Archive | October 2013



On the face of it, Timothy Rustige (Rusty) is on trial, jury denied as usual in these parts, for allegedly upsetting Elish Angiolini.  However, it is not Rusty who will really be on trial , but the integrity of the entire Scottish justice system.

Rusty, a gallant human rights campaigner from Prisoners of Conscience International faces prison – for what  – allegedly criticising, from his home in England,  the suitability of Angiolini`s publicly-funded appointment to a college at Oxford University. Thus, Rusty could be incarcerated by a regime notorious for its utter contempt for human rights, this time on the say-so of one of its worst practitioners, described as such by Ian Hamilton QC in his interview on BBC TV. Angiolini and her associates were also severely reprimanded by Lord Hope of the Supreme Court for continuous human rights abuses,  exemplified by the Peter Cadder case. Furthermore, Elish Angiolini was not only prepared to lie to the whole world in the Lockerbie case about both the conviction and true reason for Mr Al-Megrahi`s release, but also displayed cruel disregard for his basic human rights. What kind of person would state that it was contemptuous, as Angiolini did on 8th September 2009, for a terminally ill man wrongly imprisoned far from his home country, to appeal against a conviction that she already knew was completely unsustainable?

Following the recent posts articles exposing Alex Salmond`s involvement in the Hollie Greig abuse case, here is yet another headline from The Firm magazine`s edition of 1st October 2010:-

Angiolini Resigns

The article says that she is stepping down as Lord Advocate but had declined to provide a reason for doing so. It goes on to state that it understands that “she is presently facing further action in respect of a failed appeal against a decision by the Information Commissioner not to disclose whether she used her own or taxpayers` funds in legal actions against the media”.

This refers to her action, implemented by Levy & McRae in 2009, to stop the media from reporting her connection with the Hollie Greig case.

The answer to this obvious public interest query has never been revealed to this day, but I have a letter from the Crown Office confirming that the query from the Commissioner was ignored until Angiolini had left office – but who is there fit to investigate?

Angiolini`s lawyer is Peter Watson of Levy &McRae. Professor Watson also represents Alex Salmond and the Scottish Police, as well as most of the Scottish media, so they are all taking advice from the same lawyer.

If Scotland was run fairly and properly, such a situation demonstrating such blatant conflicts of interest would never be allowed to exist. Moreover, Levy & McRae boasts on its site of employing former senior police officers. Therefore, it could be surely reasonable to suggest that Peter Watson, the firm`s senior partner, has the Scottish police in his pocket. If the professor thinks such an assumption to be unfair, then I should be glad to publish his comments on this site.

When Rusty faces the sheriff, whoever he or she may be, it may be interesting to reflect on the extraordinarily lenient treatment offered to one of Angiolini`s former deputies, Stuart McFarlane.
McFarlane was initially arrested when discovered having sex with a female prostitute in a public place in Glasgow. McFarlane became violent with the two arresting police officers to the extent that both required hospital treatment. I think anyone would expect that any individual causing such injuries to police officers in the course of their duty would face a custodial sentence, but Angiolini`s Crown Office came to McFarlane`s rescue, deciding that it was “not in the public interest” for such a violent sex offender to be jailed. This left McFarlane free to subsequently be arrested again for possessing 15, 000 child pornographic images, some of a horrific nature, according to police sources. Surely, this time, he must be imprisoned, you may well say.

Well no, with an ally like Elish Angiolini, you can get away with anything in Scotland. McFarlane is still at large. It is only those of us who are prepared to expose sex offenders like McFarlane, such as Rusty and me, who must be locked up “in the public interest”. The words of the recently deceased but highly respected Jock Thomson QC come to mind when he described Scotland as a “banana republic” and the Crown Office as “institutionally corrupt”.

So what gives this institutionally corrupt banana republic the right to jail foreigners whose only “crime” it is to stand up for Scottish rape victims and to expose those who protect the perpetrators?

May I again ask for the maximum possible support for Rusty in Aberdeen on 4th and 5th November and for anyone who can attend to be there to bear witness to what may occur in the Scottish Court, as I know from my own experience that it is shamelessly capable of the most disgraceful acts of corruption.

This is not just about the Hollie Greig case, shocking though it is. It is about fundamental human rights, justice and decency. It is about freedom of expression and freedom of the press in a country where such concepts are not allowed to exist.

May the eyes of all those committed to belief in true democracy, civilised behaviour and protection of our most vulnerable citizens from sexual abuse be focussed on Aberdeen and Tim Rustige on 4th and 5th November.

1 comment:

  1. Ref The Firm’s ‘Angiolini resignation’ announcement.
    The last paragraph of the article relating to her blatantly ignoring Information Commissioner Kevin Dunion’s demand viz disclosure of source of legal action funds resulted in a police investigation of such.
    Specifically Crime Reference No CS-20120125-0112 filed with Lothian & Borders, as the alleged crime was believed to have been committed in that area – and became the subject of a criminal investigation by Scottish CID into her alleged misuse of public funds to suppress media reportage of the Hollie Greig scandal and thus subvert the course of justice.
    Never heard anymore about that one did we. Wonder why? Yet another Wicked Watson (Levy & McRae) Magic Circle coverup?




I am awaiting a response from First Minister Alex Salmond to my letter, enclosing key documents supporting Hollie`s case, to his constituency secretary of 3rd October. Mr David Woods, from Mr Salmond`s Edinburgh office, has courteously advised me that a reply will be sent.

It is to be hoped that Mr Salmond will not allow himself to be so ill-informed as to suggest that a “thorough investigation” into Hollie`s allegations has already been undertaken.

No investigation that could possibly be described as such has ever taken place.

However, I have informed the First Minister that the overriding priority is that a full inquiry into Hollie`s case and those connected to it should be proposed. Despite everything that has happened, I am willing to offer my full cooperation and support in a spirit of goodwill should this course of action be taken. I am not especially interested in vengeance or recrimination as long as justice is seen to be done for Hollie Greig and that Scottish children and the disabled receive the state`s protection from sexual abuse to which they are entitled.

If readers would like to be reminded of the evidence Mr Salmond has before him, much of the most salient information can be viewed during my interview that takes place 47 minutes into the show:-

One could only describe the investigation as being thorough if one believes that a) those accused of paedophile rape need never be questioned, b) their computers need not be examined and c) there is no need to check possible forensic evidence. None of these criteria have been met following Hollie`s formal complaint made to DC Lisa Jane Evans, in my presence, on 8th September 2009.

Mr Salmond is also in possession of the Commissioner`s report confirming that Grampian Police withheld crucial evidence supporting Hollie`s claims from the Prosecutor.

The utter inadequacy of Grampian Police in this regard was established on oath during my trial in January 2012. Ten prosecution witnesses testified to this, including DC Evans herself. When questioned by my Counsel, Andy Lamb QC,  she confirmed that not one of those identified by Hollie had even been questioned by the police.

The other nine brought forward by the prosecution to testify against me were among those identified by Hollie, although significantly, there was no complaint from the two individuals against whom the evidence was the strongest, Denis Charles Mackie and Greg Mackie, both known to the police prior to Hollie`s initial allegations in May 2000.

First of those named was Sheriff Graham Buchanan, who stated that he thought there could be no possibility of truth in Hollie`s claims as she was supported by David Icke. Thus, he was prepared, purely on the basis of his opinion of Mr Icke, to dismiss entirely the expert witness reports of Dr Jack Boyle, Dr Eva Harding, Dr Paul Carter, Dr Frances Kelly, Grampian Police`s senior forensic medical specialist, D.I. Iain Alley and his fellow officers, Ruth Beckmann and Susannah Seymann of the Down`s Syndrome Association, specialist solicitor Nicola Smith and the entire panel of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority who had decided the weight of evidence sufficient to grant Hollie a financial award.

This came from someone whose solemn public duty it is to dispense justice impartially having considered all the evidence.

What more can one say?

Others named who gave evidence were Carol Low, Ann Royal, Win Dragon, Ian and Helen Macdonald.

Jillian Mackie, sister-in-law of Denis, had recently been a key witness at the trial of Malcolm Webster, convicted of murdering his wife, Claire. Mrs Mackie had been a friend of the murderer.
Mrs Webster died in a very similar circumstances to those of Hollie`s uncle, Robert (Roy) Greig, in a blazing stationary car. The pathologist, who initially saw no reason to suspect foul play in either case, was Dr James Grieve, another of those called to give evidence against me, although I must stress that he was not named by Hollie.

Drew Young, former head of Beechwood Special School, perjured himself when questioned by Mr Lamb about Dr Paul Carter`s reports, the second of which stated that staff at the school had drawn his attention to the likelihood that Hollie was “at risk” sexually. Mr Young told the court he knew nothing about this as he had left the school in July 1992.

Dr Carter`s report was dated 3rd February 1992.

Moreover, Dr Carter had earlier stated to me that Mr Young had definitely been informed.

Sylvia Major, when questioned by Mr Lamb, confirmed that Mr Young had at one time lived at her home.

Mr Lamb asked all nine if they had ever been questioned by the police about Hollie`s allegations. All answered in the negative.

I am aware that many of you have been given dismissive replies when you have approached your MPs or MSPs when you have approached them to assist in the Hollie Greig case. May I again suggest that you then file a complaint with the constituency chairman, attaching copies of the evidence and pointing out that other politicians have had the courage to speak out, including David Ruffley, Andrew George, David Ward, David Anderson, John Hemming, David Mowat, Nigel Farage and Lord Monckton.

Finally, please support and attend, if possible, the trial of Rusty (Timothy Rustige) in Aberdeen on 4th and 5th November. Rusty, a fearless human rights campaigner is facing charges in a country that has been frequently described, even by eminent Scots, such as Jock Thompson QC, Ian Hamilton QC and Lord Hope as having an appalling human rights record.

Witnesses are important as Sheriff Principal Bowen, at my trial, after making a racially offensive remark about me, has subsequently attempted to pervert the course of justice by having the audio record falsified by having his comment deleted.

I expect to give evidence in Rusty`s defence. 




Thank you for all your messages of support following the Court of Session hearing, which provided me with an opportunity to discuss vital evidence about Hollie`s case in open court and to quote examples of Angiolini`s appalling record in public office, including her lies over Lockerbie and lack of compassion towards  a dying man who ought never have been convicted.

Now it is time for Alex Salmond to face questions over his extraordinarily baffling conduct towards the Hollie Greig case and its overwhelmingly supportive expert witness evidence, including that indicating police corruption, all of which is in his possession.

Let us first go back to The Firm magazine`s headline of 3 June 2011, which read:-

Exclusive: Information Commissioner forces Government response to Hollie Greig inquiries.

The Commissioner has ruled that the Scottish Ministers have failed to comply with their obligations under sections 10(1) and 21(1) of the FOI Act. If the Ministers fail to comply with my decision the Court of Session can treat this failure as a contempt of court.

In the event, the entire Scottish Government came within 24 hours of facing potentialcriminal charges relating to the Hollie Greig case.

Front page news, overwhelming public interest, surely?

No, Mr Salmond`s personal solicitor, Peter Watson of Levy & McRae, boasts with a good deal of justification that he can keep his clients off the front pages. Good for Professor Watson and good for Mr Salmond, but is it consistent with public interest, freedom of expression and freedom of the press?

Also, the Scottish people must not be made aware of the Hollie Greig case. It must be concealed from the public at all costs, just as the disgusting activities of Jimmy Savile and Cyril Smith were in England.

On 11 July 2011 came another headline from The Firm:-

First Minister in missing records riddle over Hollie Greig abuse allegations.

The First Minister`s Private Secretary Terry Kowal told The Firm, “I have established that we do not have a record of when the First Minister became aware of the allegations. Therefore, the information you require is not held by the Scottish Government.”

This is a statement of extraordinary inaccuracy.

Apart from the major questions about Hollie`s case posed by the FOI Commissioner, Mr Kevin Dunion, on 28 January 2011, the Crown Office, in its letter by Andrew McIntyre to me of 23 July 2009, referred to my email to Mr Salmond of 20 June 2009 giving details of Hollie`s case and which asked him to intervene. On 1st May 2011, I handed all the key expert witness documents to Mr Salmond in Perth. He undertook to take a look at them after our brief conversation about the case. Then we have the letter from his office to Anne Greig of 2nd October 2007, written by Julie Muir, which says ” Mr Salmond has asked me to thank you for your letter and asked me to reply on his behalf.”

When one considers this terrible case of  the uninvestigated rape of a disabled girl in the neighbouring constituency in Aberdeen, how could it be that Mr Salmond remembered nothing about it and given the evidence that he must have known about it, why did he then not take action?

So just how then could his Private Secretary in July 2011, still claim that Mr Salmond had no information on Hollie`s case?

Some might say that Mr Salmond is a busy man and had become inexplicably confused.

Some might say that Mr Salmond has been suspiciously evasive.

Others might even say that the First Minister has lied.

After contacting Alex Salmond`s constituency secretary, Mr Neil Bailey, enclosing again all the main documents, I invited the committee to ask their MSP why he had done nothing to resolve this blatant injustice. I received a letter of acknowledgement today from David Woods from Mr Salmond`s government office in Edinburgh. It reads simply “I am writing to acknowledge your recent letter to Alex Salmond  regarding the case of Hollie Greig. A reply will be sent to you as soon as possible.”

Of course, despite everything, the prime objective is for a thorough investigation into the Hollie Greig case and those connected to it to take place. I have offered every cooperation to Mr Salmond should he finally decide to take this obvious and honourable course of action, in the public interest.

Please remember that Rusty (Tim Rustige), of Prisoners of Conscience, faces trial by a single sheriff in Aberdeen on 4th and 5th November. He needs as many members of the public to witness the trial as possible. I expect to give evidence on his behalf. His real alleged crime – exposing the rapists of Aberdeen and their high level protectors in the Scottish establishment.

Finally it should not be thought that all of these dreadful coverups take place in Scotland. In Wales, where my background is, there are a number of cases as shocking as Hollie`s in some ways, one of which is the case of Linda Lewis. Linda is fortunate to have a splendid and brave champion in Kevin Edwards. Details of the case can be seen 52 minutes into UK Column`s show of 10th October. Please take a look and offer any support you can to Kevin and Linda.


  1. Conversation started March 8
    Stuart Usher
    3/8, 11:15am
    Stuart Usher

    Dear Andy

    It was a pleasure to meet you on Wednesday.

    Now something has cropped up: I told everyone in the pub that Sarah knew my password to my FB page because I told her it when she set the page up for me. The others with us in the pub (Phil, Ross and Steven) advised me strongly to change the passwrod. This I did ydy. However this morning I tried to change another setting as well and in the process of hunting around for options I came across a Notification that I had made a complaint against YOU for Harrassment! I NEVER did any such thing. It must have been Sarah who put that on my FB because she was the only person other than myself who knew my password. Obviously I take a very dim view indeed of her doing so.

    I presume that she did this in connection with the “Shave Porn” exchange she had with you on FB in which she wanted you to remove her comment about Shave Porn. I do not really understand what all this this Shave Porn business was about although I realise it was something unpleasant about which she felt ashamed. But for her to use my FB page to claim that I had complained about you harrassing me was a very despicable thing to do. For the record there was a comment from FB that no action was taken by FB on “my” (actually HER’S) complaint.

    If you want you can tackle her about this on FB as I am outraged at it. If however you want to keep it up your sleeve for tactical reasons I quite understand. I have no intention of ever speaking or have any communication again with Miss McLeod.

    If you want to talk about this my telephone No is ************. Also please let our troops know about this.

    What a filthy world we live in!

    Stuart Usher.



Tim Rustige and Robert Green Victims of Scottish Injustice.

I cannot get the injustice being performed on Tim Rustige and Robert Green by the Scottish legal system out of my head.  Tim, of course, is the Altrincham man being hauled over the Scottish legal coals for telling that scrawny arsed bitch and Betty Boop look-alike, Elish Angiolini, one time legal head honcho in Scotland, that her past history of aiding and abetting paedophiles was not the paragraph to have on her curriculum vitae when applying for the job of bossman at St Hugh’s College in Oxford.  She got the job anyway whether Tim objected or not but that is the way in high places, if your high enough and evil enough your good enough according to British top level thinking.
Robert Green from Warrington is the man who has been hauled over the same coals now for three years or so since being caught handing out leaflets explaining the behaviour of that now famous but unpunished paedophile ring in Aberdeen.  Famous for their part in  multi-raping over many years a young Downes Syndrome child called Hollie Greig and famous for containing the cream of Aberdeen society including judges, policemen, teachers, social workers, wives and girlfriends of the Granite City’s elite and who Elish Angiolini, her of the scrawny arse and varicosed thighs tried and succeeded in protecting.  Poor Robert was eventually sentenced to 12 months in prison for this breach of peace in some illegal sham of a trial that purported to call itself justice north of the border.  Actually he only served four or five months before the Scottish legals bowed to massive public pressure and realised they had fucked up and freed him to fight another day.
Both these men now face imminent courtroom battles over these next few weeks in the Scottish excuse for justice and fair play that their sham of a legal system purports to be.  Where bias and institutional corruption links the Holyrood Government under slippery Salmond, the Grampian police and in fact all Scottish police forces, the Crown Office and the powerful Aberdeen paedophile ring and the whole legal system in Scotland and makes it impossible for justice to prevail.
So we have two honest men, now prisoners of conscience expecting jail sentences for doing nothing but complain about the present totalitarian state in which they find themselves in.  Whilst in England, at the Appeals Court in London, Abu Qatada, who for 20 years has taunted his own Muslim brothers into thinking and doing things that they should not be doing and thinking, has his sentence of deportation to Jordan quashed as he might not get a fair trial in his homeland because of “a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice”.
Back to Scotland and on our doorstep where there is more than a real risk of a flagrant denial of justice for our two men from the North West of England and if you look into it there are flagrant denials of justice everyday.  Look at the website glasgowdefencecampaign.blogspot where it seems that the poor Scots themselves have woken to injustice.  It is a stone cold certainty that when the kilted judges or sheriffs as they call them in Caledonia sit down, injustice is what emanates from under their pleated skirts.
Something is definitely rotten in Scotland today and the smell which is almost tangible looks as though it is exuding from under that pile of dirty knickers that old Elish left in a corner of the Crown Office in Edinburgh before she left for England, knickerless and undetermined.  That same pile of knickers that nobody up there dare touch.  I hear she used to have to change them five or six times a day.
So come on you full blooded English men and women do not let this uppity Govan bitch and her sporraned mates run the roost over us, shout, complain, pass on the message and above all start to make a fuss over this “flagrant denial of justice” being meted out to these two old men.  These men are not youths, they are both in their sixties, free-thinkers, both with the sagacity to realise things are wrong and both with the bravery to fight to right a grievous wrong.

4 Responses to Tim Rustige and Robert Green Victims of Scottish Injustice.

  1. paul taylor says:
    A good job you’re over in Ireland or the Policemen in Kilts might have already paid you a visit. I believe as of 1 April 2013 (no joke intended, I fear) the Scots Police Service was amalgamated into one uber force.
    Since the police cars will shortly only have one badge to display on their side (prior to various diiferent ones for each area), I’d suggest having a tartan stripe for each of the previous local areas, that way you’d be able to tell exactly who are from the previous Grampian area and who are not.
    As to Ms Angiolini’s propensity for wearing several pairs of briefs (not ones of the legal kind) in one day, I say merely this – Too much information. No doubt they will shortly appear on E-Bay. I for one won’t be bidding.
  2. Barry Jennings says:
    I think you’ve mixed up Abu Hamza (the hook) and Abu Qatada(the MI5 double agent).
    Hamza’s role was to stir up hatred of Muslims (through both his abuse of the welfare state and his hatred of non-Muslims) and to increase fear of Islamic terror attacks. Hamza’s preaching was a powerful PR tool in the build up to the illegal and unjustified 9/11 (oil) wars.
    Qatada is an MI5 asset who as part of the mythical western created Al Qaeda also played a key part in justifying the illegal wars on terror.
  3. PaulMalpas says:
    Thank you Barry for pointing out my very basic mistake. It should teach me a lesson not to get mixed up in Muslim affairs, a subject I know absolutely nothing about. However my main point stands; why should a ruffian like Qatada be spared whilst two pensioners like Green and Rustige be subject to ignominy. If the Muslim chap is an MI5 asset however it explains a lot