There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you cannot say.
Discussion
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-woman-who-doesnt...
There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
To save anyone the hassle of figuring out what this is all about... It's someone who has accused Alex Salmond of a sex crime. She has been granted anonymity. I don't have a clue what her name is anyway.
There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
Troubleatmill said:
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-woman-who-doesnt...
There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
Surely no one can say unless we know why her came cannot be uttered? I don't believe it, actually. Why would an order be given (presumably this refers to an injunction of some sort) to prohibit the mere mention of a name with no other context?There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
donkmeister said:
To save anyone the hassle of figuring out what this is all about... It's someone who has accused Alex Salmond of a sex crime. She has been granted anonymity. I don't have a clue what her name is anyway.
There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
I don't see the problem here. Victims of sex crimes, whether proved or not, are generally granted anonymity, indeed it's a matter of law that it automatically applies. Why is this an issue for anyone? It would appear only to be an issue to people who might want to harass her. There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
donkmeister said:
To save anyone the hassle of figuring out what this is all about... It's someone who has accused Alex Salmond of a sex crime. She has been granted anonymity. I don't have a clue what her name is anyway.
There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
Pity that the person that was judged innocent of the charges wasn't granted the same.There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
Strange system huh.
Mammasaid said:
Su’s Anal Bum Party? Sounds NSFW. Stay in Bed Instead said:
Pity that the person that was judged innocent of the charges wasn't granted the same.
Strange system huh.
One charge was not proven. Being found to be innocent in court and actually being innocent are not the same thing.Strange system huh.
Even his QC thought he was a sex pest.
https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/train-c...
Troubleatmill said:
https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-woman-who-doesnt...
There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
straight from Area 51, oka Scottish Independence/Referendum thread. Usual nutters frothing all over themselves There’s a woman in Scotland whose name you’re not allowed to say.
You pay her wages and she theoretically works for you. But you can’t say her name.
She’s not a secret person. You’ve heard her name before.
It’s been on the TV and the radio and in the papers, hundreds if not thousands of times.
But if you say it now, in any context, the authorities will threaten to put you in prison.
Can any of our legal types advise if this can be done....?
AJL308 said:
Surely no one can say unless we know why her came cannot be uttered? I don't believe it, actually. Why would an order be given (presumably this refers to an injunction of some sort) to prohibit the mere mention of a name with no other context?
I think it's wrapped up in the Salmond coverup. Sturgeon and her SNP CEO husband can't get their story straight. Sturgeon tried to claim she was unaware of the Salmond accusations after holding a meeting in her home with him specifically about the matter according to Salmond.He (husband/CEO) claims it was a government meeting, not a party matter. She claims it was a party matter, not a government matter.
My memory is a little hazy on how the mystery woman fits into the picture. I think she had communications with someone high up in the SNP about her Salmond allegations in circumstances that she shouldn't have. Something along those lines.
If she is in a position of Government - and is in the eye of the press.
I understand that she should not be named as per the court order of part of the Salmond Trial.
But if that individual is involved in any newsworthy incident.
eg. Drunk driving, kills a child, finds a cure for cancer, declares Scotland Covid Free.... whatever - then that should be reported on.
As WOS is making clear - just even putting her name in print for any reason, is a criminal offence.
That doesn't sit well.
Yes - she needs the protection she was assured of.
But......
I understand that she should not be named as per the court order of part of the Salmond Trial.
But if that individual is involved in any newsworthy incident.
eg. Drunk driving, kills a child, finds a cure for cancer, declares Scotland Covid Free.... whatever - then that should be reported on.
As WOS is making clear - just even putting her name in print for any reason, is a criminal offence.
That doesn't sit well.
Yes - she needs the protection she was assured of.
But......
Stay in Bed Instead said:
donkmeister said:
To save anyone the hassle of figuring out what this is all about... It's someone who has accused Alex Salmond of a sex crime. She has been granted anonymity. I don't have a clue what her name is anyway.
There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
Pity that the person that was judged innocent of the charges wasn't granted the same.There. That doesn't break any rules and we can all save a bit of time.
These sorts of injunctions are a bit silly in these days of internet media; don't they call it the Barbara Streisand Effect? You want something to go from being known to being unknown, and in the process you just make more people aware.
Same thing happened when Princess Kate's boobs were banned in the UK media. I didn't even consider going looking for them before they were banned.
Strange system huh.
When I was 16 my mum took me to one side and warned me never to be alone with one of my little sister's friends (who would have been 13) Apparently this girl had been telling stories about what she'd been getting up to with various male relatives of other friends (which were provable false, fortunately for them). AFAIK no such allegations were made against me as I kept my distance (still know her in adulthood, still wouldn't be alone with her), but I appreciate that allegations can be false. Coupled with the stigma and the prevalence of a "no smoke without fire" attitude (or "he looks the type, everyone knows that sex-crims signal their presence by having bad taste in clothing and big glasses") then yes, I can see how you can ruin an innocent person's life.
However, I also appreciate that naming sex-crims can result in other victims coming forwards, who wouldn't otherwise have done.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff