On several occasions now we have examined the essential nature of the Breach of the Peace charge... The issue of mens rea and actus reus... If these terms baffle you then simply trawl through this blog – From an early stage we have taken the view that these two essential elements for a criminal conviction are not met in the case against Green; that the charges, from what we know, seem to fly in the face of legal precedent. A persecution rather than a prosecution!
We take the view that annoying, irritating and inappropriate though Robert Green’s behaviour undoubtedly was, there is no evidence that we know of which would take it over the line into breach of the peace territory... At the time of Green’s arrest the interdict taken out against him by Sheriff Buchanan was not in force as it had not been properly served. Had that been the case then the case against Green would be cut and dried and the charge somewhat different!
With no interdict in place an arrest on suspicion of Breach of the Peace was possibly appropriate as a quick way of getting him off the street; ‘BOP’ is often used this way by the Police as an expedient way of clearing the streets of mouthy drunks and angry people... Scotland’s own ‘one size fits all’ charge!
But Green wasn’t, as far as we know Angry or mouthy; quite the reverse. In fact we have no solid evidence of his endorsing any kind of violent act let alone inciting one... So whilst arresting him ‘on sus’ was a fair cop, for the Prosecutor Fiscal to persist with the charge seems wholly unreasonable...
It has been put to us that facts may emerge to the effect that people were alarmed to the extent they reported their concerns to the Police; that the charges relate to a persistent course of behaviour that resulted in people fearing for their personal safety. And if that is the case we may expect to hear of these reports from the Officers involved. - It has been put to us that the crown may present some evidence of Green inciting or endorsing violent acts against those named in the allegations -
These are ‘early days’ but as yet the reports from Stonehaven indicate nothing of that nature...
In respect of securing the mens rea and establishing the actus reus we would expect to hear that Green had previously been officially warned about his behaviour. – That he had been advised he was potentially ‘seeding’ a situation where others could be provoked into compromising the peace and security of those he was accusing... And that the flagrancy of Green’s actions is an element of the prosecution’s case...
But no; not yet at least...
Again; I must stress we’re treating reports from Robert Green’s cohorts with some degree of caution. A cogent analysis of the Robert Green showtrial will only be possible once the verdict is in and the judgement can be read. Equally well though; we have no information from Stonehaven that substantially discredits or contradicts what Green’s team is reporting...
There is no shadow of doubt that Green has behaved like a bloody fool. There is no doubt that the nature and extent and the embroidery of the reports from the court are problematic even dangerous. There is no doubt that Green’s perspective on the case is riddled with holes you could drive a bus through but.... Where is the body?
Where is the corpus of the prosecution’s case? In terms of precedent where are the mens rea and actus reus?? Where is the ‘ace’ that caused numerous past council to walk away in despair?
The plain fact is the prosecution have the wrong man in terms of the problematic information circling the globe. That’s as big an elephant in the room as is the issue of Sheriff Buchanan’s identification as an alleged Paedophile... We were promised (figuratively) ‘jet boots’ in the form of an ‘ace’ piece of evidence that would satisfy the mens rea and actus reus of Breach of the peace – Well where the hell it it?
Sure; we have a body of people who are annoyed, upset, stressed... But none of that is enough to satisfy what we know of how B.O.P. is prosecuted.
As many people will know; I am in the luxurious position of not giving a flying-fart about editors, commissions or the ‘policies’ of certain broadcasters. From that position I am able to act as a ‘head above the trench’ in terms of interacting with mainstream colleagues...
The fact is that by rights both Robert Green and Greg Lance-Watkins should be in court facing a defamation action, and the question remains why Watkins is so-easily let off the hook while Green is hounded. But excitement mounts as the possibility of legal precedent being overturned looms...
Excitement because the overturning of a precedent is something that needs to be reported - And of course once the trial is ended and it will be possible to comment on certain testimony given within the case.
The persecution of Robert Green has already evidenced one thing; the investigation into Hollie’s allegations was far from adequate. And whilst he has gone about it in completely the wrong way he has surely exposed fundamental problems in the Scottish justice system.
An Account of the events of Day 3 can be found here...
http://www.facebook.com/groups/hollieg4justice/permalink/10150535467088955/
