Ex-Rangers administrators David Whitehouse and Paul Clark in £21m settlement

[Uilleam 5,948]

42 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

I wonder who is the culprit at COPFS. Wolfe must know. 

It was before Wolffe's turn -the man i/c was Frank Mulholland- although a cursory glance at the file(s), should such remain intact and accessible (not a gimme, nowadays), is all that he would need to identify those responsible for the prosecutions. 

[Uilleam 5,948]

[Uilleam 5,948]

I referred earlier to 'Treasure Island', I see now that the appropriate comparison would have been to 'Fantasy Island'.

 

Quite how Green and Ahmed think they can establish loss to the extent indicated below is beyond understanding.

 

 

[Scott7 6,018]

54 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

It was before Wolffe's turn -the man i/c was Frank Mulholland- although a cursory glance at the file(s), should such remain intact and accessible (not a gimme, nowadays), is all that he would need to identify those responsible for the prosecutions. 

It was indeed before Wolfe’s time but he has access to the files and Mulholland, ignorant or not, has the responsibility.

 

The whole of the Faculty of Advocates, indeed the entire eastern legal mafia, will ken fine.

[Uilleam 5,948]

14 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

It was indeed before Wolfe’s time but he has access to the files and Mulholland, ignorant or not, has the responsibility.

 

The whole of the Faculty of Advocates, indeed the entire eastern legal mafia, will ken fine.

The scale of the settlements to date -the suggestion of recompense sought by Messrs Green and Ahmed is surely nonsensical, but pay outs will no doubt be considerable- indicates, perhaps, one of two things:

-the files are lost, or, destroyed, or, somehow, inaccessible, and no coherent defence to assertions of malicious or incompetent prosecution may be made; or

-the files are readily available for examination, and scrutiny has indicated that The Crown has not one leg on which to stand.

 

 

 

 

[Bill 13,717]

If penalties are not at the highest possible level for the false and malicious application of the law by the state then I don't know when they would be. This is the most serious misuse of state power it's possible to imagine. In a better society that this, the streets would be thronged in protest. We seem more concerned about how much money is being spent in compensation than we do about the gross and wilful miscarriage of justice by a rogue regime.

[Uilleam 5,948]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

If penalties are not at the highest possible level for the false and malicious application of the law by the state then I don't know when they would be. This is the most serious misuse of state power it's possible to imagine. In a better society that this, the streets would be thronged in protest. We seem more concerned about how much money is being spent in compensation than we do about the gross and wilful miscarriage of justice by a rogue regime.

You are advocating "Punitive Damages", which are problematic under Scots Law.

 

[Scott7 6,018]

2 hours ago, Uilleam said:

You are advocating "Punitive Damages", which are problematic under Scots Law.

 

Is he? I didn’t read “penalty” as having a technical meaning, just the highest award possible.

[Uilleam 5,948]

9 hours ago, Scott7 said:

Is he? I didn’t read “penalty” as having a technical meaning, just the highest award possible.

As I understand it:

A figure for damages may not be plucked out of the air, and any claim has to be demonstrable, and provable.

Setting compensation "at the highest possible level" seems to advocate going beyond what might be demonstrable in court: the 'highest possible level' can only be the actual loss they incurred as a result of the actions of the Police and the Crown. 

I stand to be corrected on this, of course. 

 

The Crown, having, by necessity, capitulated, will settle out of court. That adds something different to the mix, possibly to the advantage of Green and Ahmed, although I don 't see how theycould prove losses amounting to the figures bandied about above. 

 

I don't know whether there is any statutory limitation on damages for wrongful prosecution, or malicious prosecution.

 

As far as 'punishment' goes

-those responsible are -should be- subject to internal disciplinary procedures

-where their actions may be construed as 'criminal' or' criminally negligent', they should face prosecution

-in any event, whether their actions were determined by incompetence or by wrongdoing, they should be subject to the disciplinary procedures of their profession, with punishent up to and including being struck off.

 

Perhaps, in cases of abuse of Crown Power, punitive damages should be considered. That's a debate for the lawyers, and for, god help us all, the lawmakers at Holyrood. 

 

 

 

[compo 7,055]

Refuse any first offer maybe even the second one then fill yer boots lads , get in there