Former ambassador ‘created substantial risk of prejudicing’ trial of alex salmond, court hears

James Doleman reports on the case of Craig Murray, who wrote about the former Scottish First Minister’s trial last year James Doleman 27 January 2021 Alex Salmond arriving at his trial last

year. Photo: PA Images FORMER AMBASSADOR ‘CREATED SUBSTANTIAL RISK OF PREJUDICING’ TRIAL OF ALEX SALMOND, COURT HEARS JAMES DOLEMAN REPORTS ON THE CASE OF CRAIG MURRAY, WHO WROTE ABOUT THE

FORMER SCOTTISH FIRST MINISTER’S TRIAL LAST YEAR A former British ambassador and prominent Scottish writer and blogger is facing up to two years in prison over his reporting of Alex

Salmond’s trial last year. At a virtual hearing, before three senior Scottish judges, the crown alleged that Craig Murray, 62, had, via his blog and Twitter feed, created a “substantial risk

of prejudicing the trial” and that he had published information likely to identify the women who had made accusations of sexual assault against the former Scottish First Minister. The

Advocate Depute, Alec Prentice QC, told the hearing that Murray was also responsible for comments made by others on his blog as these had not been properly moderated. Responding for the

defence, advocate John Scott said that his client was a well-known campaigner for open justice, an issue he said Murray has a “sincere and genuine commitment to”. He also noted that the

former British diplomat had known the names of the women before a court order was issued banning their publication and could have legally named them, but had decided not to. (Unlike in

England, where it is an offence to publish the name of any alleged victims of sexual assault, in Scotland it takes a specific court order to prohibit this). The two sides disagreed on the

issue of “jigsaw identification”, with the crown arguing that this should be interpreted broadly and that it could therefore even include the publishing of information that would allow

someone who worked in the same building as the complainant to identify them. The defence responded by arguing that this interpretation was incorrect as, on that reasoning, it would be “hard

to see how anything could be published” about a sexual assault case as there would always be someone with some pieces of the jigsaw who could possibly discover a complainant’s identity. “It

would make even responsible reporting impossible,” Scott said.  Judge Lady Dorian noted that there could be an alleged assault at a building society and even reporting the location could

lead to some people to identifying the complainant. At the end of the hearing, the three-judge panel said it would retire to consider its verdict, which will be delivered in writing as soon

as possible.