NO PERJURY charges are to be levelled at four women who were said by a sheriff to have lied at the trial of Free Church of Scotland theologian, Professor Donald Macleod, when he faced accusations of indecent assault.
The professor was cleared of all charges.
The Crown Office said yesterday that following a study of a report by the procurator-fiscal in Edinburgh into the trial, Crown Counsel had concluded no further investigations were warranted.
``Criminal proceedings against the witnesses would not be justified,'' said the Crown Office.
Last night, the man who organised the Dorcas Fund to pay expenses of witnesses against the professor said: ``This decision blows the conspiracy theory out of the water.''
Mr John Heenan, of Oban, Argyll, said it demonstrated that Sheriff John Horsburgh QC, in his summing-up, had shown a major lack of judgment in using and accepting uncorroborated and unverified evidence put forward by some defence witnesses.
The sheriff's attack on the truthfulness of four women was shown to have no substance, said Mr Heenan, 50, who added: ``I do hope that the Church will now ignore Professor Macleod's insistence that men in prominent places should be removed from office.''
The fiscal's report had been requested by the Lord Advocate to establish whether there were grounds for instituting perjury proceedings against any of the witnesses who gave evidence at the trial or for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
It followed remarks made by Sheriff Horsburgh at the end of the trial where the acquittal of Professor Macleod on all allegations that he had sexually assaulted four women ended a 12-year ordeal for the churchman.
Sheriff Horsburgh, who said it was a case in which it was appropriate to return a not guilty verdict rather than not proven, concluded in a damning judgment that the women had all lied in the witness box to further the ends of the professor's enemies in the Church.
He said: ``My conclusion is that the witnesses on these charges have squared their consciences on the basis that a modest degree of dishonesty on their part would be justified on the perceived resultant advantage of blackening the name of Professor Macleod and supporting his opponents.'' The professor is said to be considering his future in the Church.
Last night, Mr Angus Macleod, the 26-year-old son of the professor who is on holiday with his wife Mary, spoke for his father about the move.
``The procurator-fiscal must seek to endeavour to protect the public interest. If that is his paramount consideration, then the decision by the Crown Office can only be understood in that regard,'' he said.
``Clearly the public interest will not be served by further prosecutions on this matter. This does not depart from Sheriff John Horsburgh QC's findings that these women lied in court.''
During the case, the Rev John J Murray, minister at St Columba's Free Church in Edinburgh, was described as one of the main conspirators against the professor. Sheriff Horsburgh said he agreed with the evidence of one witness that Mr Murray was a ``dangerous man''.
Mr Murray said last night: ``It is a most helpful statement by the Lord Advocate especially in respect of those against whom such serious allegations were made.''
Professor Macleod's brother-in-law, the Rev Angus Smith, a former Free Church moderator who was named in court as a conspirator, said there were still a number of unanswered questions.
``I suppose the women will be glad to hear this and I'm glad for them. I still feel certain points were not cleared up, vital evidence was not given in court, and some witnesses were not allowed to appear.''
Mr Smith, at his Lewis home, said the sheriff did not hear the evidence of a group of ministers and elders and this could have prevented him from condemning the women and others. He said there was still a split in the Church.
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