ANDREW'S ARREST

For some days now,  the media has been awash with the arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to ad nauseam accompaniment that 'no one is above the law' and nonsense of that sort. It's been poor journalism for the most part.

From our point of view, we are very far from convinced that arrest was either  justified or appropriate at this stage and we are firmly of the view that Thames Valley Police were simply grandstanding to be first out the box for a Royal Arrest - the first Royal Arrest since Charles I we are gleefully and repeatedly told.  We are told also that the arrest was in relation to allegations of Misconduct in Public Office - ie scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel allegations - relating to Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's time as UK Trade Envoy many years ago.  (Mr Mountbatten-Windsor was appointed UK Trade Envoy by Tony Blair when Prime Minister in 2001 but that's another story).

We have been told further that Mr Mountbatten-Windsor's various properties were  searched and,  indeed,  continue to be searched as we write. We are unsure what the Police expect to find in those properties from all those years ago but there you are.  Certainly,  they have not explained anything and the arrestee was released without charge after only 11 hours in custody. 

That,  in itself,  is unusual in that if the arrest was a really genuine arrest,  rather than for show purposes, one would have expected the detention to have been either for a much longer duration or the arrestee formally charged with a crime.  In a normal criminal investigation of this type of allegation  we would expect the Police to search first and arrest later if considered appropriate.

That Mr Mountbatten-Windsor is a very unsavoury character - and keeps equally unsavoury company - there is no doubt.  That,  however,  does not in our view justify the circumstances of his arrest.  It has been reported, rightly or wrongly,  that eight separate Police Forces are interested in Mr Mountbatten-Windsor.  If that is so,  we hope they proceed with much more finesse than Thames Valley Police.

Sadly,  we suspect that none of this has registered remotely with Mr Mountbatten-Windsor.  He is way beyond any form of contrition or correction - or understanding of his predicament.

LORD ADVOCATE DOROTHY BAIN

Dorothy Bain is the Lord Advocate of Scotland and,  as such,  the country's most senior criminal prosecutor.  She's now got herself into a very big pickle and entirely of her own making.

After the decision had been made by Ms Bain's department to prosecute Nicola Sturgeon's husband,  Mr Murrell,  on charges of fraud allegedly amounting to £460,000,  Ms Bain wrote to First Minister John Swinney advising him the details of an indictment and charges  that had been served on Mr Murrell and that the case was calling in court on 20 February.  This was an extremely unusual and extremely stupid thing for a Lord Advocate to do as it didn't concern Swinney in any way. Neither the public nor the Press was informed,  only Swinney.

All hell broke loose subsequently  and the matter called in the Scottish Parliament yesterday when Ms Bain tried to explain herself to MSPs.  She failed miserably and appeared utterly clueless. Essentially,  she had no answer to what she did and,  bizarrely,  maintained that once an indictment had been served on an accused the matter was then public.  However,  her underlings at Crown Office refuted this and said an indictment is a public matter only when it first calls in court.  They cannot both be right ...... and common sense  indicates to us that the underlings,  rather than the Lord Advocate,  are correct.

The Conservatives claimed the circumstances 'smacks of corruption' but such claim is,  in our view, grossly over the top.  Rather,  it smacks entirely of incompetence and stupidity.  It's not,  exactly,  like a Sheriff corruptly giving a verdict in favour of a party to whom he or,  indeed,  she is beholden in some form or other.

On any view the Lord Advocate is clearly out of her depth.  That's the worrying bit.

PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL

We have watched,  on and off, bits and pieces of the 'testimony' of Pam Bondi,  Attorney General of the United States, to the Epstein Inquiry currently ongoing in America.

This lady should very clearly be in the psychiatric wards.

JONATHAN POWELL, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER

Well,  you could have struck us down with a feather.  

We have just learned that Jonathan Powell,  former Chief of Staff to Tony Blair as Prime  Minister,  has been National Security Adviser to Keir Starmer since November 2024.  Powell has no qualifications whatsoever for the post other than being a fully-paid-up member of The Gravy Train.

Sums up Starmer's Government in one.

ANAS SARWAR MSP

Anas Sarwar,  Scottish Labour Leader, would-be First Minister of Scotland and self-proclaimed best friend of Prime Minister Keir Starmer,  brutally knifed Starmer in the back yesterday and told him to resign. He was fully expecting UK Cabinet members (particularly that traitorous creep Wes Streeting) to back him up and stick their own knives also into Starmer's back but they all refused so that Sarwar is all on his own - and with a Holyrood election coming up soon.  How about that for stupidity?

We have little time for Starmer for a number of reasons - (1)  his appalling lack of leadership  (2)  his appalling lack of judgement in (a) accepting a huge amount of freebie clothing from Lord Alli  (b) appointing  clowns like Angela Rayner,  David Lammy,  Wes Streeting and Rachel Reeves to Cabinet (c) appointing a scoundrel like Peter Mandelson as Ambassador to Washington (d)  getting  elected on false promises and policies all of which he has had to reverse and (3) his dithering over everything.  That's quite a damning indictment. 

The plus side,  however,  is that Starmer is regarded seriously abroad in a way none of those other idiots would be and he has been a great friend to Ukraine.  Those matters must not be overlooked.  If we think we have problems with Starmer,  just wait till we've seen the rest,  Burnham included.  That really would be the time to get the hell out of the UK.

Anas Sarwar,  Iscariot, your time is up.  If you had any honour,  you would resign without ado and make way for longstanding MSP Jackie Baillie.  

It's Labour's only chance to rid Scotland of those perfidious nationalists.

CRISIS? WHAT CRISIS?

The Commentariat are in full-flow mode over the scoundrel Mandelson,   each trying to outdo the other with cries of 'The Biggest Crisis Of My Lifetime' or 'The Biggest Crisis Since Profumo' and nonsense like that.  Utter drivel.

The biggest crisis that we can recall in recent years is Labour winning the General Election of 2024 and our discovering thereafter of Starmer and Cronies accepting freebies from various sources such as Lord Alli amounting to millions of GBPs.  Trust in politicians,  already bad after the Parliamentary Expenses scandal,  has never been the same since and no wonder - and no wonder that the charlatan Farage has been able to make such inroads into the popular vote.

There was little criticism - if, indeed, any - by Opposition politicians at the time and the only realistic conclusion one can come to  is that the very great bulk of parliamentarians are at it,  take,  take, take.  In our view, Members of Parliament receiving gifts of money or in kind from outside interests must always, but always, be classified as criminal.

This current Parliament of all shades is rotten to the core.  That's a far bigger crisis than Mandelson every day of the week. 

CONTEMPT OF COURT !!!

We read somewhere the other day of a Sheriff's outburst at a young male appearing before him in court wearing shorts.  The Sheriff expressed his 'astonishment' at such audacity and publicly stated that this mode of dress amounted to 'Contempt of Court' and warned all and sundry that poor dress code in future could result in a jail sentence.

We find it difficult to assess what,  exactly,  the Sheriff was taking exception to,  whether it was the bony knees or the naked knees but, on any view,  it was a draconian and jackboot approach to the legal process.  In our eyes,  as long as the attire does not display anything  offensive or indecent,  anyone appearing in court is entitled to wear whatever he or she feels comfortable with according to whim,  weather,  or whatever.  It is,  perhaps,  our only remaining liberty in this crazy and intolerant country of ours called Scotland.

And what if the young man had been wearing a kilt?  Or,  in the utterly bizarre  trans man/woman thing gifted us by Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney, a mini-skirt?

In our view, the Sheriff must be rebuked for his outburst as this goes well beyond his remit.  At the very least,  'the authorities' should have a quiet word in his shell-like.

And to think  our prisons are stuffed full to over-capacity already!  No wonder with Sheriffs like this about!