To all visitors to this site:

Scores of articles concerning:

a} the Musa case {0f 6 children removed from their parents via questionable, dubious and nay, illegal corcumstances / allegations},

b} regarding Maurice Kirk, at present in Cardiff prison on hunger strike in his 2nd stay there recently, protesting against the numerous irregular activities of the authorities {especially in S. Wales} regarding himself  and

c} Norman Scarth, also awaiting a court case concerning grave breaches of his Human Rights.

 have been withdrawn temporarily so as not to influence any {potential} jury members regarding the upcoming criminal court cases concerning these subjects.  All similar sites concerning the Musa case and Maurice Kirk should also either close or remove from the internet all articles relating to these 2 subjects for the very reason{s} stated.

  J. Graham  29 Jan 2012.


From Robert Greens blog
Fri Jan 27:

A local police officer called at my home this afternoon, on behalf of Sergeant Hogg of Central Police, Scotland, to provide me with a crime reference number in connection with my formal complaint about the alleged misappropriation of public funds by Elish Angiolini, in order to pay Levy & McRae for legal actions on her behalf in a private capacity.

Such an alleged crime should not be difficult to solve. All Dame Elish needs to do is to provide proof that the fees in question were paid by her personally. However, it would seem that she has so far been finding this simple query difficult to address. It is now two years since the question was first put to her and for a six-month period, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion, asked her to respond. She has yet failed to do so.

Levy & McRae ought also to be able to help clear this issue up. The firm must know who it invoiced and who paid the bill. There can be no lawful reason for the Scottish taxpayer to have paid this.

Central Police say that everyone in Scotland is treated equally under the law. If Dame Elish remains unable to exonerate herself, there can be no reason why she should not be arrested and charged, as anyone unfortunate enough to have less influential allies would be in similar circumstances.
Posted by Robert Green

Thursday, January 26, 2012Justice?
I would like to take this opportunity to bring everyone up-to-date regarding recent events but would first like to thank again all of you who have offered their support and expressed their objection to Sheriff Principal Bowen`s personal decision to convict me on a Breach of the Peace charge.

Especially I cannot really find appropiate words to express my thanks to those of you who came to the court, day after day, to witness what I believe to be another unacceptable incidence of bias against me by the Scottish justice system. Those of you in Scotland who have so gallantly stood by me represent the true face of Scotland – brave, loyal, fair-minded and thoroughly decent and compassionate.

I have no doubt that my prospects of a successful defence were impaired unacceptably by the Sheriff`s decision to deny me the testimonies under oath of two key defence witness who had both been formally cited, Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan and former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini.

As events progressed, it became clear that the integrity of the trial was compromised by the fact that McGowan, leading for the prosecution, was himself being protected from having to answer pertinent questions about his own conduct and influence.

In the case of Angiolini, in many ways the central figure whose failings led directly to my being charged, she would have had to face some telling questions on oath had our citatation not been blocked by Bowen`s intervention. Under Scottish law, it would not have been necessary for her to answer questions that may incriminate herself, but it would surely have been in the interests not only of the defence, but for Scotland in general as to how she would respond to the matter of who paid Levy &McRae for her private legal actions, a question she has persistently failed to answer to a formal request from a senior public official, the Freedom of Information Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion.

As we were denied Angiolini`s opportunity to speak on this specific topic, amongst others, I formally made a complaint yesterday at the police station in Dunblane, where she resides, having been invited to take this course of action by a letter from Lothian and Borders Police. The constant evasions by Angiolini in responding to a perfectly simple official question would strongly indicate, in my view, that a serious criminal offence has taken place, which I have been given to understand should be termed the misappropriation of public funds.

Regardless of opinions on the Hollie Greig case or on mine, surely no one can reasonably take a view other than that the former Lord Advocate has conducted herself in an unacceptable manner leading to the gravest suspicion of her culpability over the likely criminal misuse of public funds.

One of the most important facts to emerge from the trial was that following Hollie`s lengthy interview with PC Lisa Evans on the 8th September 2009, which I witnessed, not one of the named alleged perpetrators, not one of the alleged victims, nor any of the expert medical witnesses whose reports completely supported Hollie`s allegations were ever questioned by Grampian Police. Of course, contrary to police procedures in such cases involving the sexual abuse of children were the computers of the alleged perpetrators seized or examined. One of the main reasons for this is that whilst rape is inevitably a complex issue as far as proof is concerned, the downloading of child pornography is not. It is a known fact that abusers generally avail themselves to this type of crime and given the sheer number of those named by Hollie, there can surely be no rational explanation for Grampian Police`s failures.

As we have said so often, Hollie`s competence and honesty has never been in any doubt, as admitted by Grampian Police themselves. The condition of Down`s Syndrome leads to those who have the condition to describe past events exactly as they have experienced them, without the facility to fabricate or embellish. Hollie Greig is therefore the best type of witness one could have in acase such as this, unlike any of her alleged attackers.

Thanks to extra information alluded to or gleaned during the trial, particularly from witness Rosemary Murray, someone certainly not involved in the abuses, I have every reason to believe that two specific witnesses in particular, committed perjury during the course of the trial.

Naturally, I have always stressed that my chief objective in the campaign is to secure a proper public inquiry into the repeated failures and obstructions of the authorities in dealing adequately with all the allegations and other matters, including the death of Robert Greig.

Indeed, if any proper police investigation had taken place it would have exonerated those who professed to be innocent in court long ago.

I must attend Stonehaven Court on 17th February at 10.30 hours for sentencing.

I shall just end by repeating these facts.

Following Hollie`s indescribably brave conduct and precise allegations on 8th September 2009 to DC Lisa Evans relating to most horrendous crimes, the police took no action whatsoever.

In January 2010, when I circulated a letter highlighting the police`s failure in this matter and the potential danger to the public, Grampian Police interviewed no fewer than 61 witnesses within five weeks and I was thus arrested and charged.



Dunblane is the code-name of the ARREST ANGIOLINI campaign, launched yesterday in her home-town of Dunblane by Robert Green and the writer of this blog. A pretty town, with friendly, normal people, as we have experienced everywhere in Scotland, very much including Stonehaven. Yet a shadow hangs permanently over Dunblane, symbolically caught by the dark clouds in the sky in our photograph yesterday.

We drove past the school, Queen Victoria School, from which Thomas Hamilton recruited children to take on his ‘camps’.  I couldn’t face the Primary School, but I am sure it has long since returned to being a happy place. Children in their natural state are the best antidote to the evil in this world and the evil-doers know that, which is why children are preyed on, particularly Down’s Syndrome children, in their natural state the most joyous and loving of all children! As Anne will confirm, to have a Down’s child feels like a blessing from heaven, rather than any kind of ‘problem’.

The Sheriff declared in his final summation on Tuesday that he is taking this case “very seriously” which we interpret as a warning to Robert not to continue campaigning for Hollie between now and 17th February, or his possibly custodial sentence will be brought forward.

On the face of it, the ARREST ANGIOLINI campaign has nothing to do with securing justice for Hollie, any more than did the proceedings in Sheriff Principal Bowen’s court this past 2 weeks at Stonehaven, in which none of the evidence supporting Hollie’s claims was critically examined, and yet a lot of it did come out, and is now on the public record which greatly pleases Robert.

The issue last week was Did Robert Upset People in Scotland? And the answer was a resounding YES!

And the issue this week is Did Elish Misappropriate Public Funds? Again, the answer looks likely to be a very loud YES!

Today Central Police Scotland (the equivalent of the Met in England, presumably) contacted Robert and said Lothian & Borders Police are still considering whether or not to allocate a crime number to his complaint and that they will let him know.

The young constable who received us yesterday at Dunblane police station did his job perfectly, to the extent of confirming that no individual is ‘above the law’ in Scotland, which was reassuring to be told, and recorded Robert’s statement regarding Angiolini’s alleged crime as if recording details of a car-theft!

If everyone in public service, particularly security did their job according to their code of office and the ever-evolving law, which does not prima facie serve those who seek to abuse it and remains open to challenge, there might still be the possibility of true justice in 21st century.


Trial Day 6 – Robert found guilty


Robert was denied a second key defence witness today (Dame Elish Angiolini) by Sheriff Principal Bowen when he supported an objection to her citation by the Prosecution, on the grounds that she was IRRELEVANT TO THE CASE. He had already been denied the Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan as witness for the defence, despite unanimous support for his citation by all his legal representatives, past and present. Thus prospects of a successful defence were damaged from the beginning, yet another instance of bias by the Scottish justice system, in Robert’s view.

On taking the witness stand therefore Robert asked if he could make a statement on the record? but was refused by the Sheriff. His cross-examination then began and continued all morning, with the only other witness to be called today taking the stand in the last 10 minutes before the lunch-break.

Answering his Counsel’s questions with his customary eloquence and clarity, Robert stressed that his main object throughout the activity which had offended a few people in Scotland was to secure an investigation of Hollie’s allegations. He was able to quote from Dr Eva Harding’s letter in which Sylvia Major is named as an abuser and stated that this individual was sitting in the court.

Throughout Mr Lamb’s cross-examination Robert reiterated his belief that he was acting in the public interest in attempting to protect vulnerable citizens. He explained that he had tried every possible avenue prior to taking the action which had given rise to his being prosecuted, and that Anne Greig had also been directing her concerns through the normal legal channels since 2000. By the time of his arrest therefore, 10 years had passed during the whole of which time the authorities had obstructed every attempt to secure justice.

Robert also continued to stress that his efforts were designed to instigate an OPEN, INDEPENDENT INQUIRY into all aspects of Hollie’s case, including the abduction of Anne and the highly suspicious death of Robert Greig.

The Procurator Fiscal, Stephen McGowan then opened the Crown’s cross-examination of Robert. Robert immediately countered this by asking McGowan why he had passed a sheet of paper bearing the masonic symbol of the Square and Compass to Sheriff Patrick Davies on 30th April 2010? and asked what possible role the Freemasons could have had in the prosecution case. Unsurprisingly, the Sheriff blocked this question, which only served to underline how his refusal to allow McGowan to stand as a defence witness had helped to undermine Robert’s case.

McGowan continuously challenged Robert on his expertise on a wide range of technical subjects, including his knowledge of post-mortem examinations. Robert pointed out he was not a pathologist, nor had he ever claimed to be, but that his opinion on all these subjects was directed by the expert witness statements provided him by Anne Greig. Moreover, as the pathologist Dr Grieve had stated that he liked and trusted such people as the Majors, Sheriff Buchanan and Elish Angiolini, he could hardly be regarded as an impartial witness.

To be fair, McGowan did raise questions about a possible family relationship between individuals of the same surname not having been properly established. Robert conceded the possibility that there might be some grounds for doubt in this regard but stressed that what was at issue was what the individuals had been alleged to have done, rather than any family connections between them, real or otherwise, that might exist.

Further on in the discussion it became apparent that McGowan, when questioned by Robert, had little knowledge of the PCCS report to which the latter had referred. It also became clear that neither McGowan nor the Sheriff appeared to have any concept of the effect that Satanic Ritual Abuse has on those unfortunate enough to be forced into such a cult. Robert explained that for 14 years Hollie had suffered the most appalling ordeals in silence, due to having been terrorised by her father. Therefore, anyone with any knowledge of this issue would know that evidence provided even under oath could be unreliable. As things stand, the Scottish court system does not yet provide a facility for swearing oaths in the name of Lucifer, somewhat surprisingly. 

The only other witness to be called by the defence was Steven Raeburn, Editor of the distinguished legal magazine The Firm. During a brief cross-examination by Defence and Prosecution, Mr Raeburn described clearly and authoritatively his attempts to engage individuals in the Crown Office in connection with issues relating to the FOI Commissioner, details of which have already been published. Whereupon Mr Lamb brought up the matter of the payment to Levy & McRae over Angiolini’s private legal actions. McGowan objected to Defence’s questions but was overruled by the Sheriff.

In the afternoon session both sides summed up and Mr Lamb skillfully had Robert acquitted of 3 of the 5 charges against him. However the Sheriff ruled that in his view Robert was guilty of Breach of the Peace and of breaking some of his bail conditions.

Sentencing has been deferred until Friday 17th February, until which time the bail conditions on Robert remain in force.

NOTE by Webmaster:

This week this site was visited by known and clearly identifiable establishment bodies.
Scottish Executive – 1 visit
Council Of The European Union – Brussels – 4 visits
Commission Europeenne – 1 visit
Government Of South Africa – 2 visits
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission – 7 visits
The Audit Commission – 1 visit
Police National Network – Eastcote, Bucks – 15 visits
Police National Network – Brierley Hill, Staffs – 6 visits today, 27 visits in last 3 days
Aberdeen City Council – 6 visits in last 3 days
With such high profile visits it was envisaged that either the establishment would offer up one of the accused to protect the rest, or would stamp on this case hard. The answer to that is in the title of this post.
There is still a case to answer however over the sheer cost of this case, nor will this campaign go away.


The Hollie Greig Case – Robert Green Trial – the 1st 4 days {pls see for full reports}:

Day 4 – Robert Green Trial, Stonehaven Court, Scotland:

VIDEO:  DAY 4 – 19 JAN 2012:

A Day with Grampian Police
Posted on January 20, 2012 by Belinda 

As may be recalled, matters were held up on Day 3 Wednesday with ‘both sides of the Bar’ requesting an adjournment. This was to resolve the issue of the unwillingness of DC Lisa Evans to be cross-examined by the Defence in public.

DC Evans is a key witness in this case, with potential to be helpful to all sides, including Sheriff Bowen as adjudicator.  It was a relief to all therefore when Evans reappeared at the stand soon after 10 am on Thursday.

Thanks to Defence Counsel’s methodical probing, the reason for Evans’ nervousness rapidly became apparent. She is the officer from Grampian force who conducted the most recent interview of Hollie, on 8th September 2009 in Shrewsbury, and she also headed up the raiding party on Robert’s home on 13th February 2010. It is certain that she was directed to obtain a particular item with the potential to cause big problems for Grampian police. This item was not among the productions placed before the court yet the policewoman knew there were bound to be questions about it from the Defence, which only she could answer.

As Evans knew from having conducted the September 2009 interview which went on for 3 ½ hours, Hollie is a formidable witness, having both an excellent memory and in common with Down’s Syndrome people an inherent truthfulness. She is unable to fabricate information of which she has no direct, first-hand experience. On that day in September the information she supplied to the officer from Grampian police in West Mercia’s interview facility, much of it extremely upsetting to have to recount, was entirely consistent with the statements she had previously made in Scotland.

The problem for Grampian police was compounded by the fact that throughout the 3 ½ hour interview Robert Green had been listening in and taking notes.  This notebook was therefore a key item for which Evans had been searching on 13th February.

Defence Counsel Andy Lamb was onto this straightaway and asked Evans whether she had come across any notebooks in searching Robert’s premises? Yes, she had. And had Mr Green been present as well as Hollie and her mother? Yes he had been, but he been had asked to remain in the kitchen area. Was this separate from the interview room? It was; it was behind a wall. What kind of wall? A partition wall. Would DC Evans describe the layout of the premises? Etc.

In fact, what DC Evans tried to pass off as a wall or solid partition was only a sliding wooden door. Robert says that when the policewoman was first asked whether he was present or not while Hollie was being interviewed she had tried to get out of it altogether and said no, he was upstairs. As it happened, Anne was in the upstairs facility being interviewed by another police officer while Hollie was downstairs with Evans. Because of her speech and hearing difficulties both she and Evans were speaking at high decibels so that Robert just behind the wooden sliding door and who moreover was already very familiar with Hollie’s diction could hear everything being said.

These notes taken by Robert remain therefore a crucial piece of evidence confirming the truth of Hollie’s allegations. In fact Robert says there were 2 notebooks relating to that interview in 2009, the rough notes he took while listening in the kitchen and a “better written” version he put together immediately afterwards, in which he included more of the detail, knowing the importance this first-hand evidence from Hollie could have some at some point in the future. So far according to his Defence team only the rough, semi-legible version has been produced; the blue exercise book in which he wrote the second, fuller record has not been seen.

This interview and the transcripts of it, both Grampian’s own version and Robert’s version, when married with the other key evidence in the police hands would leave a properly-working force in no doubt that an investigation was urgently needed. Grampian were also in possession of the 4 medical reports confirming Hollie’s abuse as a child, 2 by well-known doctors whose expert analysis fully supported her allegations, and the report of Dr Frances Kelly, their own medical forensics officer who carried about an internal examination on her on 20 May 2000, two days after she and Anne had first reported her father Denis Mackie and brother Greg as her abusers at Bucksburn Police Station in Aberdeen. Dr Kelly had found clear evidence that Hollie had been abused. This was later confirmed in a letter dated 24 September 2003 to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority from DI Iain Alley of Grampian’s Criminal Investigation Division.

This clear medical confirmation of Hollie’s allegations against her father and brother should have sent the Aberdeen police straight round to the Mackie home to confiscate the computers and bedding, especially as brother Greg already had already been convicted of a sexual offence!  It should be remembered that this first report of the abuse she had suffered in May 2000 came several months before she had begun to name any of the other perpetrators. Only her father and brother were so far on the radar.

In the court at Stonehaven yesterday, much was made of Grampian Police’s Forensic Computing expertise when Ronald Findlay who had set up the unit in the late ‘90s and his colleague Gordon Simon took the stand after DC Evans. They had carried out “hundreds” of computer investigations over the years, they said, proceeding to divulge what they had found on Robert’s computer and how they had extracted that, a somewhat lengthy exegesis which sent at least one person in the public gallery literally to sleep!

So why had Mackie’s computer been left untouched? That is the question which remains as burningly relevant today as it was back in 2000. In fact, it is even more relevant in 2012 with so many people expressing grievance at having been publicly accused of horrible crimes against children by Hollie, Anne and Robert.  Their innocence, if indeed they are innocent could have been established a dozen years ago!  Mackie and Greg would have been locked up (meaning Portuguese as well as Scottish children would be safe from these monsters), Anne and Hollie would not have had to leave Scotland nor would Anne have been sectioned under the Mental Health Act, the people of Ferry Hill and Bridge of Don areas of Aberdeen would not have needed to be told worrying information about dangerous sex-offenders in their neighbourhoods and Robert Green, bless him would doubtless be busy defending some other victim/s of injustice or official corruption. Oh, and if Grampian Police had been doing their job, Roy Greig’s murderer would be behind bars too.

After the two Forensic Computing experts had given their evidence, the actual contents of Robert’s computer were put before the court by DS (now Sergeant) Stewart Drummond, in what was clearly an exercise to prove that Robert had breached his bail conditions, rather than that he had breached the peace.  It was DS Drummond who had been sent to arrest Robert on 12th February 2010. Drummond had assembled a sequence of extracts from Robert’s many public appearances on internet TV and radio and speeches given at public meetings in the period February to April 2010, the majority of which had taken place outside Scotland or in cyber-space and none at all in Aberdeen or Aberdeenshire.  In two of the extracts Robert alluded to the principle underpinning the bail “to do nothing to prevent the course of justice”. “So that’s exactly what I’m doing, assisting the course of justice! ” he told his interviewer (Paul Drockton Show, 23 March, Truthjuice Llangollen 24 March).

Eyes moistened in the public gallery when Hollie herself suddenly popped up in one of the interviews. She was on the Manchester Online show of 7th March 2010 along with Anne and Robert. The host Tony Legend asked her what she thought should happen to her dad? Hollie was in no doubt at all. “He should go to jail”, she said. And what about the other people, should they go to jail too? “Yes, the WHOLE LOT of them!”

At which point, two of the witnesses who had stayed on to keep watch over the proceedings couldn’t take any more and left the courtroom.

Posted on January 20, 2012 by Admin 

This site came under sustained hack attempts overnight in what was clearly an attempt to interfere with its good working.

In particular there were 39 Attacks, by 11 attackers using 21 separate IP addresses. All failed. In the main it was an attempt to corrupt the Share buttons on each post, and in particular the Facebook share.

One can only assume that the reporting of the Trial of Robert Green is causing much consternation amongst the powers that be, and that they have tried to limit the spreading of the reports. That the MSM have been largely silenced is witness to this.

Our response has been to harden our site security, update and make more widely available the share facility on this site, and you will notice that the share options now appear on a floating sidebar as well as within the posts themselves.

We have also made the content available via mobile phone, which we can see a good number of you have already made use of.

The truth will eventually come out, but in the meantime the interest in this story of an attempt to silence the messenger of a heinous crime that still remains to be properly investigated is growing daily. We will continue to report, whether that is liked or disapproved of or not.

Justice is for all.


Trial Day 3 – Grampian Police on the back foot
Posted on January 18, 2012 by Belinda

Crown Office in attempt to block defence questioning of Grampian police “weak link” DC Lisa Evans.
Towards the end of a very interesting day, the Trial came to a dramatic halt after Procurator Fiscal Stephen McGowan attempted to prevent DC Lisa Evans being cross-examined by Robert’s defence QC, Andy Lamb. Even Sheriff Bowen admitted being “mystified” but agreed to an adjournment, as Robert’s Counsel  and the PF could not reach an agreement.  It has not yet become clear why the Prosecution seem so desperate to obstruct the cross-examination of a particularly weak witness.

We should point out that Evans was the officer who interviewed Hollie about her allegations on 8th September 2009 at Shrewsbury, witnessed by Robert. From the current cross-examining of alleged abusers and victims, it has been confirmed that none of those named were ever interviewed as a result of Hollie’s detailed and precise evidence and, in line with what appears to be normal police procedure over such allegations these days, no computers were seized or examined.

DC Evans had been brought in as a prosecution witness because she was one of the officers involved in the raid on Robert’s home on 13th February 2010 whilst he was being held in Aberdeen and his computer, unlike those of the alleged sex abusers, was seized. The computer and papers taken from his living room (with no inventory supplied) were part of today’s court productions.

It would seem that Grampian police have a confusing sense of priorities when computers of alleged sex-abusers are not seized or examined, but the computer of someone who trying to expose the abusers is confiscated! There may well be some rational explanation for this anomaly but so far after two years, no one has been able to provide one.

Although the Evans issue seems to present a problem for the prosecution, it was not the only set-back for the Crown. Today’s witnesses packed less of a punch than yesterday’s, in particular Win Dragon, who seemed to be overwhelmed and incoherent. Dragon repeatedly claimed that Hollie had never been raped. However, she admitted to being a friend of Denis Charles Mackie, which could have affected her judgement. She was also cross-examined by Mr Lamb about her relationship with Dame Anne Begg, MP for Aberdeen South.

There seems to be an increasing mood of dissatisfaction about Grampian police’s repeated failure to investigate Hollie’s allegations, or to try to ascertain the true facts about the death of Robert Greig.  As we said yesterday and as we believe is rapidly becoming apparent to even the most sceptical observer in the court, the witnesses who claim to be angry and/or distressed about Robert’s allegations should instead direct their feelings towards Grampian police whose negligence, and possibly worse, has brought things to this pass.

Most conspicuously absent from today’s court productions are the 2 notebooks seized from Robert’s house in which details of DC Evans’ interview with Hollie were recorded. This account from another source today:

Another witness called by the prosecution was DC Lisa Evens, of Shrewsbury Police. DC Evens was the female Officer who interviewed Hollie whilst Robert listened in intently outside the room, noting down everything that was said between them and then transcribing his notes into another document later the same day, so as to be sure nothing was forgotten or overlooked. DC Evens was also one of the Police Officers who took part in the raid on Robert’s home on 13th February 2010. During that raid, DC Evens and her partner took Robert’s home table-top computer and, amongst other things, BOTH of Robert’s note books which contained a very precise and detailed record of the interview between DC Evens and Hollie Greig. These two documents would, of course, be of critical importance in such a case as Robert’s. To that end, Robert’s legal team requested sight of them today. The case was temporarily adjourned so that all of the presented evidence could be gone through by both sides in an attempt to find these two note books. Oddly, the documents were nowhere to be found! They do not appear to be listed as part of the legal bundle presented by either side either. How strange!

Once again, Robert wishes to thank all those who turn up every day to support him and for all the kind messages of encouragement he has been receiving.  Please note there is no hearing on Friday, so after Thursday’s session the trial will resume again on Monday.

Admin Note:

Following the updates from Stonehaven court for the past three days, on Hollie’s website, the hits have increased expotencially as they have for other supporting sites with a phenomenal amount of interest. On Hollie’s site alone, downloads of the Buchanan V Robert Green pdf file are now heading close to 1,000. The dam is fit to burst. Mainstream media are at long last NOW showing an interest as are councils and police in both England and Scotland. Across the world people are visiting the site. Due to the wonderful support of the many thousands of people who support truth and justice, it finally feels that justice may in the end prevail for all three victims of authoritarian abuse – in many departments.

Please continue to visit, support, comment and spread the word about the documents, which reveal so much.

Trial Day 2 – The Witnesses for the Prosecution
Posted on January 17, 2012 by Belinda 

Today the trial began in earnest, being the day when the Prosecution managed to call and question 15 civilian witnesses, with a few more to follow tomorrow, plus the police witnesses.

First to take the stand at 10.10am was Sheriff Graham Buchanan who claimed he was not related to Evelyn or Jack Buchanan, nor to Sarah Jane Buchanan from Aberdeen Social Services.  He was extremely vague and unconvincing about the depth of his association with Elish Angiolini, despite his having served in Aberdeen as a Sheriff during the time when she was Area Procurator Fiscal and, as he later confessed having spoken to her regularly when she was working in Airdrie as Deputy Fiscal in the ‘80s. He denied all Hollie’ allegations of which he had first learned in June 2009, prior to which he claimed to have had no knowledge of Hollie or her case, and was very vague also about his about his involvement in Anne and  Denis Mackie’s divorce case, although he had acted as Sheriff.

Furthermore, Simpson and Marwick which had organised his interdict against Robert also act for Denis Mackie, a fact initially denied by the law-firm, but which later had to be retracted by senior partner Peter Anderson when Anne was able to produce a document to prove otherwise.

When Buchanan was asked if he had looked at the variety of material about Hollie on the internet, he made a surprising attack on David Icke. He replied that one of the sites that was publishing Hollie’s story was Icke’s website and said he was “comforted” that David Icke was “a strange fellow”, therefore any material he published “doesn’t have any credibility”.

A large number of the alleged abusers and victims then gave evidence. It would appear even to an outsider, let alone to all those following this case, that their answers to the prosecution had been carefully rehearsed and choreographed, since all were polished performances and no two adjectival words or terms used to describe their emotion at having being branded child-abusers were the same. Much was made of their being distressed by articles on websites and blogs that were controlled not by Robert but by Greg Lance Watkins and Tom George.

An explanation is required as to why these other 2 individuals have not been charged, as it could be argued that their blogs have caused more ‘alarm and distress’ than anything put out by Robert.

A key witness was Sylvia Major, one of the three people named in the report by Dr Eva Harding confirming Hollie had been abused and identifying her abusers, the other two being Denis and Greg Mackie, Hollie’s father and brother. It should be remembered that this was the report that secured Hollie her award of £13,500 by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. Of all the witnesses it was agreed by those observing in the public gallery that Major made the weakest and least convincing impression, “I can’t/don’t recall” being a frequent response and little emotion, contrived or otherwise being shown.

A considerable number of those called continued in similar vein, having either forgotten information or as expected denying everything of which they are accused by Hollie, yet here and there belying the need for more probing than this hearing, which is focused on indicting Robert rather than them, allowed. One such was Hollie’s aunt, Jillian Mackie who first described herself as a nurse then admitted later she was actually currently involved in child protection work. Although she was at pains to portray herself as just an ordinary woman, she recently testified in the High Court in Glasgow that she was a friend and colleague of the convicted murderer Malcolm Webster. At that hearing it was alleged that she supplied Webster with the drugs that may have led to Mrs Webster’s death. Also at that hearing, Graeme and Jillian Mackie admitted to having received a mysterious ‘loan’ of £10,000 from the murderer, yet this was left hanging in the air, unexplained.

The final witness of significance was Hollie’s former head-teacher at Beechwood School, Andrew Young who began by saying he could hardly remember Hollie Greig, yet as the interview went on, including questions about the 2 medical reports by Dr Paul Carter indicating that Hollie was at serious risk he appeared to have a far more detailed knowledge than he first implied. He didn’t remember Hollie but he knew exactly when she left the school, and under cross-examination he confirmed that Robert had brought up Dr Carter’s issues in late 2009, yet he had taken no steps to check their veracity. Throughout giving his evidence he appeared nervous and uncomfortable.

Robert stresses that it is not the function of this court to ascertain whether all these people are telling the truth or otherwise, owing to the narrowness of the charge against him.  All the prosecution witnesses had to demonstrate was the degree to which he had caused them ‘alarm and distress’. Every single witness confirmed that they had never been questioned about Hollie’s allegations, whether in 2000 or 2009, which is precisely the point Robert has always made about Grampian police’s failure to investigate.

If any of these people were telling the truth, therefore, why hadn’t they directed their anger at Grampian police for not conducting an investigation which, if they really had been innocent, would have cleared their names long ago, and obviated the need for the public campaign they have all found so distressing!

And why, in view of the degree of distress and anger these witnesses claimed to have suffered, has not one had embarked on the conventional legal remedy of defamation against Robert Green which was open to all, and taken steps to clear their names, either individually or as a Class?

The evidence of these witnesses may need to be put to the test in future court cases.

Trial Day 1 – Angiolini still on the hook
Posted on January 16, 2012 by Belinda

At Stonehaven Sheriff Court, Aberdeenshire, Day 1 of the resumption of Robert’s Trial on Breach-of-the-Peace charges, joining the previous line-up of Sheriff Principle Bowen, Procurator Fiscal for Edinburgh and Prosecutor for the Crown, Stephen McGowan aided by Anne Currie, Procurator Fiscal for Aberdeen, was a new Counsel for the Defence, Andy Lamb assisted by Lili Prais, instructed by Solicitor Patrick Campbell. Some 5 out of the 61 witnesses for the prosecution (and their driver) were also spotted going into the building. All had to run the gauntlet of the crowd of Green’s supporters who had braved the sub-zero temperatures to stand outside the courthouse and welcome participants with clicking cameras, placards and a ‘Scotland’s Shame’ banner. Catching sight of the battery of cameras, Sheriff Bowen tried to hide his face behind his briefcase as he entered the courthouse.

.Robert got things off to a flying start by asking first McGowan, then the Sheriff if they were Freemasons? He cannily popped this question before responding to the Clerk’s opening question, are you George Robert Green? confirmation of which would have doubtless resulted in the Freemason issue being dismissed out of hand, so it was now or never, as Robert explained afterwards. Besides, he wanted to put the Freemasons in the frame right at the outset, this being not just a case about the rape and torture of children, but as he told the court, ever since April 2010 when during the course of an Interim Diet he had spotted a document with the Masonic insignia passing between McGowan and Sheriff Patrick Davies he had been disturbed by this possible element in the case. Up till then he had been of the opinion that the case was not connected with Freemasonry. So why were the Prosecution using this to influence the Sheriff? A question that remains unanswered to this moment.

 Again, as Robert explained afterwards, his raising this issue was by no means to discredit Freemasons in general, which would be unfair, but merely to question if there was some undue Masonic influence in the proceedings being brought against him and the manner in which they were being conducted. There was now the new question of a mysterious tie-up between his previous Counsel Frances McMenamin and the reporter from the Scottish Sun, who seemed to be ‘in the know’, to use a Freemasonic metaphor, about what was to transpire in Stonehaven Court on 15th November 2011. If it became clear from the evidence coming out of this case that Freemasonry was harbouring within its ranks rogue elements who are protecting paedophiles and abusing their public position in the process, then that would obviously be a matter of concern to all who are members of this organisation which, at a certain level anyway, prides itself on its moral standards. Quite apart from the fact it would indicate that there could be a collusion between the Bench and the Prosecution which would constitute a conflict of interests.

 This was then the reason why Robert asked the question, in the interests of justice being seen to be done, and had the Sheriff answered in the affirmative he would have asked him to recuse himself.  

 McGowan, whom we have never seen looking anything but discomforted in his thankless role of Prosecutor for the Crown, after the briefest of pauses for reflection and looking down at the floor, answered “no I am not”. The Sheriff himself tetchily told Robert he did not intend to answer the question. Whereupon Robert confirmed to the Clerk, “yes, I am George Robert Green” and the hearing began.

 Whether or not they had been prepared for this opening salvo, Anne Currie for the Prosecution was certainly ready to deal with the issue of the citation of Elish Angiolini. She attempted to dismiss that first-off, indicating that as the former Lord Advocate was not amongst those who have been offended by Robert’s allegations/named as Hollie’s abusers, she had nothing to do with the case. At which there were gasps of incredulity from the public gallery and one loud chortle, the perpetrator of which was summarily removed from the chamber.

 It will be remembered that Currie has come unstuck over the witnesses and is currently under investigation over an attempt to mislead the court. Robert has by now seen the statements of the 61 who include members of the justice service, including Peter Watson of Levy & McCrae, as well as friends and neighbours of those named by Hollie as her former abusers. Many of these people were previously described by Currie on 13th April 2011 as ‘traumatised’. This would have placed them in the vulnerable witness category, requiring accompanying medical reports, yet these are conspicuously absent. In fact not even Peter Watson would seem to have been ‘traumatised’ by the course of events, despite the additional pressures on him of the Stephen Purcell case.

Without going into the vapidity of Currie’s argument, Andy Lamb suggested to the Sheriff that the Prosecution’s evidence needed to be heard before any decision regarding the former Lord Advocate’s attendance or otherwise was taken. And surprisingly, the Sheriff concurred!

 Lamb then went on to point out to the Sheriff that as he had only just arrived on the case and had in fact only met Robert in person for the first time that previous evening, he had not had sufficient time to prepare the defence and requested an adjournment for the rest of the day.

 Again, Sheriff Bowen was disposed to be amenable, but cautioned Lamb that if he let him off for the rest of the day, he did not expect him to use the time and then walk off the case! as had happened on the previous occasion. He wanted everyone back in court ready to go at 10 am sharp the following morning.

 Thus proceedings on Day 1 terminated shortly before 11 am and everyone could enjoy the by then brilliant sunshine and a breath of sea air.

 Best of all, Angiolini cannot yet sleep easy in her bed. ”







Autumn 2009 was the 1st time the HOLLIE GREIG case was ever mentioned online…



About butlincat

my blog:
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.