Friday, November 5, 2010

George McNeilage Testimony Part Two

After the Video tape, allegedly of Mr Sheridan and Mr McNeilage was shown to the court, Mr Prentice, the Advocate Depute, continued his examination of the witness. The video tape shown to the court breaks off in mid-sentence and Mr Prentice asked if this represented the end of the conversation? Mr McNeilage stated that in fact the discussion had continued on "for a few minutes" and added  that he had given Mr Sheridan "Dog's abuse." Mr McNeilage said he had taped over this section of the recording as it "didn't look to clever and "I was like a  bear with sore head." The witness then told the court that he left his house with Mr Sheridan, making an excuse that he had to pick up his daughter from a dance class, however he had only driven round the block then returned to the house and retrieved the video camera. Mr McNeilage then told the court he had only shown the tape to one person, Willie Moore, and had decided that it was too "horrific" for anyone else to see it. 


Mr Prentice then turned to the question of how the tape was passed to the News of the World (NotW) Mr McNeilage said he had not used the tape until Mr Sheridan's victory in his libel action against the NotW as he feared being called a "grass," However when Mr Sheridan had won his case the witness said he would remember this event "until the day he died" and that he felt "physically sick." The witness added a further motive was a story that appeared in the Daily Record with a front page in which Mr Sheridan was quoted as saying "I'll destroy the scabs who tried to ruin me" Mr McNeilage also stated that Mr Sheridan had received £30,000 for this interview.


Mr Mcneilage had then decided to contact the News of the World. The witness called the Newspaper and told them he had information about Mr Sheridan, he was put through to it's then editor, Bob Bird and they arranged to meet. When asked why he chose the NotW to give the tape to he replied he had decided to "give it to the beast, tit for tat."

The witness then told the court he had arranged for "a couple of young lads" to meet Mr Bird at Mosspark train station where they directed him to the witnesses house. When Mr Bird entered Mr McNeilage help up a sign which said "Don't speak, take your clothes off or I wipe the tapes." The witness told the court that Mr Bird stripped to his "boxer shorts"  claiming that he had done this to avoid being secretly recorded. Mr McNeilage also stated he had told Mr Bird that he had a substance in the kitchen that would destroy the tape if anyone came to the door, adding "of course this was mince." 


Mr McNeilage told the court he had then showed Mr Bird the tape. The witness then said he had said to Mr Bird "I want what he [Mr Sheridan] took" (Mr Sheridan was awarded £200,000  at the libel case) plus £50,000 pounds for a community project. Mr McNeilage  said Mr Bird "whistled" and then left the house. Mr Prentice asked Mr McNeilage if he considered "donating the tape to the Notw. Mr McNeilage replied "Aye watch me" and that this was "not a freebie, he [Tommy Sheridan] had seen to that." The witness was then shown a contract between News International and himself where a payment of £200,000 was agreed for exclusive rights to the video.

Finally Mr McNeilage was asked if he had given any of the money he received from the newspaper to the Scottish Socialist Party or to Alan McCombes. The witness stated he had not.   With that Mr Prentice thanked the witness and ended his evidence in chief, with Mr Sheridan due to cross-examine the court rose, to resume in the afternoon.

50 comments:

Jones the Glue Factory said...

I reckon that a lot of people would sell their granny to a glue factory for £200,000.

MoneyMoneyMoney said...

£200,000???

Tommy was out by a factor of 10 on STV!

Give me the Money said...

I thought the £200,000 was a mis-print at first. Only 50K short of a quarter of a million - you could buy a LOT of sweeties with that kind of dosh.

Anonymous said...

small typo there, James... it should be £20.

Anonymous said...

"However when Mr Sheridan had won his case the witness said he would remember this event "until the day he died" addeing that he felt "physically sick." He had then decided to contact the News of the World."

The media are saying it was the Daily Record 'scabs' story that made him sick and prompted him to sell the tape. If this was the case you might want to correct this.

James Doleman said...

Fair point anon, I'll add that now.

shocked at so called socialists said...

Judas only asked for 30 pieces of silver for betraying Jesus...not 200,000!

Peter said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
James Doleman said...

Hello Peter, sorry had to delete your comment which made some fair points but also went a bit far in judging the veracity of certain witnesses. If you could take those references out I'd be happy to post it.

Campbell McGregor said...

"Of course this was mince." For a short time after George said this, I wondered if this meant that he was threatening to throw the tape into a pot of mince. Would that wipe the tape?

This afternoon a few people, including myself and Fatima Uygun, did not get in as the court is becoming overcrowded. There was a long queue to get in, I was cautious about standing for long periods as I have some problems with my back. Do I or others have grounds for complaint?

Bobby said...

Woah... it was only a matter of time before TS would be compared to Jesus.

Anonymous said...

If we are to accept this McNeilage story then we'd have to accept that as far as the "Murdoch Empire" is concerned it ain't about the money, baby!

Lynn said...

James, thanks so much for your work on covering this, it is so refreshing to read a clear and concise account of the trial instead of the sensational approach taken by the media which is what we would have been left with without the effort made you and other contributers. Does anyone know what has happened to the other 5 also charged with perjury - I think Gail Sheridan's father and 4 others, do you think the Crown is waiting for the outcome of this trial first? Also I notice that this site and the TV news didn't actually say what was shown on the tape, is that info for court only? I am keen to know what came out in the cross examination. It's strange that despite taking the moral high ground on the issue of Mr McNeilage's criminal past, he thought him a suitable person for the honour of best man at his wedding? I wonder if Mr Prentice will bring that up later.

James Doleman said...

Hello Lynn and thanks for the kind words. I have no transcript of the tape but an account of it's content can be found here

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2010/10/09/tommy-sheridan-trial-hears-sex-tape-sensation-as-court-case-finishes-first-week-86908-2262065/

Anonymous said...

If we are to follow TS's line of logic, does that mean that anyone who has ever been convicted of an offence or suffered from mental health problems be excluded from giving evidence in trials? Surely this would make it easier for guilty persons to go free? - give a dog a bad name and all that.

Watcher said...

I do think that a witnesses character has to be judged by a jury, and past convictions are a part of that. That's not to say everyone with a conviction is lying, but is a factor the jury should be allowed to take into account when weighing the evidence.

Anonymous said...

Maybe for actual witnesses, Watcher, but most certainly not for Accused persons. You know: "Och, wee Tommy doon the road's got a record, we'll jist gie him the blame"

Watcher said...

Thats's true anon, in almost every legal system in the world. An accused person's convictions can, and are, brought up in court if the accused says he is of good character and that is why he can be trusted to tell the truth, The prosecution would be quoting his convictions before you could say jack robinson.

A witness however swears to tell the truth, therefore it is fair for the defence to point out he is a convicted Perjurer (as a hypothetical example)

Anonymous said...

Bobby said...

Woah... it was only a matter of time before TS would be compared to Jesus.

I think you are deliberately missing the point of the post - McNeilage is being compared to Judas who betrayed a close friend for money. If McNeilage was just trying to do the right thing, why the need for the £200,000?

Jessica Fletcher P.I. said...

Just when you think things are going to stay tucked away in the latter pages of the tabloids from now on. BOOM!

NotW editor in his underpants.

Anonymous said...

It's a bit rich of TS banging on about "criminal records" coming from a guy that "glamorises" going to jail and encourages people to take part in demos etc, which are likely too, and have landed people with "criminal records". And where would the Left be if the working people weren't prepared to confront the bully boys of the Establishment.

Anonymous said...

All true working class heroes have criminal records.

A Time To Rage said...

In 'A Time To Rage' (1994, Polygon Books), Tommy Sheridan with Joan McAlpine, at the start of Chapter 2, Pollok fights back, there is a substantial account of how Tommy and George were brought together politically.
The whole narrative is one of Tommy's admiration for George precisely because of his criminal past.
On Page 31; "George argued against housebreaking by this time, saying it was stealing from our own people".

Anonymous said...

banging on about "criminal records" is so... middle class.

Anonymous said...

What now for the SSP will any of their former consituants now be in fear of what should have been private conversatons? posibly around subjects close to them being brought up or being used against them at some future date.
As retired Trade Unionist I have on occassions been provided private information by a member I would have never minuted this info or disclosed such info. without the members conscent even if threatened,this attitude was not dictated by the Union,it was in respect of the members right of privacy.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11.29pm, what on earth are you talking about? This very clearly has nothing to do with the SSP - this cross examination was conducted by Tommy Sheridan who is clearly and categorically NOT a member of the SSP.

Accuse Tommy Sheridan of whatever you want, but you can never call him a member of the SSP as this is blatantly not true. TS and TS alone must answer for whatever opinions you hold of the way he has behaved

Anonymous said...

The SSP are finished. they are lready tearing themselves apart as members are angry at McCombes and Leckie for their deceipt.

No-one will ever trust them again

Anonymous said...

Anon 1.56, aye keep dreaming pal

Luke said...

Anon 11:41, Anon 11:29 was clearly talking about the SSP's minutes and other private conversations they have repeated in court. This is why any possible trust the public could have in them has been queried in this instance. Anon 11:29 clearly was not referring to Tommy being in the SSP.

Anon 2:22, The SSP co-convener Frances Curren announced publically at a 'Crisis in Working Class Representation' conference that the 'SSP project lay in rubble and the court case will be very bad for the party'. In my opinion that is an admission from the main spekesperson that the party was finished. You disagree?

Iago said...

Some estimates have put the SSP's membership at 300-400. Those who remain are a hard core, who don't believe that the McCoombes-Curran-Leckie wing made any mistakes at any point, and that 100% of the blame for the death of the Scottish left lies with Sheridan and his supporters. Everyone else has stopped listening (forget about paper sales, derisory results in local elections etc).

As for Solidarity, it has seemingly ceased to exist, to be replaced by a succession of different Trade Union political fronts.

Iago said...

Out of interest Luke, when exactly did Curran make these comments?

Jock Tamesons Bairn said...

Anonymous said...

The SSP are finished. they are lready tearing themselves apart as members are angry at McCombes and Leckie for their deceipt.

No-one will ever trust them again

Are you sure of this?

As a rank and file member of the SSP I can assure you that the SSP is far from finished, It is suffering from a post trauma depression but will recover stronger and more determined than ever I for one would like to thank my comrades pulled into this train crash and assure them That the little man in the street knows the truth just by looking at the evidence.
My heart has been ripped from my chest but If my comrades are guilty of anything it is putting all their eggs in one basket

Anonymous said...

possibly, but it is 4 years since they split so its time to get over the trauma, and Leckie and McCombes have admitted in court to deceiving all of you. How will you get over that trauma?

Anonymous said...

What are you even talking about?

Anonymous said...

Frances Curran made those comments at the RMT sponsored conference in Glasgow at the beginning of October.

I believe she made similar remarks yesterday at the recall of that conference to discuss an electoral alliance for next Mays Scottish elections. She also seemingly said that she had wasted 10 years of her life trying to build the ssp

Bored of you said...

Well that's a helluva misquote. I feel sorry for anyone who spends their life desperately trying to prove that Scotland's most successful socialist party is finished. Some of us have more important things to worry about, like building it

Anonymous said...

The last election proved the SSP was finished, It only exists now to finish the job they did on Sheridan, meanwhile the rest of the scottish left attempt to regroup into some sort of election coalition, the SSP are on the outside looking in. This trial has shown them up for what they are, no-one will ever trust them again.

jock tamsons bairn said...

In reply to anonymous 2:21
No one lied to me. Can you be more specific as to the lies? I am only aware of the Executive Committee trying to protect a fellow socialist by allegedly holding back information to protect him.

The split from the members who left the party was not what caused the trauma it was having to put everything on the back burner for a stupid court case and the name calling from the people who left our party.

There are those in the Scottish left who like the miners will never forget and never forgive the damage that was done.

jock tamsons bairn said...

to anonymous 7:12
If what you say is true then this is a tragedy brought about this court case and this has destroyed the left in Scotland for years to come.

I however don't believe this as socialism is a way of life like a religion to many and and our only only hope for a decent future for our children and grandchildren.

justaglasgowguy said...

Jock Tameson's Bairn 7.25pm "That the little man in the street knows the truth just by looking at the evidence."

Obviously Tam you don't think yourself as a "little man". With an attitude like that you're not much of a socialist either.

Anonymous said...

In reply to Jock
jock tamsons bairn said...
In reply to anonymous 2:21
No one lied to me. Can you be more specific as to the lies? I am only aware of the Executive Committee trying to protect a fellow socialist by allegedly holding back information to protect him.

So In your world it is possible for an E.C to protect a socialist by holding back information if that were true why are the main players in this doing the complete opposite? perhaps the wrong socialist maybe.

Anonymous said...

Bored of you said...

"Well that's a helluva misquote. I feel sorry for anyone who spends their life desperately trying to prove that Scotland's most successful socialist party is finished. Some of us have more important things to worry about, like building it
November 7, 2010 5:31 PM"

I agree that the latter quote about wasting ten years of time is a misquote...she was implying that "we'd" wasted ten years, in the sense of the left in general. However she did in fact admit that the SSP project lay in ruins at the RMT Conference on Political Representation...ask around from a few folk who were there.

Anonymous said...

Alan McCombes lied about the affidavit Jock! We now all know this

Anonymous said...

Dear Jock perhaps you could re consider what defines a lie.
People who deliberately withold pertenent iformation that has been requested by the membership and wolud have continued this deception until recent relevations can be considered less than truthful.
Being selective in what is considered true does not bode well especially from a grouping who have made such heavy weather around other peoples veracity Scottish Selective Pravda now abounds.

Anonymous said...

Anon - keeping your mouth shut and telling a lie are two entirely different things. In a lot of circumstances if you can't tell the truth it is better to keep schtum.

Anonymous said...

Anon 5.22
Your comment undelines clearly my point re. selectivity. For a group to call out liar liar and as you say keeping schtum about their own truth avoidance in my opinion a selective process.
Anon 4.40

Anonymous said...

No, i meant that McCombes lied about the affidavit when he said he went to jail to protect the parties right to keep meetings confidential. He had breached that confidentiality 2 years earlier. When he said he would defend the right to confidentiality he knew that he wouldnt, when it suited his agenda

Anonymous said...

Have you actually read what was in the affadavit?

Anonymous said...

Anon 1.32

Have you actually read what was in the afadavit?

The fact that such an afadavit exists and has been provided to news media, following an internal meeting is the question not the contents of afadavit.
For a proposed democratic party to sustain and promote such activites was reason enough for me to leave.
I myself would not use the mechanism of the system which looks for and exploits weakness in any given situation to improve their lot.

RU series said...

anon 1.32 he lied when he said from jail " I took my stand on the clear position that the Scottish Socialist Party, like all democratic organisations, has the right to hold private discussions on sensitive matters and for those discussions to remain confidential"

No matter what is in the affidavit, it is clear that he had already breached that right.

you can read his full statement at http://web.archive.org/web/20060808192517/www.scottishsocialistparty.info/2006/05/alan-mccombes-statement.html