Tuesday, 15 November 2011


I have not been able to post on Robert Greens blog for about 6 months, and because I am not a computer expert I have no idea why. I know its not Robert stopping me, because I am communicating with him but someone is doing something.

I have just read his latest blog post, day 2 of his ridiculous trial, for "being disorderly in a public place." Robert was actually handing out leaflets in a very orderly and gentlemanly manner.

This is his blog post. I am so furious, the legal team has let him down.



Day Two In Court
I arrived early at court today for a meeting with my legal team and received some unexpected news. They advised me that, having looked at all the evidence, I should plead guilty. I then told them that I had no intention of changing my not guilty plea, which left them no alternative but to stand down. We left on good terms and I thank them for their efforts.

In the courtroom, where the Crown was represented by Anne Currie, the Sheriff adjourned the trial until Monday 21st November to allow me the opportunity to assemble a new legal team.
Posted by Robert Green at 2:45 PM

Miss P. Cruikshank said...
Oh shit... Let's hope you can assemble a new team in time for the 21st.

November 15, 2011 3:05 PM
Ian Evans said...
Keep at em Robert....

"When Darkness Falls
It is often the Humble Candles
That become the mighty

November 15, 2011 3:39 PM
Rusty of said...
Hmmm, did your legal team not review 'all the evidence' prior to the trial commencing? Regards,

November 15, 2011 4:28 PM
SarahL said...
Of course they did Rusty! I cannot imagine what is going through Robert's head.
@Ian Evans, that is a beautiful quote.

November 15, 2011 5:30 PM
NMD said...

November 15, 2011 5:32 PM
Ian Evans said...
Thanks Sarah

I got hundreds of em :)

November 15, 2011 6:14 PM
KS said...
Imagine...The Formula One racecars jockey for position on qualifying day to see who will qualify on 'pole position' for the start of the race the next day.

The race cars are kept locked away by the race stewards in 'Parc Ferme' overnight in preparation for the race proper the next day.

Imaging now that the Formula one car that qualified on 'pole position' at the front of the field, when the driver went to collect it from 'Parc Ferme' from the race stewards, he found that the car had no wheels, no steering wheel, and he had no racing helmet.

Confused and stunned by this apparent blatent unfairness, he walks to the pits to tell his team-mates, only to find that they have been told to go home...

Those in the know say that the Formula One Governing Rules are akin to hitting a moving target and that as they change so often tend to be interpreted to a widely different effect to suit the circumstance of the party's will.

Anne C. Dote

November 15, 2011 7:01 PM
john said...
I refer you back to the comments I made on June 6th when Donald Findlay was replaced with Frances McMenamin QC.

Is it possible for you to post exactly why your 'excellent legal team' have dropped the case?

November 15, 2011 7:50 PM
Aptl said...
Well, well, so the 'long and winding road' of the defence of 'freedom of the press' has led Robert Green up, and dropped him off, at a dead end...

Well at least we have been spared the sight of these lawyer b******s spending the next few years riding some sort of legal gravy train round the Highlands, whilst Robert Green and Hollie Greig are hung out to dry in some sort of 'limbo of justice.'

Look, it's painfully simple Robert: even though you are dealing with the Scottish justice system here -- it is NOT a crime in Scotland, or any other bloody place, to make a statement about a person, or persons in public...as long as that statement is true.

If you want to win this case, you MUST prove in court that any statements you have made about certain persons are true.

And to do this, you MUST call Hollie Greig AND any other witnesses to testify in court. It IS most certainly the time, and it IS most certainly the place.

For the love of God, get stuck in there Man! And good luck!

November 15, 2011 8:38 PM
iain07 said...
No chance of certain powers that be whispering in McMenamins ear ?

No, that would never happen would it.

Whatever happens from here on, Robert and his team are holding the high moral ground.

Rock on !

November 15, 2011 8:59 PM


Zoompad said...

JUST FOUND THIS: Frances McMenamin QC.

Chhokar family meet Lawrence lawyers

By Peter Laing and Jason Allardyce
Scotland on Sunday

3 December 2000

THE family of murdered waiter Surjit Chhokar yesterday met the lawyers who masterminded the Stephen Lawrence campaign to enlist their help in bringing a civil action against the three men cleared of the killing.

Michael Mansfield and Imran Khan, who grilled police officers over the Lawrence case, will also advise on the fight for a public inquiry into the case.

The direct link to the Lawrence case is a serious blow to the Crown Office, which has been attempting to fend off allegations of incompetence and racism in its handling of the Chhokar case.

Last week, Andrew Coulter, 19, and David Montgomery, 23, were cleared of murdering Chhokar in Overtown, near Wishaw, in November 1998.

Last March Ronald Coulter, 32, was also cleared of murdering the father of two.

The men were cleared despite eye witness evidence, an alleged confession, and the fact that they blamed each other. The unexplained decision to try them separately is widely seen as having a bearing on the failure.

Equally damaging are the complaints that police and prosecutors failed at every stage of the proceedings to keep the dead man’s family informed.

The Crown Office has ordered two inquiries, both to be held in private.

A judicial inquiry will look at the prosecution’s handling of the case. A second inquiry will study the Crown Office’s liaison with the Chhokar family.

Last night, the spokesman for the Chhokar campaign, Aamer Anwar, said he had met the Lawrence legal team in London and they had agreed to give their support.

He said: "Imran Khan and Michael Mansfield will attend a big Chhokar campaign meeting in Glasgow in the new year."

Anwar said the pair’s experience in fighting a series of prominent race cases south of the Border would prove invaluable. There will be a second meeting in London next week to finalise the details of their strategy.

Anwar said Mansfield and Khan would add tremendous pressure on the Crown Office to agree to demands for a single, public inquiry into the Chhokar case.

At the same time, the campaigners are planning to sue Ronnie Coulter, Andrew Coulter and David Montgomery in the civil courts for compensation.

Zoompad said...

"This is not about money," said Anwar. "These individuals do not have money as such. But they were responsible for his death and we want a court to declare that.

"Bringing the case would also mean the Crown Office was forced to give us access to documents on the case."

Scotland on Sunday can also reveal that the Crown Office attempted to cover up the reason why a prosecutor snubbed the Chhokar family.

An official report into the way the prosecution dealt with the family claims the leading lawyer in the case, Frances McMenamin QC, could not talk to them because of unexplained "peculiar circumstances".

We can reveal that the problem was that McMenamin was also dealing with a VAT fraud trial in which Chhokar’s father, Darshan, was a potential witness and she feared a conflict of interest.

The case involved the evasion of whisky duty worth £1.6m, and in July last year three men were sentenced to a total of over 11 years in jail. Darshan Chhokar was not called to give evidence.

Last night, Anwar said there was no reason for the Crown to keep this information secret.

He asked: "Why did they not contact the family and ask if they could put it in the report? We did not have a problem with it being published. The Crown Office put it in there to throw a spanner in the works. I was shocked when I read it.

"Were they trying to imply Mr Chhokar was part and parcel of the whole case when he was not? It’s an implicit threat to back off. If you do persist with this then other things could come out. That is a disgusting way to treat the family."

Opposition politicians last night condemned the Crown Office over the disclosure.

Tory justice spokesman Phil Gallie said a conflict of interest could have been avoided by simply ensuring that the advocate depute concerned was not involved in both cases.

"The fact that this was kept secret magnifies rather than diminishes this. It seems a pretty weak excuse," he said.

SNP shadow justice minister Roseanna Cunningham also cast doubt on the advocate depute’s logic, arguing that if she had identified a conflict of interest then she should have withdrawn from the case.

No one was available for comment from the Crown Office.