Scots podcaster appears in court over 'campaign of domestic abuse'
A Scottish podcaster may call up to nine defence witnesses in any forthcoming domestic abuse trial, a court heard.
James English, 42, is claimed to have carried out the crime at a flat in Glasgow between July 2022 and November 2023.
Among the 19 allegations are that English attacked the woman while she was pregnant.
He is also claimed to have kept control of aspects of her life including her money and contact with loved ones.
English, of Larkhall, Lanarkshire, shot to fame after he starred in reality TV show Glow.
He is also the host of the Anything Goes podcast which has more than 700,000 subscribers on YouTube.
English made no plea to the charge at a hearing at Glasgow Sheriff Court on Wednesday.
Linda Findlay, defending, told the court: 'I have been told of five potential defence witnesses including a 15-year-old.
'I need to take statements from these witnesses.
'This is something that will take some time – it cannot be done in five minutes.
'There is potentially another four witnesses in addition to the five.
'With another hearing, we will be able to see how many defence witnesses there are.'
Prosecutor Julianna Keenan stated to the court that the Crown have two civilian witnesses and police evidence is agreed.
The hearing was further told that English gave a 'no comment' interview to officers.
The case was adjourned by Sheriff Michael Hanlon to a date at the end of the month.
Court papers state English isolated the woman from her friends and family.
He is claimed to have repeatedly contact her by telephone and send her threatening and abusive text messages.
Another allegation says English repeatedly shouted and swore at her and uttered offensive remarks and threats of violence towards her.
It is further claimed he criticised her choice of clothing and controlled what clothes she wore.
English is also accused of repeatedly accusing her of being unfaithful.
An allegation of violence includes kicking her on the body causing her to fall off of a bed and striking an item of furniture, seizing her on the body and pinning her against a wall.
English is also said to have searched her belongings for evidence of infidelity and monitored and interrogated her mobile phone for evidence of infidelity.
English is claimed to have seized her by the neck, compressed it and pinned her against a door when she was pregnant.
He is further alleged to have seized her on the head and pressed his thumbs into her eyebrows to her injury when she was pregnant.
Another claim is that English controlled the amount of money she had access to and repeatedly threatened to withdraw her access to it.
English is stated to have driven her on a number of occasions to a train station and, upon arriving there, drove her home.
It is claimed he also provided her with expensive gifts and money and thereafter demanded that she return them to him.
English is alleged to have repeatedly threatened to remove a child from her care.
Another claim is that English repeatedly criticised her abilities as a mother and refused to let her breastfeed in public.
English is stated to have repeatedly demanded that she delete her social media platforms and restricted her use of social media platforms in an attempt to restrict her financial independence.
Another violence claim is that he seized hold of her by her hair and pulled her downwards which caused her to lose her balance.
A further allegation says he struck her on the face with an open hand.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
3 hours ago
- Spectator
Has deporting illegals become illegal?
The circus around Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia – whose full name the New York Times likes to trot out as if citing an old-school English aristocrat – speaks volumes about the immigration battle roiling the US. Our friend Kilmar is what we fuddy-duddies insist on calling an illegal immigrant. The Salvadoran crossed clandestinely into the US in 2012. As for what he's done since, that depends on whom you ask. According to his GoFundMe page, Kilmar is a 'husband, union worker and father of a disabled five-year-old'. Left-wing media portray 'the Maryland man' – a tag akin to Axel Rudakubana's 'a Welshman' – as an industrious metalworker devoted to his family. His wife has rowed back on the temporary protective order she once requested, claiming she'd been over-cautious. Yet according to the Trump administration, Kilmar is a member of the notoriously violent street gang MS-13 who's derived his primary source of income from smuggling hundreds of illegals over the southern border for several years. Choose A or B. In 2019, Kilmar was arrested for loitering along with three other men, one a suspected MS-13 member. He was carrying marijuana, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. From his clothing, tattoos and, more persuasively, a 'past proven and reliable' confidential source who verified he was an active gang member using the moniker 'Chele', police adjudged that Kilmar was a gangbanger, for which (of course) he wasn't charged. He was turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement – whose acronym, ICE, reinforces its rep as cold-hearted – which moved to deport him. Kilmar (of course) contested his removal. The immigration judge hearing Kilmar's case concurred that the defendant was indeed a gang member and deportable; the Salvadoran (of course) appealed the decision, which nevertheless was upheld. Kilmar (of course) then filed for asylum, as well as for a 'withholding of removal'. A subsequent immigration judge stayed his deportation to his home country, where his wellbeing might be endangered by local gangs. Now, you might suppose that putting yourself in the way of other famously rivalrous gangs would come with the territory when you join one yourself. Like, inter-gang violence seems a natural hazard of this line of work. But it's not only British immigration judges who are soft touches. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the millions of gate-crashers Kilmar (of course) remained in the US. In 2022, he was pulled over for speeding while driving eight other Hispanic men of uncertain immigration status in an SUV altered to add a third row of seats for extra passengers. The officers suspected human-trafficking; Kilmar's driving licence had expired; a run of his number plate through the database turned up a federal note on likely membership of MS-13. Yet when the patrolmen contacted the feds, ICE (of course) declined to pick him up. So Kilmar was (of course) released without charge. Even so, his claim that he was merely transporting construction workers between jobs did not, under investigation, hold up. Fast-forward to 2025 and why this otherwise obscure Salvadoran who is or is not a thug merits such a detailed lowdown. Meaning (of course) that this case has to do with Donald Trump – whose evil minions in March flew more than 230 purported criminals to a Salvadoran prison, including none other than Kilmar, whom ICE did finally pick up (no 'of course' there). The flights' timing was judicially dodgy. The planes did or didn't take off after a federal judge ruled that the flights could not proceed until the deportees were given the opportunity to challenge their removal. The administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which directed Trump to 'facilitate' Kilmar's return to the US. Because, remember, there was only one country to which he could not be deported because of that credulous 2019 decision: his own. Hence the Justice Department's acceptance that Kilmar's deportation was an 'administrative error'. During this proxy war with Trump, Democrats have pretended to hair-tear over poor Kilmar, mouldering away in a nasty foreign prison and deprived of due process. But the story I just laid out has due process, not to mention leniency or even dereliction on the part of the authorities, up the wazoo. Meanwhile, after slyly getting their jurisprudential ducks in a row, last week Trump and co finally got Kilmar flown back to the US, only to arrest him immediately for human-trafficking – with every intention of convicting the guy and then deporting him right back to El Salvador. What do we make of this farce? The American commentariat has focused on a potential showdown between Trump and the judiciary, claiming to fear a flat-out executive refusal to follow court orders but secretly rather hoping that Trump does defy the courts and thus reveals himself as an unconstitutional tyrant. I view this absurd tale through a different lens. All these trials and flights for a lone illegal alien are expensive. The amount of 'due process' the American justice system affords every single illegal makes deportation at any scale impossible. There isn't enough time and money and there aren't nearly enough judges to make any but a token gesture toward the mass deportation of illegals that Trump has promised. That amounts to a victory not just for Democrats but also for disorder. I'd assess the odds that Kilmar is a thug at about 90 per cent. But proving membership of unofficial allegiances in court is a bastard. If every individual deportation case must be adjudicated according to exacting evidentiary rules and appeal procedures, America's drastic, undemocratic demographic change will proceed inexorably. Only mass round-ups and swift group trials could effectively address the staggering ten million gate-crashers during the Biden administration alone. What are the chances of that? In New York at the weekend, ICE raids were impeded by LA-style crowds of righteously indignant protestors screaming: 'Let them go! Let them go!' The officers just doing their jobs looked beleaguered, tired, numb and pre-defeated. After all the ICE agents' thankless labours, what proportion of their detainees will still get to stay in the country in the end? I'll take another stab at 90 per cent.
The Herald Scotland
7 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Drug policy reform campaigner Peter Krykant dies aged 48
Mr Fitzpatrick later lost his job after Scotland's drugs deaths soared to 1,264 in 2019. Krykant, who battled his own addiction issues, said his mobile injection room saved lives and argued for similar facilities to be set up to cut Scotland's soaring drug deaths. Peter Krykant in the converted ambulance, which allowed drug users a safe space to inject (Image: Mark F Gibson) It has been reported that he was found dead at home in Falkirk . He faced police charges over the ambulance, but these were later dropped. He said: "We are all deeply saddened to hear of Peter's passing. 'Everyone from the Scottish Greens is thinking of his family and friends at this extremely difficult time. "Peter was a tireless campaigner for a fairer, more compassionate approach to handling drug misuse and addiction, and his campaigning has left such an important legacy in the UK's first safe consumption room in Glasgow. "His advocacy for drug reform, and of course, his yellow van have no doubt saved countless lives in Scotland." Police Scotland have said that no suspicious circumstances surround the death at Krykant's home in Larbert, Falkirk, on Monday this week. Labour MSP Paul Sweeney, who had helped man the mobile service, which was regarded as illegal at the time, said 48-year-old Krykant's efforts had helped make significant changes to Scotland's drugs policy. READ MORE: Mr Sweeney told The Daily Record: 'I'm shocked and saddened to hear of Peter's death. We can't underestimate the contribution he made to the drugs debate in Scotland, which came amid many years of increasing overdose deaths. 'He undoubtedly played a major part in changing policy in a political a system that was very much set in its ways and resistant to the kind of radical change that Peter advocated.' Earlier this year, The Thistle safe drugs consumption facility opened in Glasgow after years of political wrangling between the Scottish and UK governments, allowing those who inject drugs like heroin and cocaine a safe place to do so, with medical professionals on hand should they be needed. The centre has seen 17 overdoses since it opened, according to service manager Lynn Macdonald in March, some of which she believes would have resulted in death had staff not stepped in.
Daily Mirror
8 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Al-Qaeda inspired student who stabbed Labour MP can be freed from prison
Roshonara Choudhry has been cleared for release by the Parole Board after being jailed for 15 years for trying to murder Labour minister Stephen Timms after being radicalised online A student who tried to murder Labour minister Stephen Timms after being radicalised online has been cleared for release from prison. Roshonara Choudhry, then 21, was jailed for life for a minimum of 15 years for stabbing Sir Stephen twice in the stomach in 2010. The attack on the now social security minister is thought to be the first al Qaida-inspired attempt to assassinate a politician on British soil. Mr Timms, 69, has revealed Choudhry had written to him several times from jail. In a previous interview, he explained: "In the third of them, she says she's sorry about what happened. " So we're in a restorative justice process which may lead to me meeting her before she's released. I'd welcome that." Weeks before the attack on May 14, 2010, Choudhry had quit her English degree course at King's College London, where she had been expected to get a first. She became radicalised after watching online sermons by terror preachers and decided to kill Sir Stephen because he supported the Iraq war. The student knifed her local MP as he held a constituency surgery at the Beckton Globe community centre in east London. Choudhry smiled and pretended she was going to shake hands with him before repeatedly plunging the blade into her victim. After she was arrested she told detectives the stabbing was "punishment" and "to get revenge for the people of Iraq". But after a Parole Board hearing last month, a panel decided she could be freed from jail. A decision summary said: "After considering the circumstances of her offending, the progress made while in custody and the evidence presented at the hearing and in the dossier, the panel was satisfied that imprisonment was no longer necessary for the protection of the public." The document said that at the time of the attempted murder, Choudhry, now 36, had risk factors of problems with family relationships, development of extreme beliefs and willingness to use violence to address perceived injustices. But she had engaged in programmes in prison to understand how her extreme beliefs developed and her conduct was described as "exemplary". The summary added: "Ms Choudhry was assessed as having shown a very high level of insight and understanding of herself. "She had consistently shown over many years that she no longer held the same beliefs, that she was able to manage her emotional wellbeing effectively and she would no longer be likely to be influenced by other people with strong negative views, having developed the ability to critically evaluate information and to seek help from professionals if she needs it." The document said the panel did not receive a victim impact statement, or representations from the justice secretary. It was recommended that Choudhry be released on licence under conditions such as living at a designated address, with a specific curfew and subject to an exclusion zone to avoid contact with Sir Stephen. A Parole Board spokesman said: "Parole Board decisions are solely focused on what risk a prisoner could represent to the public if released and whether that risk is manageable in the community. "Parole reviews are undertaken thoroughly and with extreme care. Protecting the public is our number one priority."
