Prosecuting Sheridan to save News International $300,000 damages cost the tax-payer roughly $6 million. The paper happily paid the same amount for a video purporting to be a confession from Sheridan, so it's not as if they were short of the money. Given the numerous comments and actions against government cuts, it is remarkable that no one condemned this hefty tax-tribute to every Prime Ministers boss, Rupert Murdoch. Now the News of the World is demanding that the public also pay for the prosecution of every witness at the trial who gave evidence on behalf of Sheridan. I didn't vote for Sheridan but I can't remember when Murdoch was elected our leader.

 http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/news/Sheridan-Trial-Perjury-case-has.6649826.jp

Mr Kerr said he had submitted Freedom of Information requests to Lothian and Borders Police in connection with the perjury inquiry which had followed Sheridan's success in the civil litigation. He lived in Edinburgh and was concerned as a council taxpayer about "spending huge amounts of our money on what seemed to me to be an inappropriate investigation". Referring to costs, he said: "The final figure we got to was around £1.5m which had been spent up to about a year ago. It is probably higher now. It excludes the cost of the Crown operation or the cost of the trial which, I gather, is estimated to be £2m or £3m, which seems to me an incredible waste."

Sheridan is a misogynist egotist - why would an anarchist care about a yet another hierarchical party? It is sad that for all the good that he has done in working class organising he ended up putting himself before everything. Thus he facilitated, unintentionally or otherwise, the NOTW to tear apart Scottish Socialism - he was ultimately their dupe.

I hope that what this teaches the Scottish left is that cult of personalities fucks things up, whether internally or by giving the State & corporations the tools to do it. Regardless of the specific issues, the likes of Sheridan and Galloway, demonstrates why focusing power on a party leader rather than the communities they claim to serve will generally backfire. This is the curse of the non-anarchist Left. Power to the masses, not unaccountable leaders.

It's an unprecedented abuse of Scottish state power in the cause of foriegn corporate interests. When a newspaper starts smearing you, or raking through your dustbins, or recording you illegally, that can now be used against you in a court of law in the defence of the newspaper. When the establishment want to prosecute you they can now offer your friends and family large amounts of state money, and limitless amounts of corporate money, to tell tales on you. When you defend a friend in court from unjustifiable allegations you are now liable for the same overwhelming treatment.
Personally I couldn't care less if the allegations are true or not, they don't affect my opinion of Sheridan one bit. He is a twat and he probably did lie, and I've never spoken two words to him despite seeing him at numerous events I attended. If they are true though, going to a swingers club, indulging in threesomes and lying to his wife about it is distasteful but it isn't my definition of misogyny and more importantly it isn't anyone's business except his wife's. All this moral superiority from his former colleagues and friends who profited from his demise is hypocritical. I have met many of them, including McNeillage and Leckie, and frankly they are little Tommy-wannabes themselves at best, and they have sunk even lower in my opinion.

Ignore my opinion though, read the Ian Hamilton articles for a non-anarchist condemnation of this debacle. Tommy may have been heading for a fall from his little pedastal, along with the rest of his former flunkies, that's not the problem. The problem is the shitty way it was kicked out from under him. At Faslane Tommy was mocked relentlessly by the campers for being a media magnet, he was fair game for that and couldn't defend against it. But spending four million pounds of public money to humiliate and imprison him for protecting his personal life while we can't afford decent public services? You don't need to support or even stomach Tommy to condemn that abuse. And if they can do that to him today, they can now do it to you tomorrow. Ever done anything you aren't particularly proud of?

Here is an great insight into Tommy Sheridan and the SSP from the SSY:

 http://ssy.org.uk/2010/12/the-truth-about-tommy-sheridan/

Very interesting reading.

I personally couldn't give a fuck what happens to Shop'em Sheridan. He's a lying cheating selfish fuck and always has been. Danny might go on about IMC Scotland people being M15 moles or whatever but Tommy publicly said he'd out people who rioted against the Poll Tax. He made a shit load of mistakes and publicly attacked anyone who said otherwise even calling people scabs who wouldn't lie for him. He put his own ego before the politics he claimed to stand for. He's a snitch, a misogynist, he destroyed the SSP from within and doesn't deserve anyone's sympathy.

What you seem to be conveniently missing out is that it was *Sheridan* that started the whole legal ball rolling, deceitfully obtaining £200K by claiming that he was the very model of a devoted family man in a bourgoise nuclear family. Rather than a swinger with a penchant for News of the World sex journalists.

Once he got that £200K he went on a wrecking spree, causing mayhem on the Scottish left and refused to pay his parliamentary workers.

He dragged former comrades, friends and lovers into open court demanding that they lie for his personal benefit. His treatment of Katrine Trolle on the witness stand was nothing short of disgusting.

The Poll Tax was introduced in Scotland and it was already beaten up here before the London riot. It had been beaten by the Can't Pay, Won't Pay campaign, and by the tactic of using phone trees to swamp flats and streets to block the Baillifs. I was involved in both of those and I never heard any mention of Sheridan or the SSP back then, though they were the major players in Glasgow. There wasn't any need for riots here, and so such a tactic would've been counter-productive, and the people who condemn Sheridan now for his supposed quote about grassing up rioters were obviously none too bothered about it for the past ten years when they supported their dear leader without such criticism - that's hypocrisy. I distrust your claim anyway since you also falsely claim he received £200k when he didn't receive a penny. George McNeillage got the £200k.

Why is anyone bothered if Sheridan destroyed the SSP? You talk as if you lost an ally.

More than that, why is anyone bothered if he robbed Murdoch of £200k? That's a result, whether he did it by armed robbery or legal methods.

Sheridan may have started the whole legal ball rolling, but this started with the News of the World setting him up and raking through his personal life for dirt. Your sexual sanctimousness about his behaviour is really out of touch with modern life, where happily married couples do visit sex clubs or stay together after affairs. That's their business, not Murdochs, not yours. Concern for Mrs Sheridan is hollow when she faced prison herself thanks to their testimony.

The same sanctimoniousness is displayed by claiming real socialists wouldn't lie in court, even in a political show trial like this. I don't like Sheridan at all but I would've been happy to lie in court to protect anyone from this sort of abuse by the worlds leading media magnate misusing public funds to micro-manage British politics.


Most importantly, your schadenfreude and personal dislikes have led to you ignoring the civil liberties issues. Fabbri is happy to call Sheridan a misogynist, which in my view belittles the term and plays into the hands of the truly misogynist News of the World. Yet Fabbri, like everyone else in Scotland, is now open to the same tactics of combined state and corporate abuse at the expense of the tax-payer. It's nice to know that isn't a problem for Fabbri the monk who has never made a signle questionable decision but I know for a fact that friends and colleagues within Indymedia Scotland not only have done far more reprehensible things in their sex lives, at least a few of them are active 'anti-mysandrists', ie proud to be misogynist.

I guess Fabbri wouldn't have any problem with me selling evidence of that misogynist hypocrisy to the News of the World?


It Says Here -Billy Bragg

It says here that the unions will never learn
It says here that the economy is on the upturn
And it says here we should be proud
That we are free
And our free press reflects our democracy

Those braying voices on the right of the house
Are echoed down the street of shame
Where politics mix with bingo and tits
In a strictly money and numbers game

Where they offer you a feature
On stockings and suspenders
Next to a call for stiffer penalties for sex offenders

It says here that this year's prince is born
It says here do you ever wish
That you were better informed
And it says here that we can only stop the rot
With a large dose of law and order
And a touch of the short sharp shock

If this does not reflect you view you should understand
That those who own the papers also own this land
And they'd rather you believe
In coronation street capers
In the war of circulation, it sells newspapers
Could it be an infringement
Of the freedom of the press
To print pictures of women in states of undress

When you wake up to the fact
That you paper is tory
Just remember, there are two sides to every story

Come all of you good workers,
Good news to you I'll tell,
Of how that good old union
Has come in here to dwell.

which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on now
which side are you on

My daddy was a miner,
And I'm a miner's son,
And I'll stick with the union,
Till every battle's won.

They say in Harlan County,
There are no neutrals there.
You'll either be a union man,
Or a thug for J.H. Blair.

Oh, workers can you stand it?
Oh, tell me how you can.
Will you be a lousy scab,
Or will you be a man ?

Don't scab for the bosses,
Don't listen to their lies.
Us poor folks haven't got a chance,
Unless we organize.

they stole a few elections,
still we the people won
We voted out corruption and
big corporations

we voted for an end to war
new direction
we ain't gonna stop now
until our job is done

lord knows the free market
is anything but free
it costs dearly to the planet
and the likes of you and me

i don't need those money lenders
suckin' on my tit
a little socialism
don't scare me one bit

too many stories written
out in black and white
c'mon people of privilege
it's time to join the fight

are we living in the shadow of slavery
or are we moving on
tell me which side are you on now
which side are you on

which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on boys
which side are you on
which side are you on now
which side are you on

my mother was a feminist
she taught me to see
that the road to ruin is paved
with patriarchy

so, let the way of the women
guide democracy
from plunder and pollution
let mother earth be free

feminism ain't about women
no, that's not who it is for
it's about a shifting consciousness
that'll bring an end to war

so listen up you fathers
listen up you sons
which side are you on now
which side are you on

which side are you on now
which side are you on
which side are you on now
which side are you on

so are we just consumers
or are we citizens
are we gonna make more garbage
or are we gonna make amends

are you part of the solution
or are you part of the con?
which side are you on now
which side are you on?

Being able to hold at least 2 ideas in your head at one time is a useful thing in politics. Sheridan can be an unprincipled misogynist AND the victim of unprecedented state attention. The SSP can be a distraction from effective struggle AND a source of useful solidarity. (e.g. :  http://www.indymediascotland.org/node/1946)

The ability to spin out such a lengthy tale from my 3-line "here's another side to the story" response on someone's idle conspiracy-inclined commentary is a great talent, Danny.

Just last month Andy Coulson, then the NoW flunkie for Murdoch, now Camerons right hand wank, claimed on oath that only one member of the News of the World was involved in phone hacking. Yet today another underling has been forced to resign after also being proved to be involved. So where are the calls for Coulson to be tried for perjury? Where are the calls for Sheridans trial to be declared a mistrial?
Ch? Fabbri? If you now claim that you can simultaneously condemn Sheridan and the News of The World, then why have you only condemned Sheridan's honesty repeatedly and not condemned Andy Coulson's honesty at all?


News of the World suspends assistant editor over phone-hacking claims
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/05/news-of-the-world-phone-hacking-pressandpublishing

A senior News of the World executive has been suspended by the paper following a "serious allegation" that he was involved with phone hacking when the paper was edited by Andy Coulson, now the prime minister's director of communications.



Sheridan on trial – but it's Coulson in the dock
 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/sheridan-on-trial-ndash-but-its-coulson-in-the-dock-2155932.html

Mr Coulson was also questioned over evidence he gave to a House of Commons select committee inquiry in 2009 into phone hacking, which, Mr Sheridan said, concluded that the News of the World "at best turned a blind eye to illegal activities such as phone hacking and blagging and at worst actively condoned them".

The Downing Street aide replied: "I don't accept there was a culture of phone hacking at the News of the World. There was a very unfortunate case – this is to put it mildly – involving Clive Goodman. No one was more sorry than me. That was why I resigned."

Have a read of the Guardians take on this latest spin of the wheel:

The case against Goodman, who was jailed for his part in the phone hacking, rested partly on similar transcripts found in the same raid. Several were labelled "Clive". Yet it was only when victims of the practice decided to mount legal action – following the Guardian's revelations that the paper had made secret payments to others who had been targeted – that the police were forced to reveal the existence of the documents marked "Ian".

In December, the Crown Prosecution Service announced that there was no evidence to justify further charges after a Scotland Yard inquiry that was specifically tasked not to look at the material gathered in 2006. They chose not to investigate the evidence, apparently happy to accept Goodman's assertion that he had acted alone. That is a defence that has been cited again and again by News of the World executives, past and present, in the face of several parliamentary investigations, and two more by the Press Complaints Commission.

As evidence that more executives may have known about the practice emerges, that defence is looking shaky.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/05/news-of-the-world-phone-hacking-editor-suspended


Let me redact that a little bit more to make things clearer:

"t was only when victims of the practice decided to mount legal action... that the police were forced to reveal the existence of the documents marked "Ian". In December, the Crown Prosecution Service announced that there was no evidence to justify further charges...apparently happy to accept Goodman's assertion that he had acted alone"



So, while the police spent millions of pounds trying to prove Sheridan is a liar on behalf of the News of the World, using the unchallenged testimony of Andy Coulson, they simultaneously dropped charges against the News of The World for hacking into the phones of people like Sheridan. How very convenient for Rupert Murdoch and David Cameron, that the police should disbelieve Sheridan and yet wholly accept Coulson's veracity.

Like I said earlier, Ian Hamilton QC and the Firm magazine are the only media to have pointed out the injustices of the Sheridan trial. Which is pretty fucking brave of them, given even 'independent media' like IM Scotland were happy with the News of the World's public lynching. Let's review what Hamilton said:

"Why did Coulson, the Editor of The News of the World, come from London to interview and pay a potential crown witness for a video recording? This is contrary to proper criminal procedure. Purchase of witnesses has no place in Scots law. Indeed payment by the Americans of witnesses in the Magrahi case is one of the things that make many people think the conviction is unsafe. Why did Coulson hand over £200,000 when the police could have got the same evidence for nothing? Either the recording was evidence or it was not evidence and, if it was fabricated, no amount of money could make it sweet.

The admissibility of evidence bought by a third party and handed to the Lord Advocate to be used in criminal proceedings was not, I think, argued in court. I do not know if Mr Sheridan will appeal. So far he has not done so. I tell you this. As a criminal lawyer of many years experience such a happening sticks in my craw. So many questions occur to me.

Was the money given to the haver before he gave evidence? Were any conditions attached to the giving of the money? If so what were they? Is it true that the haver was sent on holiday by The News of the World? If so why? Was this to keep him from being interviewed by the defence or their experts?

Now that The News of the World is calling for the prosecution of all the Sheridan defence witnesses it looks as though Rupert Murdoch is using our Scottish criminal law as his own personal weapon. He is probably richer than the Scottish state so he can afford to. I write these words in fear. If he were to use the law against me, as it was used against Tommy Sheridan, it would break me as it has broken him. I am a weak citizen and all the law in the land will not save me."

 http://www.firmmagazine.com/features/855/Exclusive%3A_Money_has_no_place_in_Scots_justice.html

Sum total of what I have written on the Sheridan thing = 3 lines
Number of stories about the Sheridan thing posted to IMC Scotland = 1
No. of those stories taking TS's side against the NOTW = 1

No of lines of vitriol spat between leftist groups over the issue over Xmas = plenty.
No. of hidden agendas behind that vitriol = 100s
No. of hidden agendas in IMC Scotland's coverage of the issue = 0
Organization singled out by Danny over our coverage of the issue = IMC Scotland.

Really, why would you pick on one of the few left/activist/whatever orgs in Scotland that *aren't* touched by the fallout from the Sheridan Clusterfuck? People can draw their own conclusions.

Andy Coulson resigned from the News of the World when it was proven that one of their reporters illegally hacked into phones (while falsely denying he knew about it and falsely denying any other employee was involved). He didn't spend too long on the dole queue though, he is now David Camerons Director of Communications.

Andy Hayman, the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner who cleared Coulson and sat on evidence, immediately retired on a full public pension, but didn't spend too much time in retirement doing gardening. He is now fruitfully employed by The Times, another of Murdoch's many newspapers.

So much for a difficult jobs market, there seems to be plenty of pie from Sky today if you suck Satan's dick. Tommy Sheridan pointed out these facts and managed to get Coulson to incriminate himself on oath, so his employment prospects for the next three to five years will be limited to prison work.

For any so called anarchist, socialist, citizen-journalist, progressive or libertarian to see these sides as balanced, let alone side against Sheridan, well, they really have to have some grudge against the man or some undeclared interest. What is it Fabbri and CH, did Sheridan screw your mothers?

If properly investigated this story could be the undoing of the modern day 'Citizen Kane', Rupert Murdoch, who not only owns most of the mainstream media, but Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair, David Cameron and the police, so most Indymedia readers would expect a bit more interest here. I mean, you're not going to be hearing much in the Times, the News of the World, the Sun or on Sky TV, so surely the little remaining 'independent media' should take a more independent line and put aside their grubby little grudges for five minutes?

"Two police forces, two Crown Prosecutors, two states, caught blatantly working for the man, fabricating evidence and sitting on other evidence in the service of the world's largest media magnate."

How do you call yourself an anarchist and yet get surprised at this? This is almost the definition of capitalism. Nobody on here is having a go at the police or NoTW because we shouldn't have to on IMC. Its a given. Danny, you obviously have way too much faith in the law and criminal justice system.

What makes you think I am surprised or outraged at News International? I worked for them for 6 weeks in the 90's, four weeks of which were my notice. I know what they are like, and how many pages it takes to list their organisational structure of subsidiaries. I am actually exicted and happy that obvious illegal connections have been revealed by these trials between the PrimeMinister and his boss Murdoch, because there are still pockets of independent journalists out there who can show this to the public.

"Nobody on here is having a go at the police or NoTW because we shouldn't have to on IMC."

No, no, no. See that is where we disagree. At least part of the function of a site that calls itself Indymedia should be to investigate, list and publicise factual corruption of the state by corporate power. It doesn't matter if you suspect it, or know about it, I'm sure no one here is surprised, but you have to prove it to your average Sun reader. Or else call yourself by a different name.

The non-Murdoch English press, the Guardian and the Independent, cover the Coulson story today in depth by their own soundbite standards, but miss the Scottish connection completely and thus miss the major implications and significance of the story. While I am glad my original post didn't demean Indymedia Scotland unfairly, the comments here by self-proclaimed 'citizen journalists' and anarchists should dismay us all as they are more fitting for the News of the World comments section. This shows Indymedia collectives in modern Britain to be a yoke around the neck of anarchism, a personal plaything for the talentless and embittered rather than a source of inspiration or information.

If any Indymedia reader is interested in the case and it's repercussions, Ian Hamilton's blog is to be commended but I failed to mention another outstanding source of factual information that is an exemplar of true citizen journalism.
 http://sheridantrial.blogspot.com/2011/01/news-of-world-and-phone-hacking.html

Unless this site can learn from and emulate these individual's blogs and sites then there seems no role left for you beyond your own delusional self-congratulation, and while there may not be any greater use for your talents and time, at least you should stop misrepresenting yourselves to the public.

Indymedia Scotland is not alone in smearing Tommy Sheridan, and indeed given it's stated political nature, personal dislike for the man and extremely low readership their lack of integrity can easily be dismissed as rather irrelevant and only demeaning to the collective and a simple disservice to it's readers.

Much more important and informative is the BBC Scotland complicity with Lothian and Borders police. On the day of the conviction they cleared their schedules to broadcast a lengthy pre-prepared character assassination called 'The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan'. That in itself and unprecedented, but the programme included footage of police interviews with the Sheridans that should have been protected under the Data Protection Act. Far from being a confession, the interviews were a staunch defence that added nothing to the public knowledge of the case. However this highly illegal and immoral move shows direct complicity of the BBC with the Lothian and Borders Police manhunt in the service of Sky TV. It illustrates clearly the complete lack of boundaries between BBC and Sky and an identical agenda.

For a second day, there are calls in non-BBC, non-News International newspapers based in England for an independent investigation in complicity between the Metropolitan Police lack of prosecution of the News of the World phone hackers, which fail to even note similar or greater illegal complicity by Lothian and Borders Police.

All these facts converge onto a single simple truth, that the UK and Scottish governments and state institutions are wholly subservient to Rupert Murdoch, corrupt employees of the corporate elite. Someone has said on this thread that this is no surprise, but that is no reason to ignore it or fail to utilise and publicise it. Other comments have demeaned Sheridan, but he has cleverly shown his worth not in the quality of his friends, but in the quality of his enemies. Sheridan is now taking new legal action against the police and the BBC, purportedly not for damages but to force extra disclosure.

Murdoch's The Sun 'newspaper' today has exploited the murder of Joanna Yates by offering a reward of £50,000 to catch her killer. Such rewards are rarely influential and it is motivated to deflect attention from their libellous and tawdry coverage of the case. However it is telling that the reward is being touted uncritically both on the BBC and on Sky TV news, and similar TV advertising for the Sun would cost millions of pounds. Compare that £50k to the £250k News International spent to convict Sheridan, and their priorities are laid bare. To Murdoch, Sheridan is as dangerous as five murderers.

In a couple of years Sheridan will be freed and is likely to have far more influence than before, while the collective is unlikely to influence any new readers with it's current sniping. If any individuals agree with this assessment then I can only point out that both the BBC and Sky are hugely damaging to us all and yet are incredibly soft targets for direct actions under any banner. Yes, they will smear you if caught, and yes they will prosecute you with the full force of their police lackeys, but their security is non-existent. Do not cooperate with them, do not use them for publicity, but if you can break into a cardboard box then you can cost them huge amounts of money and embarrassment.

Three new witnesses are demanding to give evidence at any new appeal for Sheridan. They include Fatima Uygun, the recently berieved widow of accalimed Scottish folk singer Alistair Hulett.

"My husband had died tragically and I didn't feel that I could give evidence, as the trial was going on during a date when it would have been his birthday and I was suffering from bad depression. But now I'm so enthusiastic about giving evidence to prove that Tommy was there that I'd rugby tackle him to do it, as his conviction is a miscarriage of justice"

CH commented favourably upon Hulett's obituary on Indymedia Scotland, however obviously without the same commitment to justice that Alistair and Fatima embody.

 http://www.indymediascotland.org/node/18301/revisions/20280/view

"Indymedia Scotland ... can easily be dismissed as rather irrelevant."

Which is why you've spent half a week attacking us and myself based on a 3-line comment linking to a SSY article.