Latest news with #Suzanne'sLaw
The National
a day ago
- Politics
- The National
Nicola Sturgeon claims Alex Salmond may have leaked probe against him
In an excerpt of her new memoir, Frankly, published by The Times, Sturgeon insisted she was not the one who had leaked the outcome of the Scottish government investigation into her predecessor as first minister to the press. She said: 'It crossed my mind many times that it might have been Alex himself or someone acting on his behalf. Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon (Image: PA) 'To those with no experience of the dark arts of media manipulation, I know this will sound preposterous. However, in many ways it would have been classic Alex. 'I had known him to make these kinds of calculations in the past. If there is damaging information certain to emerge about you and there is nothing you can do to stop it, get it out in a way that gives you the best chance of controlling the narrative.' Salmond, who died last year of a heart attack, was investigated by the Scottish government in 2018 after two women made allegations of sexual misconduct against him. READ MORE: Andrew Tickell: MSPs weighing up Suzanne's Law should be clear on what it means The findings of that investigation were leaked to The Daily Record on the day before they were due to be published, prompting Salmond to launch a judicial review of the handling of the inquiry. The Scottish government initially defended the judicial review, before dropping its defence. But a separate police investigation resulted in a criminal trial in 2020 in which Salmond was cleared of all 14 charges, being found not guilty on 12 counts while prosecutors withdrew another charge and one was found not proven. The next year Salmond, who had been Scottish first minister between 2007 and 2014 as leader of the SNP, founded the pro-independence Alba Party. In her memoir, Sturgeon said Salmond had informed her that he was being investigated in April 2018 and initially appeared to be 'upset and mortified' before he 'became cold'. Claiming he 'effectively admitted the substance of one of the complaints, but claimed that it had been a 'misunderstanding'', Sturgeon said it had been 'evident' that Salmond 'wanted me to intervene' to stop or divert the investigation. She added that her refusal to do so turned him against her and 'made the break-up of one of the most successful partnerships in modern British politics all but inevitable'. Sturgeon also accused Salmond of attempting to 'cast himself as the victim' and being 'prepared to traumatise, time and again, the women at the centre of it all'. READ MORE: Inside the growing movement to boycott Israel in communities across Scotland She said: 'A conspiracy against Alex would have needed a number of women deciding to concoct false allegations, without any obvious motive for doing so. 'It would then have required criminal collusion between them, senior ministers and civil servants, the police and the Crown. 'That is what he was alleging. The 'conspiracy' was a fabrication, the invention of a man who wasn't prepared to reflect honestly on his own conduct.' In other extracts, published on Friday, Sturgeon discussed her arrest in 2023, describing it as 'mental torture', her miscarriage in 2010 and her sexuality. Sturgeon served as Scottish first minister between 2014 and 2023. Sturgeon's memoir, Frankly, will be published on Thursday.
Edinburgh Live
a day ago
- Edinburgh Live
Edinburgh's Suzanne Pilley's family issue plea for killer to reveal location of body
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info The family of an Edinburgh murder victim are pleading with her killer to end their 15 year torture and reveal where he hid her body. Suzanne Pilley disappeared in the capital back in 2010 when she was 38. Murderer David Gilroy is currently behind bars as he serves an 18-year sentence for the heinous crime but he continued to torment the family by failing to reveal the location of her remains. Speaking to the Sunday Mail for the first time in more than five years, Suzanne's sister Gail Fairgrieve and mum Sylvia Pilley told of the never ending heartache over the loss and lack of closure. Fighting back tears, Gail told the Mail: 'It's very difficult to explain the emotional impact. Every family situation, every birthday, every Christmas, every milestone. Join Edinburgh Live's Whatsapp Community here and get the latest news sentstraight to your messages. 'Suzanne was my Maid of Honour at my wedding. She never saw my 25th wedding anniversary. It's the same with my kids, she had a niece and a nephew who have had so many birthdays. And she wasn't there for it. He denied her that.' Gilroy, who was Suzanne's work colleague, was jailed for her murder in 2012. He is believed to have buried her body in a remote part of Argyll but has refused to divulge the location. (Image: Daily Record.) Sylvia, who hasn't spoken publicly about the loss of her daughter since 2018, said: 'I know Suzanne had justice when he was put in prison but her life has been cut short. She really wanted a family and she has never been given that, and we miss her. That's really why we are doing this.' Gail said all the family now wants is 'to bring Suzanne home and celebrate the life she did have'. She added: 'That's everybody's final wish, so it would be a quite significant thing if [Gilroy] was to give us that information.' At a press conference on Wednesday organised by Victim Support Scotland, Gail and Sylvia were joined by family members of Arlene Fraser, another murdered woman whose body has never been found. Carol Gillies, sister of Arlene who disappeared in Elgin in 1998, revealed how she and Gail had bonded over their shared trauma – and become close allies in the campaign to introduce 'Suzanne's Law' in Scotland. The change, set to be delivered in the coming months, will make it harder for killers to be freed on parole if they don't disclose where their victims' bodies are. Gilroy is not eligible for parole until 2030 – however, in the case of Arlene's twice-convicted killer husband Nat Fraser, he could be freed as early as October 2028 under the current rules. With the two families sharing a public platform for the first time, Gail and Carol were asked if they took strength from each other. Carol said: 'Oh, absolutely. We're usually on the phone for about an hour and a half.' Arlene was last seen waving her kids off to school at her home in Elgin, Moray. Her disappearance sparked one of Scotland's largest ever police investigations. Fraser was first jailed for killing the 33-year-old in 2003 with the trial revealing she had been making plans to divorce him. His first conviction was quashed but he was found guilty again at a 2012 retrial. (Image: Sunday Mail.) Despite repeated pleas to Fraser from the family to reveal her whereabouts, no trace of Arlene has ever been found. Speaking alongside mum Isabelle Thompson, Carol said: 'He controlled Arlene when she was alive and he's controlling her when she's dead. To have Nat Fraser in front of the parole board and all they are considering is... how he behaved in jail is just not enough. 'If he was to get out, then the truth would be gone forever.' Carol spoke powerfully about the 'mental torture' the family had endured with their shocking 27-year wait to find Arlene. Sign up for Edinburgh Live newsletters for more headlines straight to your inbox She said: 'I think I sometimes feel guilty that I have a life. She was only 33 when she was taken. She wouldn't want me to feel guilty, she would want me to live my life. But she has missed out on so much… "I feel that Arlene now comes under the heading of 'remains'. I still see her as a person... she's still a person to us.' The families' joint press conference followed a 'positive' meeting with Justice Secretary Angela Constance on their calls to toughen parole rules. Under an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform Bill, there will be a requirement that the Parole Board 'must' take into account when killers refuse to disclose remains in decisions on whether to release them.
The National
a day ago
- Politics
- The National
Alex Salmond may have leaked sexual misconduct inquiry details
In an excerpt of her new memoir, Frankly, published by The Times, Sturgeon insisted she was not the one who had leaked the outcome of the Scottish government investigation into her predecessor as first minister to the press. She said: 'It crossed my mind many times that it might have been Alex himself or someone acting on his behalf. Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon (Image: PA) 'To those with no experience of the dark arts of media manipulation, I know this will sound preposterous. However, in many ways it would have been classic Alex. 'I had known him to make these kinds of calculations in the past. If there is damaging information certain to emerge about you and there is nothing you can do to stop it, get it out in a way that gives you the best chance of controlling the narrative.' Salmond, who died last year of a heart attack, was investigated by the Scottish government in 2018 after two women made allegations of sexual misconduct against him. READ MORE: Andrew Tickell: MSPs weighing up Suzanne's Law should be clear on what it means The findings of that investigation were leaked to The Daily Record on the day before they were due to be published, prompting Salmond to launch a judicial review of the handling of the inquiry. The Scottish government initially defended the judicial review, before dropping its defence. But a separate police investigation resulted in a criminal trial in 2020 in which Salmond was cleared of all 14 charges, being found not guilty on 12 counts while prosecutors withdrew another charge and one was found not proven. The next year Salmond, who had been Scottish first minister between 2007 and 2014 as leader of the SNP, founded the pro-independence Alba Party. In her memoir, Sturgeon said Salmond had informed her that he was being investigated in April 2018 and initially appeared to be 'upset and mortified' before he 'became cold'. Claiming he 'effectively admitted the substance of one of the complaints, but claimed that it had been a 'misunderstanding'', Sturgeon said it had been 'evident' that Salmond 'wanted me to intervene' to stop or divert the investigation. She added that her refusal to do so turned him against her and 'made the break-up of one of the most successful partnerships in modern British politics all but inevitable'. Sturgeon also accused Salmond of attempting to 'cast himself as the victim' and being 'prepared to traumatise, time and again, the women at the centre of it all'. READ MORE: Inside the growing movement to boycott Israel in communities across Scotland She said: 'A conspiracy against Alex would have needed a number of women deciding to concoct false allegations, without any obvious motive for doing so. 'It would then have required criminal collusion between them, senior ministers and civil servants, the police and the Crown. 'That is what he was alleging. The 'conspiracy' was a fabrication, the invention of a man who wasn't prepared to reflect honestly on his own conduct.' In other extracts, published on Friday, Sturgeon discussed her arrest in 2023, describing it as 'mental torture', her miscarriage in 2010 and her sexuality. Sturgeon served as Scottish first minister between 2014 and 2023. Sturgeon's memoir, Frankly, will be published on Thursday.
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
MSPs weighing up Suzanne's Law should be clear on what it means
Introduced to Parliament more than two years ago, the Government and MSPs are considering final amendments to the legislation. This is the last chance for politicians and campaigners to shape the final flagship criminal justice reform of this SNP administration. One proposal featured prominently in the media last week. Sponsored by the new LibDem MSP Jamie Greene and backed by Victim Support Scotland, 'Suzanne's Law' would require the Parole Board to 'refuse killers parole if they withhold the location of their victims' bodies'. The amendment is named after Suzanne Pilley, who disappeared in 2010. David Gilroy was convicted of her murder in 2012 but remains tight-lipped about where her body might be. Relatives of Pilley and other families who have lost loved ones – and remain in the dark about where their bones are interred – gave a powerful press conference in Glasgow last week, describing the predicament as a 'form of mental torture'. READ MORE: 'Absolutely crazy': Scottish jazz artist scores new film by Hollywood director They argue the uncertainty about the fate of their loved ones makes that elusive thing – 'closure' – even more difficult to find. Homicide convictions are not common but have featured prominently in a number of high-profile documentaries from High Court murder trials in recent years. They range from the disappearance of Arlene Fraser and the subsequent prosecutions and convictions of her husband Nat in 2012, to Margaret Fleming's disappearance from Inverkip, resulting in the conviction of Edward Cairney and Avril Jones in 2019, despite the lack of a murder weapon, physical evidence proving how murder could have been committed or even physical evidence establishing that Fleming had passed away as a result of foul play. To understand this campaign, you need to understand something of the law as it currently applies. If someone is convicted of murder in Scotland, the court is required to hand down a life sentence. The judge sets what is normally called the 'punishment part' of the sentence, which is the minimum period of time the prisoner will remain in custody before being eligible to apply for parole. Decisions on whether or not to release life prisoners from custody are made by the Parole Board. The board is composed of a mixture of legal and criminal justice professionals and is independent of government. Their key role is to 'ensure that those prisoners who are no longer regarded as presenting a risk to public safety may serve the remainder of their sentence in the community on licence under the supervision of a supervising officer'. In taking these decisions, the Parole Board is concerned with risk to the public – not further punishment. News reports suggest that in response, Cabinet Secretary for Justice Angela Constance has accepted some kind of amendment to the parole rules which will require the board to treat non-disclosure of where a victim's remains might be found as a factor in decision-making. While details haven't been published, this would fall short of the principle of 'no body, no parole' requiring the Parole Board to automatically refuse to release a prisoner who won't provide information about what happened to their victim. This proposal has been met by some sceptical responses from parts of the legal world. The first argument is: there's no point in introducing laws like this. Speaking to the media last week, lawyers pointed out that Parole Board rules already direct them to consider whether or not the prisoner has revealed the whereabouts of their victim's body. READ MORE: Anas Sarwar blasted as 'hypocrite' after branding Benjamin Netanyahu 'war criminal' On Radio Scotland, advocate Edith Forrest rightly pointed to Rule 12 of the Parole Board Rules which already applies to parole hearings involving someone serving a life sentence for murder or culpable homicide. Where the Parole Board 'does not know where and how the victim's remains were disposed of' and believes the prisoner 'has information about where and how the victim's remains were disposed of' then it can take this into account in terms of deciding whether or not to release them on licence. This looks, as Forrest says, much like the rules which the Scottish Government is now proposing to add to the statute book. Holyrood has, yet again, been caught relegislating for things the law already deals with. Jamie Greene's response is he thinks 'it's important to get this stuff in black and white on the face of legislation'. But there are other reasons why MSPs would be wise to approach introducing rules like this carefully. As the name suggests, the whole campaign is premised on a particular scenario: a factually guilty person, behind bars, maliciously refusing to yield information about their victim's final resting place, presented as a form of coercive control beyond the grave, or as a further act of spite to rub salt into the wounds of families broken by grief. Presented in this way, who could reasonably object to the idea of keeping dangerous characters like this in custody? But try looking at the proposal from another angle. Try thinking of this not as Suzanne's Law but just as a law which will apply to all kinds of prisoners. While Greene's proposals might answer a sense of justice in one context, they are guaranteed to create more injustice in others. In the miscarriages of justice literature, this is sometimes called the 'innocent prisoner's dilemma'. Consider the case of Andy Malkinson, by way of illustration. Malkinson was convicted of rape in 2004. The conviction relied on the evidence of the victim, who picked Malkinson out of a life-up, saying she was '100% sure' he was the man. She was mistaken. He was convicted by majority verdict and sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge set the punishment part at six years and 125 days. Subsequent forensic re-examination of the victim's clothing found DNA matching the profile of another man on the national database. On the basis of this new evidence, the Court of Appeal in London finally quashed Malkinson's rape conviction as unsafe in the summer of 2023. He spent 17 years in custody. READ MORE: Former Knesset speaker urges '1 million Jews' to file Israel war crimes complaint Failures in the handling of Malkinson's case have now precipitated the collapse in the leadership of the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The CCRC is responsible for reviewing potential wrongful convictions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. But there was another step in the criminal justice process which helped keep Malkinson in custody for 17 years: the parole process. Although eligible to apply for release on license after spending six years and 125 days in custody, the Parole Board applied a principle like Suzanne's law to his case. In essence, it said: if you don't admit you did this, we're going to leave you in prison until you do. Rules like this demand of wrongfully convicted people an impossible question: which is more important to you, the truth or your liberty? Choose. As the Court of Appeal explained in its 2023 judgment vindicating Malkinson, 'throughout those many years', he 'adamantly maintained that he was innocent of the crimes and had been wrongly convicted'. And 'he did so in the knowledge that he was thereby delaying his release from prison' – for years, and years, and years. This is the innocent prisoner's dilemma. Malkinson described it as his catch-22. If he just admitted to committing the rape he was convicted of and went through the dishonest motions of engaging with the behavioural programmes in prison requiring him to reflect on his wrongdoing, he'd have been released from prison long before he was. If he refused, more years were guaranteed to pass him by, protesting his innocence in custody. Similar considerations apply to Suzanne's Law. You can't give the authorities information about a murder you did not commit. You cannot specify a deposition site if you didn't kill your victim. Given the small numbers of people involved, perhaps you're comfortable with a utilitarian calculus which sees a small number of innocent people like Andy Malkinson spending more time in custody for crimes they did not do, if it visits lengthier punishments on guilty men, determined to inflict a final twist of the knife on families they've already bereaved. In backing this campaign, that's the choice MSPs will be making.
Daily Record
2 days ago
- Daily Record
Suzanne Pilley's family beg killer to reveal where body is hidden amid 15 years of torture
Relatives of bookkeeper Suzanne, murdered by colleague David Gilroy in 2010, have urged him to end their torment and disclose where he buried her remains. Murder victim Suzanne Pilley's family have begged her killer to end their torment and reveal where he hid her body 15 years ago. Bookkeeper Suzanne was 38 when she vanished in Edinburgh in 2010. Her killer David Gilroy is serving an 18-year jail sentence but has never disclosed the location of her remains. Speaking last week for the first time in more than five years, Suzanne's sister Gail Fairgrieve and mum Sylvia Pilley told of the never ending heartache over the loss and lack of closure. Fighting back tears, Gail told the Sunday Mail: 'It's very difficult to explain the emotional impact. Every family situation, every birthday, every Christmas, every milestone. ' Suzanne was my Maid of Honour at my wedding. She never saw my 25th wedding anniversary. It's the same with my kids, she had a niece and a nephew who have had so many birthdays. And she wasn't there for it. He denied her that.' Gilroy, who was Suzanne's work colleague, was jailed for her murder in 2012. He is believed to have buried her body in a remote part of Argyll but has refused to divulge the location. Sylvia, who hasn't spoken publicly about the loss of her daughter since 2018, said: 'I know S uzanne had justice when he was put in prison but her life has been cut short. She really wanted a family and she has never been given that, and we miss her. That's really why we are doing this.' Gail said all the family now wants is 'to bring Suzanne home and celebrate the life she did have'. She added: 'That's everybody's final wish, so it would be a quite significant thing if [Gilroy] was to give us that information.' At a press conference on Wednesday organised by Victim Support Scotland, Gail and Sylvia were joined by family members of Arlene Fraser, another murdered woman whose body has never been found. Carol Gillies, sister of Arlene who disappeared in Elgin in 1998, revealed how she and Gail had bonded over their shared trauma – and become close allies in the campaign to introduce 'Suzanne's Law' in Scotland. The change, set to be delivered in the coming months, will make it harder for killers to be freed on parole if they don't disclose where their victims' bodies are. Gilroy is not eligible for parole until 2030 – however, in the case of Arlene's twice-convicted killer husband Nat Fraser, he could be freed as early as October 2028 under the current rules. With the two families sharing a public platform for the first time, Gail and Carol were asked if they took strength from each other. Carol said: 'Oh, absolutely. We're usually on the phone for about an hour and a half.' Arlene was last seen waving her kids off to school at her home in Elgin, Moray. Her disappearance sparked one of Scotland's largest ever police investigations. Fraser was first jailed for killing the 33-year-old in 2003 with the trial revealing she had been making plans to divorce him. His first conviction was quashed but he was found guilty again at a 2012 retrial. Despite repeated pleas to Fraser from the family to reveal her whereabouts, no trace of Arlene has ever been found. Speaking alongside mum Isabelle Thompson, Carol said: 'He controlled Arlene when she was alive and he's controlling her when she's dead. To have Nat Fraser in front of the parole board and all they are considering is... how he behaved in jail is just not enough. 'If he was to get out, then the truth would be gone forever.' Carol spoke powerfully about the 'mental torture' the family had endured with their shocking 27-year wait to find Arlene. She said: 'I think I sometimes feel guilty that I have a life. She was only 33 when she was taken. She wouldn't want me to feel guilty, she would want me to live my life. But she has missed out on so much… "I feel that Arlene now comes under the heading of 'remains'. I still see her as a person... she's still a person to us.' The families' joint press conference followed a 'positive' meeting with Justice Secretary Angela Constance on their calls to toughen parole rules. Under an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform Bill, there will be a requirement that the Parole Board 'must' take into account when killers refuse to disclose remains in decisions on whether to release them. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. The proposal has been pushed by Lib Dem MSP Jamie Greene, formerly of the Scottish families say Scotland could go even further and introduce a 'no body, no parole' rule as seen in countries like Australia. Constance has vowed to consider any proposal put to her with a consultation on parole rules set to be launched imminently. The SNP minister said both families had been through 'intolerable pain and trauma'. She said: 'The ongoing suffering for these families as a result of the location of their loved ones not being disclosed is an act of utter contempt. 'In many ways, words almost fail me as to why anyone would do that to a grieving family.' Greene said the amended Bill is 'a welcome step toward creating a system that properly respects the rights of those victims'.
