29 April 1991 Lord Fraser (Attorney General), Lord Roger (Attorney General), Duncan Law (Crown Representative), Alfred Bannett (Deputy Crown Representative) and unidentified persons to discuss the report. A meeting was held between. Written by Elish McPhillomy (now Dame Elish Angiolini), it sets out the rationale and extent to which the protections provided by the common law may be circumvented and statutory law disregarded. tried to establish.
“Operation Planet”, Edinburgh
On 24 March 1990, Edinburgh Police launched 'Operation Planet'. The police operation began after a 16-year-old boy was discovered in a house in the city center, drugged with cannabis and repeatedly sodomized by multiple men over a 10-day period. The boy had taken a weekend break and was visiting a local children's home. Evidence uncovered in a subsequent police investigation showed that the men also engaged in gay “boy-for-hire” activities and were connected to a “network” of older men.
“Operation Planet” lawsuit and verdict
By the time the Operation Planet case reached court, a total of 10 men had been arrested on a total of 57 charges. These charges relate to participating in and procuring acts of sodomy against juveniles in contravention of the Common Law and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980 and the supply of cannabis to juveniles in contravention of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. was. Hiding and concealing a boy in supervised care contrary to the Scottish Social Work Act 1968.
The pretrial hearing was held from January 9th to 11th, 1991. During the trial, an agreement was reached between the Crown and the defense team to reduce the 57 charges to just 10, release five defendants, and arrange a plea. 5 left. The police officers who participated in Operation Planet were completely bewildered and extremely angry at this unusual turn of events.
On 15 and 16 January 1991, one defendant (an Edinburgh-based solicitor) who had pleaded not guilty was tried before Lord Clyde (Senator of the Judicial College). The jury found the charges “not proven.” On 12 February 1991, the remaining five defendants (who had pleaded guilty) appeared before Lord Clyde for sentencing. One of the defendants was sentenced to four years in prison. Sentence for the remaining four defendants was adjourned until October 8, 1991, when they appeared before the Clerk of the Supreme Court to be admonished.
break the law
Towards the end of March 1991, as a direct result of the prosecution relating to “Operation Planet'' and the sodomy of teenage boys, an internal investigation report was prepared by the Crown, seeking to establish its basis and scope. Therefore, protections provided by common law may be circumvented and statutory law may be disregarded. The paper's author was Elish McPhilomey (now Elish Angiolini), the royal's senior legal assistant at the time.
The Crown justified this unusual step by saying it expressed “public concerns about the appropriateness of bringing charges under common law rather than statute.” However, the only “public concern” cited in the royal report was an opinion put forward by defense lawyer Derek Ogg, one of the lawyers in the “Operation Planet” trial, which was published on February 20, 1991. Quoted in the Glasgow Herald.
29 April 1991, between Lord Fraser (Lord Justice), Lord Roger (Attorney General), Duncan Lowe (Royal Representative), Alfred Vannett (Deputy Crown Representative) and unknown persons, regarding Elish. A meeting was held to discuss. McPhilomey's report.
As a result of that meeting, a directive was issued by the Crown Office to the public prosecutor's finances (Directive No. 2025 of 28 November 1991), in which the Crown Office, contrary to the law, ordered that a teenage boy be sodomized by an older man. This effectively sanctioned the specific criminal act of being sanctioned. male. This Directive provided the means for such activities to be “legalized” by the Crown.
In response to what the Royal Family called “public misunderstandings”, a revised set of instructions was issued (Direction No 2025/1 of 20 December 1991). However, these instructions amounted to little more than fine-tuning, and there was also an additional Crown instruction stating that pursuing cases involving 'rental boy' clients was rarely justified.
The concern is not just about royal officials violating their oaths (and “misconduct in office”). There is also the issue of introducing political action into the criminal justice system with the aim of introducing extreme and non-consensual social change.
One such issue of great importance is that of the activities of pedophiles and organized pedophile organizations. Disgusting such acts is a natural human reaction to those who indulge in such horribly cruel and selfish acts towards vulnerable children. The danger, however, is the politically motivated misrepresentation of those who seek to confront pedophilia as “homophobic” (for example, as argued in a 1997 article by defender Derek Ogg in Scotsgay magazine). This means that it can also be perceived by people who have the following feelings: A sinister intent to prevent an effective response to the serious problem of systematic child abuse.
move forward
On 28 November 2001, Elish Angiolini was appointed Attorney-General of Scotland. On 12 October 2006 she was promoted to Lord Chancellor and on 17 July 2007 it was announced that Derek Ogg QC had been appointed as Lord Chancellor.
On 6 March 2009, Barrister Elish Angiolini announced the appointment of Derek Ogg QC as Head of the new National Sexual Offenses Unit. Upon accepting the appointment, she promised: “Sex crimes are often the most difficult and sensitive cases for prosecutors to bring to court. However, I remain committed to making a strong case and treating victims with dignity and respect. I am determined to do my best.”
Later that year, Mr Robert Green sent two letters to Derek Ogg asking the Crown to instruct Grampian Police to investigate serious and substantiated allegations of pedophile abuse of Holly Greig, a young man with Down syndrome. A request was made to the agency. In particular, Mr Green called for instructions for Grampian Police to interview those named as Holly's abusers, including current police officers and local sheriffs.
Both characters were ignored.
