Another twist - wonder if his appearance tomorrow will happen.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56167956
From the article:
Ms Sturgeon, who is expected to give evidence to the inquiry next week, has denied the allegations and told BBC Scotland that there was "not a shred of evidence" to back up claims of a conspiracy against Mr Salmond.
"Several of the women have already made clear how utterly absurd it is to suggest they were part of a conspiracy to bring him down. And yet Alex Salmond is still making these ridiculous and baseless claims and lashing out at all and sundry."
Salmond's submission linked to by NS on Page 9 - 11 (see extract below) does not appear to be claiming that the women complainants were part of a conspiracy. So it looks like Sturgeon is trying to discredit Salmond by misrepresenting the claims about conspiracy to include the women and by also claiming he is lashing out. Dick move by Sturgeon IMO:
The interests of the complainants They were offered the option of making “anonymous complaints” for which there is
no provision in the policy. However, when it came to actually protecting the
anonymity of the complainants through a court order in the Judicial Review in
October 2018 the Government was not even represented by Counsel in court. It was,
in fact, me who instructed Counsel to seek that anonymity on the part of the women
concerned.
The investigation was carried out against the advice of the police who pointed out that
the Scottish Government were not competent to conduct the investigation. This has
been made available to the Committee in the police evidence from the Chief
Constable.
The reports to the Crown Office (instead of the police) were made against the express
wishes of both complainants and in direct conflict with the terms of the policy at
paragraph 19.
The question of ‘conspiracy’It has been a matter of considerable public interest whether there was ‘a conspiracy’. I
have never adopted the term but note that the Cambridge English Dictionary defines it
as ‘the activity of secretly planning with other people to do something bad or illegal.’
I leave to others the question of what is, or is not, a conspiracy but am very clear in
my position that the evidence supports a deliberate, prolonged, malicious and
concerted effort amongst a range of individuals within the Scottish Government and
the SNP to damage my reputation, even to the extent of having me imprisoned.
That includes, for the avoidance of doubt, Peter Murrell (Chief Executive), Ian
McCann (Compliance officer) and Sue Ruddick (Chief Operating Officer) of the SNP
together with Liz Lloyd, the First Minister’s Chief of Staff. There are others who, for
legal reasons, I am not allowed to name.
The most obvious and compelling evidence of such conduct is contained within the
material crown office refuses to release. That decision is frankly disgraceful. Refusing
to allow the Committee to see that material both denies me the opportunity to put the
full truth before the Committee and the public, and makes it impossible for the
Committee to complete its task on a full sight of the relevant material. The only
beneficiaries of that decision to withhold evidence are those involved in conduct
designed to damage (and indeed imprison) me.
