Sunday, January 24, 2010

Special Ops & Surveillance training revealed by Law Society twit

Law Society of ScotlandLaw Society of Scotland twit reveals special black ops. SPECIAL OPS, SURVEILLANCE, INVESTIGATION & PROTECTION are hardly the kind of activities one normally associates with the Law Society of Scotland, especially the part about ‘investigation’ (haha – Ed) but apparently this is exactly what is going on over at the Law Society of Scotland’s HQ at Drumsheugh Gardens these days, according to one of its own directors writing on an internet message website.

StevensonLawLaw Society Director Neil Stevenson’s twitter page. In a message on the popular micro blogging website, Twitter, Neil Stevenson, the Law Society of Scotland’s ‘Head of Diversity’ wrote in a ‘twit’ (a short message) : "Working with www.idinquiries.com on special ops, surveillance, investigation and protection – the increasingly hard face of corporate IP 3:45 AM Jan 24th from web”. The firm, id enquiries, identifies its services to the legal profession as follows : “Conventional Inquiries, observations or surveillance which are used to secure statements or acquire evidence, Computer Forensic Services, Asset Tracing and Protection Services, also offering a Special Operations Department which devises bespoke responses when conventional investigations are inappropriate. The department creates a unique strategy to deliver results using a variety of techniques which can include physical or technical surveillance and undercover placement”

IDServices website also state : “We undertake a large amount of surveillance work for the insurance industry, as well as public sector and corporate HR departments. All public sector surveillance is required to comply with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) or the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Scotland) Act (RIP(S)A). ID can also assist public departments not familiar with (RIPA) or (RIP(S)A) procedure to develop compliant strategies.”

Law Society been using RIP(S)A lately ? - now would that be against clients, or solicitors ?

Also we couldn’t help noticing a slight sour grapes in Mr Stevenson’s growl at the Scotsman newspaper for failing to obey orders wishes and publish the Law Society’s comments on this week’s SLCC complaints levy freeze, which appeared here : Budget proposals see freezing of compulsory solicitors' levy to fund complaint commission

Mr Stevenson’s outburst against the Scotsman read : “Frustrated the Scotsman has publish SLCC budget press release, & not our response! Makes it easy ride for them as solicitors & clients pay 12:18 AM Jan 25th from web”

Oh dear, poor Scotsman …and exactly who pays for sloppy work which leads to complaints, Mr Stevenson ? …

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Crown Office refuse to release Grampian Police paedophile investigation papers amid claims media were misled over Hollie Greig case

Anne & Hollie GreigAbuse allegations made by Hollie Greig were subject of misleading public statements by Crown Office. SCOTLAND’S CROWN OFFICE is facing claims it issued deliberately misleading statements over a decision by Stephen McGowan, the Aberdeen Procurator Fiscal not to prosecute a group of identified individuals including a serving Sheriff and Police Officers after Grampian Police investigated allegations of rape & abuse by Hollie Greig, a down’s syndrome woman who was forced to flee with her mother to England after the horrific events which took place in Aberdeen, Scotland.

Elish AngioliniLord Advocate Elish Angiolini used Glasgow law firm Levy McRae to silence media publication of allegations of involvement. The allegations, relating to abuse carried out by an Aberdeen based ‘paedophile gang’, made as far back as 2000 have recently seen a number of successful attempts by private law firms such as Levy MCrae solicitors of Glasgow, acting on behalf of Elish Angiolini, the Lord Advocate, to censor website content and reporting of certain parts of Ms Greig’s allegations of abuse.

COPFS to Anne GreigAberdeen Procurator Fiscal’s letter to victim’s mother explaining lack of prosecution. In a letter from Aberdeen’s Procurator Fiscal, Stephen McGowan to Anne Greig, Hollie’s mother, Mr McGowan stated : “In September of this year, your daughter Hollie was interviewed by officers of Grampian Police in Shropshire and provided a statement in which she alleged that she had been sexually abused. Prior to September, other allegations had been made both by Hollie and by you on her behalf. Having reviewed all of the circumstances of Hollie's case, including Hollie's statements and all other available evidence, a report was prepared for the consideration of Crown Counsel. The conclusion is that there is insufficient evidence to allow criminal proceedings to be taken against any person in respect of these allegations.”

The Firm - Hollie Greig CENSOREDAllegations against Lord Advocate which Scots Law publication “The Firm” printed, then were forced to apologise over, were also mentioned. Curiously, Mr McGowan went on in his letter to detail allegations “made by others” of alleged involvement by the current Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, in the case, claiming decisions taken in Hollie’s case were taken before or after Ms Angiolini’s time as Regional Procurator Fiscal in Grampian. Mr McGowan continued : “During the course of this investigation, it has been alleged by others that the Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini QC, had in some way covered up Hollie's allegations. These allegations are unfounded and this has been supported by a careful scrutiny of the case. All key decisions in relation to prosecution in Hollie's case in 2000 and 2001 were taken before or after the Lord Advocate's time as Regional Procurator Fiscal in Grampian and were taken by other senior prosecutors, not the Lord Advocate. In addition, the Lord Advocate has not had any involvement in the recent decision by Crown Counsel that there should be no criminal proceedings.”

A legal insider said he found the references to the Lord Advocate in such a letter explaining a lack of prosecution in an abuse case, to be “unusual”, and questioned why it was included when “others” had made the allegations in the first place.

COPFS emailCrown Office issued ‘alternative version’ to newspapers over reasons why no prosecution took place. To cloud matters even more, it has now been revealed by several journalists the Crown Office issued statements to the press which appeared to contradict the terms of Mr McGowan’s letter to the family over why no prosecutions took place. Where Mr McGowan simply claimed there was “insufficient evidence to allow criminal proceedings to be taken”, the Crown Office’s media unit issued a statement which many claim appears to be an attempt to undermine the events documented in the victim’s allegations, stating : "Historical allegations of sexual abuse made by a 30 year old woman in Shropshire have been thoroughly investigated by Grampian Police. Crown Counsel have considered all the available information and decided that there is insufficient credible, reliable and admissible evidence to justify criminal proceedings in respect of these allegations."

A spokesman for the family issued a statement contending “there had not been a thorough investigation carried out by Grampian Police” and went onto state several key individuals had apparently not been interviewed by the Police during their ‘investigation’ of Ms Greig’s allegations.

A legal insider said he was concerned the questionable differences between what the Procurator Fiscal had told the family in terms of why there had been no prosecution, compared with what the Crown Office were saying publicly on the case, amounted to an attempt to mislead the victim, the media and the public.

Crown Office FOI Hollie Greig RefusalCrown Office refused FOI request for investigation documents. In an attempt to verify the content of the Grampian Police investigation, reporters, and the victim’s family had made Freedom of Information requests to the Aberdeen Procurator Fiscal’s office for copies of documents gathered during the Police investigation, only to be told by the Procurator Fiscal he had decided to use a public interest exemption, thus refusing to release any documentation under FOI legislation. Mr McGowan said : “I have concluded that to disclose the information which you have requested would jeopardise the freedom and candour with which the police communicate with the Procurator Fiscal and the consideration of that information by police and prosecutors. I have therefore decided that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. On that basis I am refusing to release the information you have requested.”

The Crown Office have so far refused to make any further comment on the case, however a spokesman for the family has said there could be legal action over recent statements issued by the Crown which are being seen as an attempt to undermine Ms Greig’s traumatic experiences and the expectation that allegations of criminal acts reported to the Police should be dealt with according to law.

Thursday, January 07, 2010

Crown Office forces second apology over Aberdeen abuse claims as Lord Advocate's lawyers Levy & McRae threaten Scots media with defamation

The Firm - Elish Angiolini ClarificationSecond apology from “The Firm” after legal threats. New developments in a widely reported abuse case where downs syndrome victim, Hollie Greig and her mother Anne have made consistent claims of abuse at the hands of an alleged paedophile ring in the Aberdeen area, initially reported to Grampian Police over ten years ago, have resulted in Scots legal publication “The Firm” being forced into a second apology clarification to the Lord Advocate over their report of 17 November 2009, which related to the identification of key legal figures connected with the claims made by Ms Greig, and a ‘timeline regarding a decision not to prosecute in the abuse case’, the details of which cannot be reported due to legal threats from the Crown Office itself.

The Firm said : “An article of 17 November reported that Anne Greig, mother of Hollie Greig – reportedly abused by an alleged paedophile ring said to include a serving Sheriff and a now deceased police officer – had called for an investigation into the role played by Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, then a Regional Procurator Fiscal, in the decision not to prosecute.”

“We have been asked by the Lord Advocate to make clear the following: there was no allegation of a paedophile ring contained in the police report to the Procurator Fiscal at that time; that there was no allegation about a Sheriff or a policeman in the report; that the decision not to prosecute was made before the Lord Advocate took up post as Regional Procurator Fiscal and on the basis that there was insufficient evidence in law; and that she was unaware of the claim at the time and has never had any involvement in the case. We are happy to make the position clear and did not intend to suggest that she had acted in any way improperly.”

“At the time of publication, the specific details regarding the timeline of the decision not to prosecute, although requested, were not provided by the Crown Office. This information was supplied after publication. Having been furnished with the relevant information, we would like to apologise to the Lord Advocate for any distress that may have been caused.”

In breaking news on the story today, legal insiders have now confirmed that private law firms, among them Levy & McRae solicitors, acting on behalf of Elish Angiolini, the Lord Advocate have contacted bloggers and journalists, threatening legal action for defamation if information originally reported by “The Firm” on 17 November 2009, and reprinted around the web on various blogs and internet publications, was not removed immediately.

The Firm - Hollie Greig CENSOREDScots Law online magazine “The Firm” censored abuse case report resulted in more legal threats to media. A legal insider speaking on the Hollie Greig case, who Levy & Mcrae allege had committed defamation by referring to the original article which “The Firm” published & later retracted over legal threats, said : “I received a very stern E-mail from Levy & McRae Solicitors and Notaries Public threatening legal action against me and the hosts of my blog unless I removed the content in question forthwith. At no time in my post did I suggest that the [censored] had been involved in the decision. I was relying on the information reported in The Firm (which has a relatively good reputation as far as I am aware).”

Another individual who claimed he had also received such a letter said he could not even discuss it as he had been officially gagged over the whole affair.

The Crown Office have so far refused to give any media statement, or even confirm that Levy & McRae were acting for the Lord Advocate, and Grampian Police have refused to reply to media enquiries on the case. Today however, it has been revealed by Aberdeen’s Press & Journal newspaper there is to be no prosecution over the abuse allegations by the local Procurator Fiscal.

While the decision not to prosecute will not surprise many, when it comes to claims involving members of Scotland's legal establishment, a less than clear picture is emerging of how the decision not to prosecute has been arrived at, with claims that key documents including initial reports made to Grampian Police in 2000 have now ‘vanished’ along with letters to & from local MSP Brian Adams to certain legal figures and even medical reports, now apparently missing despite Grampian Police’s recent re-investigation of the case.

Robert Green, the legal representative of the Greig family today said the Grampian Police investigation had been "far from thorough" and the campaign for a prosecution of identified individuals would go on.

It is widely believed there is much more to come on this case, noting while media outlets have been threatened with legal action, the victims have not. You can read our earlier reports on the case, HERE and HERE

The Press & Journal report :

Woman loses campaign to have abusers prosecuted

Crown office says there is not enough evidence to bring criminal proceedings

By Ryan Crighton

Published: 07/01/2010

A disabled woman who claims she was abused as a young child by an Aberdeen paedophile ring has been told there is not enough “credible” evidence to bring criminal proceedings against the people she accused.

Hollie Greig, who has Down’s Syndrome, claims she was abused for 14 years from the age of six, and has given police the names of some of the men she says assaulted her, including a senior police officer and a sheriff.

The 30-year-old and her mother, Anne, have been campaigning since 2000 – when police were first informed of the alleged abuse – for criminal proceedings to be taken against those she claims were involved.

The abuse is alleged to have taken place in Aberdeen, and Hollie and her mother claim to have made a statement at Bucksburn police station in July 2000 naming a senior police officer, who has since died, and a sheriff, who is still serving.

Hollie was re-interviewed by police last year, raising Mrs Greig’s hopes that charges would be brought against her daughter’s alleged attackers.

The Crown Office revealed last night that there was not enough reliable evidence to proceed with the case, however.

A spokesman said: “Historical allegations of sexual abuse made by a 30-year-old woman in Shropshire have been thoroughly investigated by Grampian Police.

“Crown Counsel have considered all the available information and decided that there is insufficient credible, reliable and admissible evidence to justify criminal proceedings in respect of these allegations.”

Despite no charges ever being brought, Hollie received £13,500 compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in April last year.

It is understood that followed evidence from a Grampian detective inspector, who described Hollie as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim”.

Mrs Greig, 58, said her daughter has experienced nightmares and panic attacks since she first told her mother about the alleged abuse.

Last night, her legal adviser, Robert Green, said Mrs Greig was “devastated” to hear no charges were being brought, but said her campaign for justice would continue.

Two officers from Grampian Police visited Hollie in September and spent three-and-a-half hours re-interviewing her at a special facility at Shrewsbury.

Hollie and her mother moved to Shropshire to escape the alleged abuse.

Mrs Greig claims two of the alleged abusers moved to Portugal a number of years ago and she went to her local police station at Shrewsbury to pass on that information when news broke of the kidnapping of Madeleine McCann.

Madeleine, who was three at the time, was kidnapped from her family’s holiday apartment at Praia da Luz in the Algarve in 2006. Police believe she was taken by a paedophile.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

Lord Advocate Angiolini made complaint to Press Complaints Commission over abuse claims report by Scots law title “The Firm”

NMG0505123Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini filed complaint with PCC over abuse claims publicity. ELISH ANGIOLINI, Scotland’s Lord Advocate is reported to have made a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission over Scots legal publication “The Firm” who recently reported on the case of Hollie Greig, a downs syndrome girl who filed reports with Grampian Police over claims she, together with other victims, was abused by an Aberdeen based paedophile gang which the media have reported contains a serving Sheriff and other key figures in Scotland’s legal establishment, including Police officers.

The Firm - Hollie Greig 2 CensoredScots legal publication “The Firm” were censored by legal threats from Lord Advocate. The complaint to the Press Complaints Commission is being widely seen as a tactical move on the part of the Lord Advocate, to warn other media outlets & newspapers from re-printing the allegations made by Hollie & her mother, Anne. However, while the PCC complaint deals with allegations printed by “The Firm”, it gives no answers to medical evidence now disclosed confirming Ms Greig was abused, and neither does it account for a substantial payout to Hollie from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, despite there being no charges to-date against anyone identified as being part of the paedophile gang.

A source at the Press Complaints Commission said they could not release any documentation regarding the complaint, and confirmed the PCC was exempt from Freedom of Information legislation, making it difficult to establish exactly why the Lord Advocate felt it necessary to file a complaint with the PCC through her private lawyers, identified as Glasgow law firm Levy McRae rather than make the complaint in a personal capacity.

It transpired the complaint made by Ms Angiolini through her lawyers was settled in a matter of hours after “The Firm” printed a retraction & apology, which we covered HERE

freefastfairPress Complaints Commission : Ms Elish Angiolini (Complainant) v The Firm (Publication)

Complainant Name: Ms Elish Angiolini

Clauses Noted: 1

Publication: The Firm

Complaint:

Ms Elish Angiolini, the Lord Advocate of Scotland, complained through Levy & McRae Solicitors of Glasgow that an online article relating to comments made by the mother of Hollie Greig was inaccurate and misleading.

Resolution:

The complaint was resolved when the magazine published the following text online:

An article of 17 November reported that Anne Greig, mother of Hollie Greig - reportedly abused by an alleged paedophile ring said to include a serving Sheriff and a now deceased police officer - had called for an investigation into the role played by Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, then a Regional Procurator Fiscal, in the decision not to prosecute.

We have been asked by the Lord Advocate to make clear the following: there was no allegation of a paedophile ring contained in the police report to the Procurator Fiscal at that time; that there was no allegation about a Sheriff or a policeman in the report; that the decision not to prosecute was made before the Lord Advocate took up post as Regional Procurator Fiscal and on the basis that there was insufficient evidence in law; and that she was unaware of the claim at the time and has never had any involvement in the case. We are happy to make the position clear and did not intend to suggest that she had acted in any way improperly.

At the time of publication, the specific details regarding the timeline of the decision not to prosecute, although requested, were not provided by the Crown Office. This information was supplied after publication. Having been furnished with the relevant information, we would like to apologise to the Lord Advocate for any distress that may have been caused.