Thursday, December 16, 2010

Thursday Afternoon update

Before further evidence was heard this afternoon  Mr Sheridan informed the court that he only four more witnesses to call before concluding his defence. The court then heard from two witnesses, Duncan Boyle and Lynn Sheridan.

Mr Boyle, a 73 year old retired pipe fitter, told the court he had known Mr Sheridan "man and boy" for forty years, as he had been the manager of the local football team the accused played for. The witness was played a section of the disputed video tape, that the Crown allege contains the voice of Mr Sheridan admitting to attending the Cupids "sex club" in Manchester. After listening to the clip Mr Boyle told Mr Sheridan that in his opinion , "That is definitely not you"

Lynn Sheridan, the sister of Tommy Sheridan, testified to three matters. Firstly she told the court that when she and Mr Sheridan  had met with Dr Nicky McKerrill in 2005,  she had not, as Dr McKerrill has testified, leave their company after a short period of time  and that the admissions Dr McKerrill claimed Mr Sheridan had made to him did not occur. Ms Sheridan further told the court that she had driven Mr Sheridan to a meeting in Edinburgh on the 18th June 2006 and therefore Mr Sheridan did not meet Colin Fox before that meeting in the "Beanscene" cafe on that date, as stated in evidence by Mr Fox. Finally Ms Sheridan was shown a section of the disputed tape and testified that she did not believe the voice on the tape was that of her  brother. Court was then adjourned.

NB regular readers will be aware that we have fallen a little behind in our reporting of witness testimony. This is due mainly to the large numbers of witnesses appearing over the last few days. We hope to catch up as soon as possible.


beyond reasonable doubt said...

Mr Boyle could prove to be a crucial defence witness - an old man with no political axe to grind and nothing to gain by lying in court. I'm sure he would not have agreed to testify that the voice was not that of Tommy Sheridan if he was not certain.

Anonymous said...

aye, nae worries, james.

Peter said...

From the Scottish Socialist Voice Issue 192
7th Oct 04

Keir Hardie Memorial Lecture

Colin Fox MSP joined local SSP member Jim Monaghan on the platform for the 2004 Keir Hardie Memorial Lecture in Cumnock.

The Keir Hardie Memorial Lecture is an annual event now into its third year.

Started by members of the Cumnock Branch of the SSP, the Lecture aims to keep alive the name of the great socialist and miners' leader Keir Hardie who has close affiliations with the East Ayrshire town.
In the coming years, the organisers hope to build the Lecture into an event of national importance.

Former Labour MP Tony Benn has indicated his desire to speak at next year's event and the organisers hope to attract speakers from trade unions, community groups and organisations as well as other political parties.


This event started off in 2001 and, as far as I can work out, is held in October each year by Jim.

Leafletting the SSP cultural festival to promote the lecture, as Jim claims he did with a colleague when he met Tommy on September 27th 2002, is a perfectly reasonable activity.

What do posters think of Ms Trolle is telling the truth make of her claiming there was no such cultural festival on September 27th 2002.

Some here appear to consider that maybe if the Cupids trip was not actually that day it was another day and therefore Ms Trlle could still be correct.

That does not wash for me at all.

She could not be "mistaken" about the date of the alleged Cupids trip as some have implied as the cultural festival was there in her diary - plain as day and she claims that cultural festival was a euphemism for the Cupids trip.

She was absolutely clear, when the Crown asked her, that it was that date and the "cultural festival reference in her diary for the 27th September 2002 was a eupehemism for a sex trip that night.

She was absolutely clear that there was no such event on.

Oh dear.

Bottom of the Bar-L said...

Great work keeping up with this James and Whatsy, much appreciated.

Just so I'm clear, for the defence most recently we have had....

A bloke who (like the accused) would be in deep domestic doo doo if any of KT or AK's evidence was thought true;

A pair of elderly family friends;

The accused's own sister;

Who is next? George G must surely be on his way. Only Alice S herself could top such a heavy hitting, motive-beyond reproach, undeniably objective and credible, reliable list.

Or maybe, how about - the spouses of the co-accused? Why have we not heard how great each is from the mouth of the other? And in among all the conflicting evidence, why have the jury not had the benefit of an explanation from the people who know most about the whole thing? Oh, dash those compellability rules.

Sceptic said...

"why have the jury not had the benefit of an explanation from the people who know most about the whole thing?"

The ladies and gentlemen of the jury have heard from everyone involved so I'm not sure what you could be referring to.

James Doleman said...

Hello "AC" Sorry but cannot post that, perhaps after the case is over.

Best Regards


Bunc said...

I think he is referring to TS himself sceptic. Though in relation to the tape the jury may have already heard quite sufficient directly from TS himself speaking in court to make their minds up on the tape.

A -Hall said...

@ Specric, with all due respect GS stands Indicted and we haven't heard a peep from her - as yet, and TS hasn't been given evidence either which of course it is their legal right to do so, and we are as equally entitled to draw our won inferences.

Doctor in the House said...

This is not a surgical operation that Mr McFarlane is describing; its a non-invasive exploration procedure commonly carried out in out-patient departments.

Sceptic said...

That is just a lie isn't it "doctor in the house"

The recovery following hip resurfacing surgery is similar to that following hip replacement surgery. Patient have a lower risk of dislocation of the implants, so the precautions placed on the patient may be less significant.

During the first year after surgery, all impact activities and heavy lifting must be avoided. This is the time frame when the bone holding the implant is most susciptible to fracture. Therefore, current recommendations are to avoid running, jumping, and lifting for the first 12 months after surgery

James Doleman said...

Could we keep it civil please Sceptic?

James Doleman said...

Hello "AC" my email address is I would be happy to hear from you.

all the best


Anonymous said...


it was said in court that Mr McFarlane "later" had this operation.

At the time of the alleged cupids trip, he had undergone a key hole "look aboot" a month previously.

Your post is irrelevant.

Unsure said...

In reply to Sceptic - I am unsure from what is written but I think Doctor in the House was refering to the fact he was recovering from the minor surgery during the alleged visit to Cupids and at a later date had to get more intensive surgery. Or am I reading it wrong? Perhaps someone who was at court could clarify.

Dental Nurse said...

From wikipedia: Arthroscopy (also called arthroscopic surgery) is a minimally invasive surgical procedure in which an examination and sometimes treatment of damage of the interior of a joint is performed using an arthroscope, a type of endoscope that is inserted into the joint through a small incision." A root canal filling is a lot more "invasive" than that.

marvinfaethescheme said...

Peter wrote:
She was absolutely clear, when the Crown asked her, that it was that date and the "cultural festival reference in her diary for the 27th September 2002 was a eupehemism for a sex trip that night.

She was absolutely clear that there was no such event on.

Oh dear.

I think this conclusion must be reached by quite a narrow reading of the verbatim report, excluding the context as a quite different interpretation is possible.

Upon being shown her diary, verbatim she laughs and says "there was no such cultural festival."

I took this to mean, when she was shown the diary entry, - and I’m paraphrasing obviously, “don’t be silly, that’s a laugh, we did not go to any such thing, it was most certainly a sex club we went to.”

I did not take it to mean, “No cultural festivals took place on that date.”

I don’t find it inconceivable that it can be both a “euphemism for a sex trip that night” and the date of a real event. In fact if I find it more likely that if someone is engaged in such “taboo” activities, that they might indeed use as a euphemism in a diary a real event. It makes sense for a number of reasons, as adulterers since time immemorial have known. The accused has the same event in his diary, worded differently, either for honest reasons or for similar reasons to the witness. In isolation, this piece of evidence cannot reasonably be held to undermine this witness any more or less than the accused. In fact the Crown are likely to have raised it as they feel it bolsters the veracity of the date, and her overall evidence.

Ven Dredi said...

James, you do not have to apologise even if your reporting has "fallen a little bit behind."

It's still a long way ahead.

Perhaps it would be more appropriate to consider setting up a donation process?

Thank you.

atrhur itis said...

But the doctor gave him a sick note on the 26th, obviously he wasnt fit at that time, and the fact that he then went on to need surgery which left him with a limp means that he did have a serious hip problem, I dont think the prosecution disputed this.

If he had the arthroscopy only, I can see the point of some of the posts above. As anyone who has needed hip surgery will tell you, the time leading up to the surgery is the most painful. This man eventually required surgery so we can assume he was having trouble at that time.

Anonymous said...

All this doubt about the surgical procedure.

Surely the significant point is that his doctor signed him off as unfit for work, lending credibility to the suggestion that he would be recovering at home rather than spending hours in a car followed by hours engaged in sexual gymnastics in a sex club!

Or is anyone alleging that Andrew McFarlane's doctor is lying to try to help Tommy Sheridan?

Thought not.

Anne Onimus said...

How invasive it is depends what exactly they do in the Arthroscopy by way of treatment. I had one on my wrist which left my arm in plaster for 3 months.

Campbell McGregor said...

I was in court for much of today and found some of the defence witnesses distinctly underwhelming. The witnesses on both sides have been of variable quality, but Duncan Boyle and June Hill were among the weakest yet. Someone who knew TS for many years and was coach of his football team is hardly an independent witness.

In places it was also unintentionally slightly amusing. A few times we would hear TS examining the witness at length, we would then hear a short extract of the voice on the tape, which a lot of people would say was at least a very good imitation of the voice we had heard a few moments earlier, the witness would then say this was nothing like TS's voice.

There have not been many witnesses
in this case independent of Sheridan, the SSP or the News of the World, and whose evidence has had some significant relevance to the charges. However I think most if not there have been have tended to support the prosecution case.

marvin said...

Seems that some contributors here only have energetic, athletic sex when in prime condition.
This friend of mine advises that it is quite possible to engage in an active and enjoyable sex life while remaining in a sedentary position and with minimal movement. feels even better when signed off sick!!!

Anonymous said...

marvin said...
Seems that some contributors here only have energetic, athletic sex when in prime condition.
This friend of mine advises that it is quite possible to engage in an active and enjoyable sex life while remaining in a sedentary position and with minimal movement. feels even better when signed off sick!!!

Would it also be possible to have sedentary sex life with a group of pepole at a variety of locations following a long car journey?

Dex said...

I had a hip operation once when I was young (er). The hip certainly hurts before the op but I wouldn't have said no to a sex club. I would, however, say no to the 3 odd hour journey each way sitting in a car.

He's given a very fair reason as to why he wasn't there. Did anyone who wasn't paid by the NotW say he was there?

marvinfaethescheme said...


as regards sex with a group of people, yes! passive/sedentary means no exponential energy expended.(so i am advised)

as regards long car journey, depends.quite possible though, if a bit uncomfortable. Fairly common complaint among older sportsmen, nagging injury rather than totally debilitating. depends how keen you are to get where you are going.

Peter said...

Hi Marvinfaethescheme,

May I suggest that you present a hopelessly complicated explanation for Ms Trolles claim that the "cultural festival" reference in her diary was a euphemism for a sex trip.

You may wish to get Bunc to lend you his trusty Occams razor.

You say the Crown was fully aware there was a cultural festival on that weekend of the Cupids trip.

If the Crown position was that there was a cultural festival but that Ms Trolle only put in her diary to cover up the sex trip from her then husband I could see your point - that would be understandable approach for an adulterer to take.

But no ... the evidence the Crown led from Ms Trolle was not that.

The Crown and Ms Trolle's position was there was NO such festival and it was wholly and completely a euphemism for a sex trip.

I would have thought that the simple explanation is that there was a SSP cultural festival and that Ms Trolle as a very active SSP member and candidate put it in her diary as an event to attend.

I suggest the defence are right when they indicate that when the date of the alleged marathon overnight sex trip to Cupids and the sex house in Wigan was changed (to 2002 from 2001) it put Ms Trolle in a spot.

The defence indicate that when her diary emerged Ms Trolle needed to explain the diary entry about the "cultural festival" and she covinced the police it was just a euphemism for the sex trip.

The defence indicate that Lothians police (with their coffee/ muffins / flirty approach) simply accepted her word that cultural festival was a euphemism without checking out if it actually took place.

The police it appears did not check it - hence it appears the Crown was very surprised to find their was a cultural festival after all.

If they had checked they would have found there was a festival that night and the weekend.

They could then have tested Ms Trolles account that there was not.

Whilst they were at it they should have also tested her knowledge the large offers that the NOTW say they made to her .... but that Ms Trolle has denied twice on oath were made.