THERE were extra television cameras crammed into the galleries for FMQs yesterday, the lure of an execution always draws a crowd.
The would-be victim was Campbell Gunn, the veteran reporter who became Alex Salmond's special adviser on cajoling the media. It is a fact universally acknowledged at Holyrood that Mr Gunn is a thoroughly good egg.
But the FM's good egg has been in hot water this week after sending a dodgy email about Clare Lally, the mother of a disabled child, who appeared at a pro-Union Better Together event.
As the hourglass indicated high noon, it was looking touch and go for Humpty Gunn.
The SNP backbenches fell silent; the cabinet wore despairing "What this week?" faces.
But Mr Salmond has always been lucky in his opponents, and in Labour's Johann Lamont it's as if he hits the jackpot every time.
In a flash, she was over the top asking why Mr Gunn had unleashed "a torrent of vile abuse".
Not so, said the FM, there was "a mistake and misjudgment" but no internet abuse from Mr Gunn.
Facts be damned, Ms Lamont breathlessly continued her ascent of Mount Hyperbole.
Unless the FM dished out a P45 it must mean "all the bullying that goes on, wherever it comes from, is done by order, by design, by him".
Mr Salmond asked Ms Lamont to "reflect" on her remarks, ie admit they were rank guff, and pointed out the code of conduct for special advisers was written after one of Gordon Brown's aides was caught red-handed in a smear op.
Ruth Davidson did far better simply reading said code, which states "disseminating inappropriate material" means automatic dismissal.
What didn't Mr Salmond understand in that?
Mr Salmond wobbled, but insisted Mr Gunn was innocent "in terms of the code", meaning he had interpreted it to mean his pal was in the clear. The FM ended with a burst of rousing humbug about forging a nobler society for Clare Lally.
"Let us go forward and make Scotland a better place for the carers," he trumpeted noisily.
Mr Gunn was safe, a good egg spared by some hardboiled politics from the boss.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article