The concept of “jigsaw identification” necessarily implies a number of components. There is no such thing as a one-piece jigsaw puzzle. This being so, if one piece (piece A) constitutes jigsaw identification only in conjunction with at least one other piece (piece B) then it follows as an iron law of logic that piece B must constitute jigsaw identification when put together with piece A.
How then can it be considered just or fair that the author of one piece is prosecuted but not the author of the other piece(s)? If one has offended then the other must also have done so. On the basis of what criteria is only one targeted by the justice system?
It would seem that only two things distinguish Craig Murray from any or all of the other pieces in this jigsaw identification. One is that he works in the new online media rather than the traditional media. The other is that his reporting of the trial of Alex Salmond sought to compensate for woeful under-reporting of the defence case in the traditional media.
Does either or both of these criteria seem adequate justification for the selective persecution of Craig Murray? To put it another way, does working for a traditional media outlet rather than publishing a blog, or favouring the (failed) prosecution in a high-profile criminal case rather than providing balanced reporting, constitute adequate grounds to be granted exemption from prosecution for an offence identical in all relevant regards to that for which another has been imprisoned?
These questions go to the heart of Scotland’s justice system and so demand thoughtful responses.
If you find these articles interesting please consider a small donation to help support this site and my other activities on behalf of Scotland’s independence movement.