stated he had met a journalist there, Douglas Wight (again for an account of that meeting see the previous post) he was then asked if he knew that this meeting was being taped by the journalist, he said he did not and Mr Wight had lied to him. He was asked about a statement he made at the meeting "People have being lining up to do Sheridan in for years" which he confirmed he had said.
Mr Sheridan then asked about "factions" in the SSP, and Mr Rowan agreed there were a number of them. He was also asked about the 50-50 debate within the SSP (this relates to a proposal, later agreed by the party that at least 50% of SSP candidates in elections be women) The witness said he recalled Rosie Kane and Carolyn Leckie as being "leading members of the 50-50 faction." He was asked if he had told anyone else that there was a group "out to get Tommy Sheridan" Mr Rowan said he did not recall. Finally Mr Sheridan asked the witness if he had said anything to Rosie Kane about "Tommy taking my girlfriend" before the 9th November meeting. The witness answered "possibly, anything's possible, I don't remember." With which Mr Sheridan ended his questioning,
The Advocate depute then rose and asked Mr Rowan about the Stanley bar and if the discussion there was as "calm and measured" as that in court. Mr Rowan stated he did not remember as he was "only after more drink" and "had a lot on his mind." With that Mr Rowan was allowed to step down from the witness stand.
The Advocate depute then called a witness, Carolyn Leckie. Mr Sheridan objected to this as he had expected "Ms Kane" to be the next witness. There then followed a discussion about a "affidavit" which he had asked for, and needed to consult before questioning the witness, but had still not been presented to him. The court then adjourned while this was dealt with.
At 11.55am the court resumed and the judge, Lord Bracadale, informed the jury that a document Mr Sheridan required had not been received by the court and that an attempt to fax it had "not been successful". He then thanked the jury for their patience and informed them the case would resume at 2.30pm today.
26 comments:
"...and that an attempt to fax it had "not been successful"." yeah, and the band played believe it if you can. How low can the Crown stoop, what next paper in Tommy's ink well?
Fax machines in 2010? OK, say the fax machine broke down, why not email the document, and computers can send faxes too.
If you look you can see that all the court officials are connected to the internet, there is not way that a document can't be delivered on time in this day and age. Everything is stored electronically these days.
documents not arriving lol... did the carrier pigeon get eaten by a cat lol
To whoever may have been in court today:
Did Tommy not ask Duncan Rowan if he had any idea how the NoTW identified Fiona McGuire for their story that alleged she had sex with Tommy - considering Duncan was her boyfriend at the time, that Fiona got well paid for the story, and that Duncan himself was willing to go to the NoTW, it's an obvious question.
"he'd make a terrible lawyer."
With a 100% record of success. lol.
"it's an obvious question", suppose so, but I have "no recollection" of Tommy asking it though.
100%, strictly true fair enough, but based on a sample of 1/1 cases lol
"That's two days in a row that TS hasn't been prepared"
If you had read James Doleman report, you would have seen.....
"There then followed a discussion about a "affidavit" which he had asked for, and needed to consult before questioning the witness, but had still not been presented to him."
Wasn`t TS`s fault was it!!!.
Wasn`t TS`s fault was it!!!. - yes, it was the Crown's fault!!!! And you can also glean form the Doleman report that the witnesses were called no in the order that TS was expecting, so that kind of stuff is going to wrong foot, confuse and catch him off guard. It's not like it would be done on purpose lol mistakes do happen, you know!
It's strange for TS to raise the 50-50 debate as a cause of alleged factionalism against himself, since I remember he supported 50-50 at the time. Indeed, I remember one meeting of the SSP national council in the run-up to the 2003 election where some men in Central region were trying to get out of standing a woman candidate. Gill Hubbard (a leading member of the SW platform), TS, and me between us pretty well bombed them out, and it could be just a little bit thanks to the three of us that Carolyn Leckie sat in the Scots Parliament in 2003-07. Did TS come to regret this intervention?
From my faint "recollection" you maybe correct Campbell TS will no doubt now regret this "intervention" given the way that events have turned out especially if he was instrumental in the election of Carolyn Leckie... but this is TS we are talking about not Mystic Meg.
Campbell McGregor
Ts had dealt with this point, you can`t recall? (lol)...
TS:29 May, 2006
"I chose the unity option. I was wrong"
As you KNOW TS was trying everything to keep the SSP from tearing itself apart. Like a valiant knight against those who sought to destroy our party.
Campbell, it was DR who raised 50-50 as an example of factionalism.
On the issue of witness's being called or not, it was the Crown who dismissed a witness yesterday, causing TS to be unprepared. TS could be criticised in not being better prepared, but why was the witness dismissed when it had been agreed she would be next?
I know. The evil crown is allowing Tommy to look like a raving madman. Something must be done to stop the crown making Tommy look so unhinged and nasty.
Hello all, I'm sorry I've had to delete a number of comments that discuss events that happened outside the presence of the jury.
Some of them made good points but if we could watch out for that I'd be grateful
"I know. The evil crown is allowing Tommy to look like a raving madman. Something must be done to stop the crown making Tommy look so unhinged and nasty." - nobody said that they were, it's just that that's the impression it gives (to an impartial observer), intended or otherwise, so you can get off your high-horse, buddy.
"Like a valiant knight against those who sought to destroy our party."
"you can get off your high-horse, buddy"
Yeah, high horses are reserved for Sir Tam!
Campbell, it was the witness, not Sheridan, who raised the idea of a 50/50 faction being opposite to Tommy Sheridan's position.
But this was a mantra of the United Left faction - that 50/50 was the dividing line. It was also a theme of the Roz patterson article that has been quoted in court and was also said by Catriona Grant and others in the Guardian after Sheridans libel victory.
Post a Comment