Lord Advocate’s Reference

To:- G J B Moynihan Q.C. Faculty of Advocates, Parliament House, Parliament Square, Edinburgh EH1 1RF.

21/6/00

Dear Mr. Moynihan, Ref. Lord Advocate’s Reference No 1 2000

Please excuse this frank letter and be assured that I have nothing against you personally. However, as the first respondent, acting for myself, and wishing to speak up on behalf of my own interests, I am asking for your immediate resignation as amicus curiae in the LAR.

I have been informed that you were appointed amicus curiae by Lord Rodger on 4^th April, on the back of my decision to represent myself and therefore not having legal counsel - see the Interlocutor Sheet Petition Ref No Misc 11/2000, where it says ’in respect there has been no intimation from the first respondent in terms of Section 123(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act appointed GJB Moynihan Q.C. to act as amicus curiae’.

I am deeply distressed that you have been appointed as my amicus curiae as I object to having any Counsel speak for me or represent me in any way. I wish to be allowed my full rights to speak directly to the Court and to argue fully in protection of my interests.

I am also opposing your appointment on the grounds that you were an Advocate Depute and that your ’devil-master’ is Lord Rodger, who, I have already asked to step down from the LAR, on the grounds of conflict of interest due to him having expressed clear opinions about the central issues involved in the LAR when he was a Lord Advocate and because as a Minister supporting criminal weapons of mass destruction he has a ’prejudicial interest’ in that he is potentially open to the charge of being party to a criminal conspiracy. It would obviously be a continuation of the same conflict of interest if I am now to have you appearing in the guise of a helper of the Court now that Lord Rodger has indeed stepped down from the bench. The Crown is already represented by Mr Doherty.

Your appointment is also unsatisfactory in that no-one knows what your role will be? The other respondents are represented and the Crown is represented and in theory they are all meant to act as amicus curiae to the Court, so why is another amicus curiae needed, except to boost the Crown position? Your appointment certainly does not serve my interests. In a telephone conversation that I had today with the Acting Deputy Principal Clerk Thomas Higgins it became apparent that no-one knows what particular role you should play as amicus curiae. I was told that you were to decide what your role is to be! The letter of 20/6/00 I had had from the same person had said that your ’involvement will be determined by the Court’! I would like to know from you who (what person) is the Court? When does this person decide and how will I be informed? I also request to see immediately any communication to do with your appointment and duties/role in the LAR that you have received from ’the Court’ and/or Lord Rodger or any of his agents.

I conclude then with a request that you inform me of whether, in the interests of an impartial LAR conducted openly, accountably and in the interests of justice, you will immediately resign? And if not, of why you will continue and what role you will be taking, how you will proceed and how you think you will be able to serve my interests or even if you know what my interests are?

Please respond to this letter within 14 days.

Yours in peace and love, Angie Zelter.

Printer friendly version

Home | Top