Why I started the petition (John Neicho)

I’m an Englishman who has made Shetland his home. I abhor sectarianism – something I saw too much of during my time in the British army.

I’m also a constituent of Alistair Carmichael and he has helped me in the past.

I belong to no political party and have voted Liberal Democrat in every election but the last. I voted SNP, not for independence, but because they were the only party offering hope for the vulnerable in society – a traditional Lib Dem role.

I started my campaign as soon as I heard Mr Carmichael was behind the leak and that he had lied.
He allowed an investigation to take place, using costly resources, to prevent the truth coming out and affecting his chances of winning the seat.

His majority shrank from approximately 10,000 to 817 and in my opinion he would have got considerably fewer votes if the electorate had known the truth.

The people of Shetland and Orkney treasure a sense of honour and they feel very let down.

Had Mr Carmichael resigned immediately he could have stood for re-election and ended up with a larger majority. But that time has passed.

Every hour he delays shows that concepts such as honour and integrity are just words to be ignored. He now appears to be more concerned with receiving his five years of high salary than maintaining any semblance of propriety.

Tavish Scott stated that Mr Carmichael had a long road to recovery. But why does he need to bother? He has his salary and pension and is retiring at the next general election.

I set up the “38 Degrees” petition because I was angry and felt let down by my MP. I posted a link on Facebook and it spread from there.

Many SNP supporters are angry about this issue. They feel their candidate should have won and naturally have backed this campaign.

The greatest effort has been by the brave people of Orkney. They have set up a crowd-funding project to raise money to overturn the election result. It is to them that the plaudits and hopefully laurels should go.

Remember this expensive legal action is only taking place because of the lack of integrity of our MP.

Had he resigned, funds raised for the legal action would have been donated to the food banks created by Mr Carmichael’s government.

This is not a witch hunt or mob rule. If Mr Carmichael had nothing wrong there would be no “mob” at all.

There are unsavoury elements in every campaign and targeting of his position as kirk elder is indefensible.

People worried by the nationalist reaction should consider this: Scottish nationalism is the only form of nationalism that welcomes all and discriminates against none.

Mr Carmichael should remember he is the sole cause of his problems and the longer he takes to do the right thing, the more respect he loses and the greater disrespect he shows to his electorate.

John Neicho


Add Your Comment
  • John Tulloch

    • June 2nd, 2015 14:06

    Mr Neicho,

    What your past political allegiance was is irrelevant. You have said you ARE an SNP supporter and were one when you launched your petition. It is aimed at unseating Alistair Carmichael for the benefit of the SNP, so they can “have another shot” at the election, is it not?

    • John Neicho

      • June 2nd, 2015 15:12

      I am not in the slightest bothered who wins the seat in a by election and they will have my full support as a legitimate MP -even if they were a Tory. I believe in democracy and will accept any MP who has a mandate. I am questioning the mandate of Mr. Carmichael. I will be supporting no-one and as soon as i hand my petition in i intend never to speak publicly again on political matters. I have never knowingly met an SNP supporter although i now converse on-line with some; as we have the same goal for the moment. I am not affiliated with either protest group although i think that the Legal Challenge is a brave and correct move. I would suggest that an Independent candidate stands to counter the SNP. I am sure that there are more anti-SNP voters than SNP suppporters. I feel that the unseating an MP for wrong doing is far more important than not doing so because of a fear of the SNP.

      • Gareth Fair

        • June 2nd, 2015 16:33

        Fair enough but on this matter of honesty be honest about why you are doing this.

        ‘I voted SNP, not for independence’ even though a quick scan of your Facebook page shows support for the Yes campaign.

        ‘I am not in the slightest bothered who wins the seat in a by election’ although your Facebook page is full of political commentary including criticism of both the Conservative and Liberal Democrats.

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 16:59

        Gareth that is a fair point I did support independence. what I should have said is i did not vote for SNP because I wanted independence but because I liked their policies first and foremost and thought they would make the country better. Of course by voting SNP i am giving my support to all their policies.
        It is very poor wording on my behalf, and i apologise. I should have been much clearer.
        The reason there are so many anti-Tory and anti-Lib Dem comments on my Facebook is that I am against them.
        The Tories I detest simply because of their policies.
        And the Lib Dems i am angry with, because of what I saw as a betrayal of their ideals after I cast my vote and Nick Clegg formed a coalition with David Cameron. I make no apology for being left wing.
        Spare a thought for us poor lefties who have absolutely no-one to vote for and land on the SNP because they are the closest in values.

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 17:09

        What I should have stated is the reason i am not in the slightest bit bothered who wins any more; is that i am so sick and tired with politics that for the first time I am considering not voting again. Politicians are all pretty much the same. But, I still say once you have been caught lying on television that you resign whatever party you are from.

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 18:09

        Gavin that is a fair point.
        I should have been much clearer in my intent.
        I should have said I did not vote for the SNP for Independence; but first and foremost for their policies.
        I feel that at the moment they are the best thing for the country.
        I did vote for Independence, because Scottish Independence would be better, however bad things got for Scotland, than 5 years of Tory government or Labour government with almost identical policies; and the Lib Dems disregarding any policies to get power with largest party.
        I landed on the SNP because I am a left wing socialist and as there are no parties left for me to vote for, I have to vote for one closest in values: which at the moment is SNP.
        The reason there is so many anti-Tory and Lib Dem statements on my Facebook is simple. It is because I am anti-Tory and anti-Lib Dem.
        The reason there is no labour criticism is simply that they are a non-entity.
        The reason I am state I am not the slightest bit bothered who would win a by-election is that I am so sick of politicians, they are all basically the same, that I am considering not voting again. I still hold firm with the belief that if you are caught lying on television you resign: whatever party you are from.
        Hope I haven’t double posted, some of my earlier replies have vanished during moderation

    • Robert Sim

      • June 2nd, 2015 19:12

      Our MP put himself in this position, John. You are spinning this to make it sound as though he is an innocent party hounded by the bad SNP. Many ordinary Shetland constituents see it differently from you. I note, by the way, that the parliamentary standards commissioner is now looking into whether he broke the Commons code of conduct.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 2nd, 2015 21:34


        Mr Carmichael is now subject to a legal action and a parliamentary inquiry which I understand have been brought against him by supporters of the SNP. I am not “spinning” anything. I am not saying Mr Carmichael is “innocent”, nor am I saying he is “guilty” of anything sufficiently serious for the court to decide he should resign.

        I am saying that, as the defendant in this legal action, he is currently defenceless and it is, at best, deplorable that he should be so hounded while these official investigations are in progress.

        I understand it has been announced in Orkney that the “silent protests” have been ended, in deference to the legal process.

  • Suzy Jolly

    • June 2nd, 2015 14:10

    I’m English too and I think you’ve got an awful cheek to make out that you speak for all Shetlanders when I know for a fact that you don’t; you’ve just lied.

    • Robert Duncan

      • June 2nd, 2015 14:55

      I think you may be muddling him with the entirely distinct “We the people of Shetland” group.

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 15:49

        Thank you.
        That is indeed what is happening as anyone in that group could tell you. If fact, it is very likely if you asked any of them who i was i think you would get a blank stare and be asked who?

      • Suzy Jolly

        • June 2nd, 2015 15:55

        Read again. “The people of Shetland and Orkney treasure a sense of honour and they feel very let down.”

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 16:07

        Sorry Suzy,
        I must disagree with you. I feel entitled to say that the people of Shetland feel let down. Our own MSP Tavish Scott has said it. I also feel that i am entitled to claim that the Shetland Islands are not racist and that Shetlanders like living by the Sea and many other decent or self-evident claims But if it is your opinion that i am not . So be it. I cannot reason with the unreasonable.

      • Robert Duncan

        • June 2nd, 2015 16:12

        Fair comment Suzy. I don’t think that’s an intentional attempt to speak for all but I suppose it can be taken that way.

      • Suzy Jolly

        • June 2nd, 2015 16:35

        Robert, given that the author has now had this article published in a few locations, I would argue that it is very much intentional. After all, if the author did not intend to mislead, he would have changed the wording but instead, chose not to. Ironic or what?

    • John Neicho

      • June 2nd, 2015 15:24

      Ah Suzy my old sparring partner. As you have rightly stated I do not speak for all Shetland Islanders. I would hope that I speak for all Shetlanders when i say the people of Shetland feel let down by Mr. Carmichael’s wrong doing. I know Tavish Scott does and would hope that the rest of Shetland does as well -but of course I couldn’t guarantee it. I am glad you are sticking so strongly to your previous argument, it shows you feel quite strongly , shows integrity and real passion and that is a good thing. I would suggest you harness that and help Mr. Carmichael through his difficulties. I will hand in my petition and fade from view. It is up to us all to decide what happens and if more people wish for Mr. Carmichael to stay than to go; then so be it. I am just having my say. It’s time for Parliament and the courts to decide what happens next.

      • Tom Jones

        • June 7th, 2015 12:11

        I have to laugh at the phrase in the Neicho comment above that the Shetland Islands are not racist. How do you know this? They haven’t had the chance to try yet given that the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants are White Shetland natives. Where’s your local mosk or hindu temple? Or your afro/caribbean drop in centre?

  • iatinkler

    • June 2nd, 2015 15:23

    I’m English and Scottish too and I think you’ve got an awful cheek to make out that you speak for all Shetlanders when I know for a fact that you don’t; you’ve just lied. Must be something about Nationalism that spawns dishonest and general nastiness.

    • John Neicho

      • June 2nd, 2015 15:57

      Please see above. I agree that Nationalism tends to bring out the worst in people which is why i hope for an Independent to stand so that everyone could vote apolitically towards parties. Then the divisive politics that dominate can be healed. I am quite aware how passions can be stirred by this debate. You should see my inbox, I am sure that the only difference in the abuse Mr. Carmichael and myself have been getting is who sends it.

      • Gareth Fair

        • June 2nd, 2015 17:56

        That’s not the only difference. We can see the abuse Mr Charmichael is getting on the Yes Shetland Facebook page, we only have your word for the abuse you claim to be getting.
        Although as you think you are speaking for all the people of Shetland, who are let down by Mr Charmichaels wrong doing, you shouldn’t be getting any abuse?

      • John Neicho

        • June 2nd, 2015 21:17

        I am of the opinion that no-one should be getting any abuse, as I have said in a private correspondence (not that he has replied) with Alistair saying how sorry I am that he is getting abuse and I am not behind it.
        I at least am willing to defend my points and not vanish while it all blows over.
        Saying that as soon as I hand over my petition that’s me done. I will allow Politicians to get away with anything they wish I am disenfranchised and will accept that. There is a saying that you get the Governance you deserve and as far as I can see we will.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 2nd, 2015 22:18

        John Neicho,

        You wrote: “I at least am willing to defend my points and not vanish while it all blows over”

        Now, I know you aren’t referring to Alistair Carmichael who has not “vanished” but has been in Lerwick and held a “surgery” meeting with constituents.

        As the defendant in a legal action he is unable to comment on anything related to that. However, should you find yourself in need of his “good offices”, meanwhile, I don’t doubt that he will be ready and willing to assist you.

  • iatinkler

    • June 2nd, 2015 16:44

    And now we have the architectural Nasty Nat, Alex Salmond, lying again, claiming the late ” Charles Kennedy’s heart was not in the Better Together campaign!!” Nicolas large mouthpiece in Westminster truly plays true to form.

    • Robert Sim

      • June 2nd, 2015 22:29

      Here’s another quote from the same Salmond interview: ” [Charles Kennedy was] an interesting, complex character, but above all an outstanding communicator and a fine human being”.

      • iantinkler

        • June 3rd, 2015 7:32

        What is your point Robert Sim, Alex Salmond lies again and try’s to link his divisive political ideology “Nationalism”, to a much loved deceased politician. Whilst Charles’s body is still warm Salmond claims a total fabrication, claiming that Charles Kennedy’s heart was not in “The Better Together” campaign. That is pure opportunistic rubbish, morally reprehensible and utterly untrue. Why is it that Salmond, like Danus Skene? Both try to steal the mantle of deceased and popular dead Liberal politicians. Could it be their political dogma is so morally bankrupt that no behavior, however contemptible is below them? Is this the behavior of true Scottish Nationalists? Does Nicola Sturgeon have to endorse such people? She certainly endorses Salmond, making him a SNP spokesperson, so very typical, Nicola Sturgeon is certainly now well tarred with the Salmond brush.

    • Robert Duncan

      • June 3rd, 2015 9:33

      I’m with you in finding it incredibly crass for Salmond to make his comments when he did, but I don’t think there’s much question that is a statement of fact.

      Charles Kennedy was dismayed by the “Better Together” campaign and spoke frequently about how the campaign for a No vote should be run differently. To say his heart was not in the official campaign is not to say that he was not in favour of a No vote, but that he was unhappy with aspects of that campaign.

      He said for example:

      “I’ve made that criticism [that the campaign is too negative]. I think that we should be more positive in terms of the way in which those of us on the Better Together side are putting over our key messages. I think we’re right to ask the pertinent questions, of course. But if you take, for example, the recent figures on the state of the Scottish economy, the decline in the oil revenues and so on and so forth, I’m not sure that the right response to that from our point of view is to say There we are, we told you so, Scotland could never go it alone. I’m not sure that’s a resonance that you can establish with the people and I’m not sure it’s the right one anyway.”

      A fairly prescient take, I would say, and another example of why Mr Kennedy will be a sore loss to Scottish politics.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 3rd, 2015 10:35


        To criticise the execution of the campaign isn’t the same thing as saying his heart wasn’t in “Better Together”.

      • Robert Duncan

        • June 3rd, 2015 11:59

        It is to me. “Better Together” was an organisation set up in a particular way to campaign in a particular way. Supporting “Better Together” was not necessarily synonymous with supporting a No vote.

        Charles Kennedy made clear that he was uncomfortable with the approach of “Better Together”. That isn’t making assumptions about the views of somebody who can no longer clarify his position – as his statements on the topic are very explicit. It’s a great shame his concerns were not taken on board because, as on so many other issues, time has proven him absolutely correct.

        Had the official “No” campaign been led by somebody like Charles Kennedy from the get go it would have won with a far greater majority than it did.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 3rd, 2015 13:59


        Kennedy was a unionist. Better Together was the main pro-Union campaign, indeed, I know of no other. No doubt, you will be able to regale us with details of Charles Kennedy’s alternative No campaign, please do.

      • Robert Duncan

        • June 3rd, 2015 15:17

        I’ve already posted a quote from him, John. Here’s another:


        “Speaking at the Scottish Lib Dem conference in Aberdeen, Kennedy predicted a very close result in September’s referendum and said the pro-Union side needs to broaden its appeal. He said: “I looked at some of the rhetoric from last week’s Labour Scottish conference, “It’s Salmond versus Scotland”, I don’t think that’s the tone we are looking for.

        “A lot of Scots probably think Alex Salmond is on the side of Scotland whether they agree with his ideas or not.

        “So it’s a bit stupid to pose it as Salmond vs Scotland but I do appreciate Labour have a specific contest of their own, essentially anchored in the central belt against the SNP

        “The danger is that this drowns out the broader rhetoric needed to appeal to the landmass and islands of Scotland as a whole.”

        Kennedy then added it was important the campaign gave consideration to the legacy of the referendum. He said: “Mrs Thatcher won most of her big political battles but she did so with terrible wreckage in the wake, we’ve got to win and take with us the ones who did not vote our way.””

        Time proved him right on that final point.

        If you know of no other pro-Union campaigns you simply weren’t paying enough attention. Whilst they collaborated toward their shared desired outcome, there were a plethora of different groups, many of whom disagreed with the approach of the official campaign.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 3rd, 2015 17:30

        Thanks for that Robert, you’ve proved what I said – he was a unionist and he didn’t like some aspects of Better Together and many of his concerns were justified. However he was a unionist.

        I think you’ll find that if I was paying insufficient attention to notice any other No campaigns then a great many others would not have noticed them, either, and they were of little or no consequence.

        Alex Salmond, as Ian pointed out, has once again attempted to dress up the SNP in the clothes of a dead Liberal in the hope of creating a perceived link between them and what the SNP purports to stand for.

        And it’s a tactic that cannot be reciprocated. Which party, for example, would wish to cloth themselves in the apparel of Arthur Donaldson – or Salmond himself in the future, for that matter?

      • Robert Duncan

        • June 4th, 2015 9:53

        “Thanks for that Robert, you’ve proved what I said – he was a unionist and he didn’t like some aspects of Better Together and many of his concerns were justified. However he was a unionist.”

        And my point was that neither Alex Salmond (nor myself) did not claim otherwise. You appear to have completely misunderstood Salmond’s comments. He was not trying to “claim” him as a supporter of independence – if you read what he actually said you will see that is very clear. He was making the entirely reasonable (but extremely poorly timed) remark that Kennedy was unhappy with the tone of the Better Together campaign – which in my mind was intended as a compliment given how badly run that campaign was.

        I took Salmond’s comments to mean, “yes, he supported the Union, but he wasn’t like the rest of them”. Churlish, sure, but not in the way yourself, Ian Tinkler, and other regular SNP detractors would like to depict it. Kennedy put forward a far more reasonable case for maintaining the Union and should have been given a greater platform to air it.

      • John Tulloch

        • June 4th, 2015 10:11

        Ok, Robert, as you wish. I have bigger fish to fry.

  • Gordon Harmer

    • June 2nd, 2015 16:45

    At least John has the decency to answer his critics unlike Robbie McGregor in another thread on here.
    Having said that John I am afraid I could not disagree more with what you have done or your motives for doing so. Mr Carmichael also helped me with a problem I had and it was a three year battle with a rather pedantic government department. I do not believe there is a constituency MP out there who could have done any more than Mr Carmichael did. Even though what he did was wrong it does not erase the good that he has done for individuals in this constituency or what he has done for these islands and their inhabitants as a whole. To be honest if I had done what you have I would have considered that I had stabbed him in the back.

    • John Neicho

      • June 2nd, 2015 21:28

      I would expect any MP whether you voted for them or not to help, remember they do get paid a lot of money to do just that. As for his ability to help that is possibly greater than another MP I wouldn’t know because there hasn’t been one since I have been here. I will bow to your greater knowledge of him. Remember I only started a petition because of his wrong doing. A wrong doing that is being investigated by the PSC. I have stated my case and if i am in a tiny minority so be it. My conscience is clear.

      • Gordon Harmer

        • June 3rd, 2015 8:34

        John you are obviously a man of high moral standards otherwise you would not do what you are doing but have you asked yourself do I live up to my own standards. Have you ever lied? Have you ever told someone something you thought they should know for what you though were the right reasons only to find you made a mistake, I know I have. What Carmichael leaked made no difference to the election, the SNP landslide shows that, it was not directed at his opponent but at some one who her self was not a candidate but had a direct influence over the result because of her position. Nothing Carmichael did had a direct result locally on the election. So why do what you are doing, I do not get it, surely your time in the army showed you not to be judgmental and people do things for a reason, right or wrong.

  • Haydn Gear

    • June 2nd, 2015 18:32

    As a Welshman (with Shetland connections) it has always been so obvious to me that the Westminster politicians are never anything but squeaky clean, honest and trustworthy.No English MP has ever needed to resort to wriggling and squirming out of a sticky situation .I believe that Teflon Tony is one who has unfailingly worked for the good of the people and was totally open and honest about the war in Iraq before becoming a “peace” envoy and a guest speaker which has bolstered his bank balance by £millions. Mr Carmichael?……….not in the same league.It’s time for the angry brigade to get a sense of balance and perspective.

    • David Spence

      • June 2nd, 2015 21:27

      I could not agree more, Haydn. Tony Blair, like Bush, should be on trial for war crimes, and partly responsible for the killing of thousands of innocent people as a consequence of illegally invading 2 countries. (We are focused on Putin, and his campaign of taking new territories, but forget what we have done – hypocrisy comes to mind).

      Tony Blair, said to Parliament and the country, Saddam Hussein had the potential to launch a missile with 45 minutes…….and as such we should do everything we can to prevent such a tyrant ever having such a capability.

      I can remember Bush, saying to the UN in New York ‘ You are either with me or against me ‘…..in other words, it did not matter what the UN did, Bush (and his evil bunch of Republicans) were going to invade Iraq and Afghanistan with or without the backing of the UN.

      What Mr Carmichael has done is totally minuscule compared to what Tony Blair, has done.

      However, lying is lying no matter what the gravity may be with such words. When you are put into a position of responsibility, and are expected to behave squeaky clean in the corrupt and dirty world of politics (certainly is with the vile Tories) one may slip up now and then………….but to go out of your way to discredit another politician and more so their party does merit more severe repercussions, lets say. How this will transpire time will only tell.

  • Johan Adamson

    • June 3rd, 2015 9:02

    Well done John for standing up for for what you believe in. I completely agree and will no doubt receive the same comments from the usual suspects and yes I also voted SNP, Yes in the Ref and would describe myself as left of centre, a floating voter previously voting Liberal or Labour depending on where I was living or where there was a need. I must therefore be part of this alleged SNP mob.

    John Tulloch describes Alistair as ‘defenceless’. Hardly, he has his party behind him. I admire you standing alone and having to defend yourself against all comers. Now just who is this witch hunt directed at?

    • John Tulloch

      • June 3rd, 2015 10:31


      I’ll have you know that I, too, am “standing up for what I believe in” – the good of Shetland!

      Do you imagine I spend so much of my time on this, simply, to confound and denigrate the SNP’s wonderful beneficence towards Shetland (and Orkney)?

      The SNP have done and are doing incalculable damage to Shetland, with the uproar over school closures and now this dreadful, divisive campaign of vitriol, to name but but two.

      For heaven’s sake, wauken up!

      • Johan Adamson

        • June 3rd, 2015 11:20

        The SNP did not try to close our schools, the SIC did. The lack of cash for education in Scotland was the Scottish Governments fault, they do need to allocate more to education. We have a Liberal MSP – what is he doing about this?

        This vitriolic campaign is not being run by the SNP. You will say that they are behind it all – maybe so, but its also people like John. There are a lot who agree, shown by the response he got and the response to the crowd funding and the response to the on line poll on ST. Can you really blame the SNP for having the most popular policies in the election and also in this?

    • John Neicho

      • June 3rd, 2015 11:19

      Thank you for your support. It means a lot. I will no longer be contributing to this discussion and would recommend that you refrain from it yourself. No point joining me as a pariah.

  • iantinkler

    • June 3rd, 2015 9:14

    John Neicho, no one applauds what Carmichael did, I personally find it far less obnoxious than what Alex Salmond has just done. I reprint my previous “Alex Salmond lies again and try’s to link his divisive political ideology “Nationalism”, to a much loved deceased politician. Whilst Charles’s body is still warm Salmond claims a total fabrication, claiming that Charles Kennedy’s heart was not in “The Better Together” campaign. That is pure opportunistic rubbish, morally reprehensible and utterly untrue. Why is it that Salmond, like Danus Skene? Both try to steal the mantle of deceased and popular dead Liberal politicians. Could it be their political dogma is so morally bankrupt that no behavior, however contemptible is below them? Is this the behavior of true Scottish Nationalists? John would you agree, or are you so much SNP, you regard Salmond as some kind of Holy savior, like so many of the SNP

    • John Neicho

      • June 3rd, 2015 11:16

      I do think that any one lying as a politician should step down when caught. Whether it is Salmond, Sturgeon or Carmichael. I am just old fashioned. If it is the case that Alistair cannot defend his position due to legal constraints i will no longer ask questions of him until he can defend himself.

  • joe johnson

    • June 3rd, 2015 9:32

    David spence. I totally agree with you. Well said.

    All politicians lie. Seen it all before, heard it all before.

  • Michael Mackay

    • June 4th, 2015 19:57

    I have just been reading all these comments and can’t believe Johan Adamson’s quote ( The SNP did not try to close our schools, the SIC did. The lack of cash for education in Scotland was the Scottish Governments fault) now that’s a contradiction of words when we all know who the Scottish Government is the SNP.

  • Tim Morrison

    • June 8th, 2015 9:50

    Ynionist commentators are desperate to talk about everything apart from what this case is about. I can see why. It is very simple.

    Carmichael made false statements to the electorate about his own character when he talked about the leak investigations by claiming that he was not the kind of person who would break the Ministerial Code of Conduct. At hustings in Orkney, and to the press he repeated this directly to the electorate. He acknowledged in the Orcadian that he had not told the truth and his behaviour had harmed people. Our case, and this is supported by various legal opinions, is that this is an offence under the Representation of the People’s Act 1983.

    The person who wrote above that is sufficient to get someone disallowed from legal practice is probably correct. Solicitors are expected to have a higher standard of truthfulness than the general population. To point this out is not mean, it is a logical consequence of Carmichael not having resigned by now when his reptuation would have been more or less intact and he would have had a chance in a by-election.

    This in not about the conduct of Salmond, Sturgeon or anyone else. It is not even about our motivation as petitioners or crowd funders. Now it is before the Courts, it is about Carmichael and no one else. He is in the unfortunate position of having to respond to the petition now. It is hard to see what his defence can be.

    • Ali Inkster

      • June 8th, 2015 11:12

      So Tim you are not going to hold Salmond Sturgeon Swinney et al to the same level of honesty and integrity that you expect of Carmichael. Yes Carmichael lied but so did they and I find that so far not one of the usual suspects who demand that Carmichael must go demand the same from known liars on the SSnp side of the political debate. From this the only rational conclusion anyone can come to is that they are all hypocrites.

    • John Tulloch

      • June 8th, 2015 11:20


      I for one am not desperate to avoid discussion of Alistair Carmichael’s behaviour. I simply believe that the official investigations, one of which you, personally, were involved in raising, are the proper place to do that.

      If, having looked at all the evidence and the relevant circumstances, the court decides to annul the election, I will have no complaint about that.

  • John Tulloch

    • June 8th, 2015 11:32

    Tim Morrison,

    You are “first petitioner” in the legal action against Alistair Carmichael yet you are campaigning against him in the media.

    Furthermore, you are the author of ‘The Orkney Vole’ Yes campaign Facebook page and are using your platform, relentlessly, in your campaign.

    I’m not a lawyer but I suspect you are skating on very thin ice here and Mr Carmichael’s lawyers will make mincemeat of your action as a result.

    Which begs the question, why are you doing this, do you actually want to sabotage your own legal action?

    Several potential benefits from such a stunt spring readily to mind.

  • iantinkler

    • June 8th, 2015 12:24

    These Ynionist get everywhere!! Your actual point Tim, do you not think it prudent to await The Courts?


Add Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

200 words left

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Get Latest News in Your Inbox

Join the The Shetland Times mailing list to get one daily email update at midday on what's happening in Shetland.