22
Mar
17

Case against gamekeeper Stanley Gordon re: shot hen harrier, part 10

Criminal proceedings continued at Elgin Sheriff Court yesterday against Scottish gamekeeper Stanley Gordon.

Mr Gordon, 60, of Cabrach, Moray, is facing a charge in connection with the alleged shooting of a hen harrier in June 2013. He has denied the charge.

Here is the timeline of court proceedings so far:

Hearing #1 (19 May 2016): Case continued without plea until 16 June 2016.

Hearing #2 (16 June 2016): Case continued without plea until 14 July 2016.

Hearing #3 (14 July 2016): Case continued without plea until 11 August 2016.

Hearing #4 (11 August 2016): Case continued without plea until 1 September 2016.

Hearing #5 (1 September 2016): Mr Gordon enters a not guilty plea. A provisional trial date is set for 19 December 2016, with an intermediate diet set for 18 November 2016.

Hearing #6 (18 November 2016): Case adjourned for another intermediate diet on 2 December 2016.

Hearing #7 (2 December 2016). Provisional trial date of 19 December is dumped. Case adjourned for another intermediate diet on 10 February 2017.

Hearing #8 (10 February 2017). Case adjourned for another intermediate diet on 21 March 2017. New provisional trial date set for 15 May 2017.

Hearing #9 (21 March 2017). Case adjourned due to joint motion from both prosecution and defence to review recent disclosure. Another intermediate diet set for 21 April 2017. The provisional trial date of 15 May 2017 will be dependent on what happens at the hearing on 21 April.

UPDATE 21 April 2017: All proceedings dropped (see here).

Advertisements

8 Responses to “Case against gamekeeper Stanley Gordon re: shot hen harrier, part 10”


  1. 1 Michael Smith
    March 22, 2017 at 11:56 am

    Although I am looking forward to the date [of the trial] who is footing the bill for this saga?

    [Ed: comment edited slightly to avoid defamation. Please note, it is for the court to decide the innocence or guilt of the accused]

  2. 2 Bob Keltie
    March 22, 2017 at 12:47 pm

    [Ed: comment deleted, not prepared to publish that at this stage of legal proceedings]

  3. March 22, 2017 at 1:27 pm

    [Ed: libellous comment deleted]

  4. 4 Jo
    March 22, 2017 at 1:49 pm

    Are we allowed to ask what the recent disclosure is?

    • 5 Secret Squirrel
      March 22, 2017 at 2:11 pm

      Joint motion probably doesn’t reveal details (which would probably be sub judice to report anyway)

    • 6 Adam
      March 23, 2017 at 11:13 pm

      I don’t know what the recent disclosure was, but my understanding is that the admissibility of video evidence is one issue which seems to have arisen.

  5. 7 nirofo
    March 22, 2017 at 5:25 pm

    They’re literally taking the proverbial piss.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Blog Stats

  • 3,040,563 hits

Archives

Our recent blog visitors