S3W-38760 - Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD) (Date Lodged Wednesday, January 12, 2011): To ask the Scottish Executive what guidelines cover the release of information and documents by the (a) police, (b) Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and (c) courts to the press or public in connection with criminal prosecutions.
S3W-38761 - Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD) (Date Lodged Wednesday, January 12, 2011): To ask the Scottish Executive what documents were released by the police, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service or the court to the press or public in connection with the prosecution of Her Majesty’s Advocate v Thomas Sheridan and Gail Sheridan.
S3W-38762 - Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD) (Date Lodged Wednesday, January 12, 2011): To ask the Scottish Executive whether recordings of interviews under caution with Tommy and Gail Sheridan by police officers of Lothians and Borders Police were officially released to the BBC and, if not, what action has been taken regarding the use of this material in the BBC programme, The Rise and Lies of Tommy Sheridan.
Appropriately enough, these questions are due to receive their answers from the Scottish Government on the 26th of January, when Tommy Sheridan will be taking to his hind legs to petition Lord Bracadale for mercy (or in the alternative, to reformulate and re-utter his noisy exculpations). For those expecting an uplifting Chavezesque harangue, bear in mind that Lord Bracadale will hardly be willing to sit quietly through another five hour peroration, particularly if its relevance to the matter in hand is tenuous. Having been convicted, the hearing has significantly less potential for Sheridan to redefine the issues in a manner more convivial to his avowed position that he has been the honest victim of a wide-ranging political conspiracy. A party litigant's jury address is one thing, his plea in mitigation is quite another.
*The Committee's most recent evidence session on the 11th of January was a blistering affair, without any hint of an ennobling, convivial atmosphere. In brief, I think it is fair to say that professors Andrew Hughes-Hallett and Drew Scott got "Wendied". University of Edinburgh academic, Alan Trench, described the exchanges as "highly acrimonious" and has decided to withdraw from giving evidence to the Committee himself. He sets out his reasons in full in his post. I won't attempt to paraphrase them here.