Record of Communications between Court and Angie Zelter

Date: 8 Feb 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Enclosed the Petition lodged by the LA, stated that a procedural hearing would be fixed and asked how long I considered the ’full appeal’ might take. Said the Sheriff’s Report would be forwarded as soon as received.
-   Date: 9 Feb 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Thanked for letter of 8 Feb 00, confirmed I would be present in person at both procedural and full hearings as I wanted to represent myself. Asked for i) full consultation about dates; ii) advice about getting a Mackenzie Friend; iii) permission for either official copies of court tape/transcript or my own tape-recorder/short-hand note taker; iv) clarification on use of words ’full appeal’ as I thought it was an inquisitorial process for clarification of points of law.
-   Date: 23 Feb 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Asking about how I can be reimbursed for my costs of participating in the LAR; asking for reply to previous letter of 9 Feb 00; stating I thought the LAR would take a month.
-   Date: 23 Feb 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Informed me of date of procedural hearing Tuesday April 4th; he wasn’t aware of any Scots Law procedure for a Mackenzie Friend; I had to raise issue of a tape recorder with the Court; apologised for the use of the word appeal – it is in fact a hearing.
-   Date: 24 Feb 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: Clerk of the Justiciary, Supreme Courts.

Contents: Formal notification of my election to appear personally at the hearing on April 4th and asking to be allowed a Mackenzie.
-   Date: 25 Feb 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Stated that Section 123 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 says it will pay costs of representation but is silent on costs for a party. Suggests I write to the Crown Office to ask for payment.
-   Date: 6 Mar 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Lord Justice General intimated that the issue of a Mackenzie Friend be dealt with at the procedural hearing on 4th April.
-   Date: 6 Apr 00 – report

From: Angie Zelter

Contents: My write-up of the procedural hearing on 4th April 2000. Rulings made by Rodger, Cowie and Reed were i) the LAR hearing would be scheduled for 5 days; ii)skeleton arguments from each of the parties are to be available a week before the hearing; iii) the court will appoint an amicus curiae for Zelter; iv) a complete transcript will not be ordered but the evidence of expert witnesses Boyle, Johnson and Rogers will be ordered and sent to all parties; v) a report from the Sheriff will be prepared and will include the rulings she made; vi) the Court will not remit the facts to one of their number; vii) no references will be made to the European Courts; viii) there will be no order for transcripts or recordings of the LAR hearing; ix) the Court has no power to order the expenses of Zelter to be paid and therefore it will not do so.
-   Date: 18 Apr 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Complained about the process on 4th April because it impinged upon my right to speak for myself and defend my interests and asked that I be informed as soon as possible that during the full LAR hearing I would be assured that i) I am given equal access to time and respect as all other parties; ii) a full transcript of the Greenock trial is provided to all parties; iii) all LAR proceedings be recorded, transcribed and provided to all parties and that parties are entitled to make a tape recording; iv) inquiry into the factual base and knowledge necessary for the Judges to answer the questions on an informed and impartial basis; v) adequate arrangements for the public to hear properly; vi) that Lord Rodger be asked to step down and a Judge with no conflict of interests to replace him. Copied letter to new LA (Colin Boyd) and asked that the major question of law that arose from our case be dealt with and added to the LAR – ’Is the UK in breach of international law in its deployment of the Trident System given the specific design and capacity of Trident and in particular when linked with HMG’s stated willingness to use Trident’s nuclear warheads?’
-   Date: 9 May 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: Clerk of Justiciary, Supreme Courts

Contents: Referring to the letter to the LA of 18 Apr 00 and copied to the Court I stated that as the Crown refuses to withdraw the Reference then I am asking formally for the Court to dismiss the reference on the grounds that it is unjust and unfair.
-   Date: 11 May 00

From: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Stated that the composition of the bench is only decided shortly before any appeal hearing and so the disqualification of Judges arises only at that stage; court will conduct the proceedings in a way that is ’entirely consistent with your rights’; transcript can be provided to any person who pays the fee; no official tape recording is made of legal debate in the Court of Criminal Appeal, personal recordings are regulated by the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and are not permitted except with leave of the court; the Court has appointed Senior Counsel to assist it in dealing with the matters raised by the Reference; there appears to be no basis for the Court’s making an order to dismiss the Reference but this is a matter for the Court to consider at the hearing of the Reference.
-   Date: 12 May 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Asked for clarification on the rulings made at 4th April Hearing and to have copies of those rulings or any interlocutory orders; details of the amicus curiae and how it will affect my rights to present my own arguments directly; information on what the official record of the debate will be and how detailed it is and if I can have access to it; if implementation of hearing improvements can be made so people will be able to hear; who will the Senior Counsel be and what the function, process and connection with him will be.
-   Date: 14 Jun 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Referring to my letter of over a month ago (12 May 00) I ask for an immediate answer to the questions contained in it and then repeated the 5 points made. Said it had been brought to my attention that Gerry Moynihan had been appointed as my representative and that I opposed this as he had been an Advocate Depute and there was a clear conflict of interest and that such an appointment smacks of a stitch-up.
-   Date: 20 Jun 00 [view full text]

From: Thomas Higgins (Acting Deputy Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Was in response to my letter of 12 May 00 and enclosed the Interlocutor Sheet; amicus curiae appointed on April 4th and is G J B Moynihan, ’His appointment will not impinge on any of your rights’; Proceedings are not recorded, decisions will be recorded and signed by the Clerk, the written judgement delivered by the Court customarily sets out an analysis of the submissions made during the hearing; will not introduce a p.a. system and if experiencing any difficulties in hearing should bring to the attention of the Court; Moynihan was appointed on 4 Apr 00 as an Officer of the Court, appointed to assist, his involvement will be determined by the Court. The Interlocutor of the Court did not request that he provide ’skeletal arguments’ and enquiries as to his role should be addressed to him.
-   Date: 21 Jun 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: Thomas Higgins (Acting Deputy Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Asked why it had taken so long to inform me of the amicus curiae (two and a half months after the Interlocutor Sheet); expressed deep disturbance at the appointment and asked several questions about his role including whether he was a ’party’ to the proceedings; when would I get the Sheriff’s Report; discussed my need for a short-hand note taker to be seated adequately; enclosed my letter to Moynihan.
-   Date: 21 Jun 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: Objected to being represented in any way, opposed to his appointment on grounds that he was an AD and his devil-master is Lord Rodger – conflict of interest; his appointment is unsatisfactory as no-one knows his role; requested that he resign.
-   Date: 22 Jun 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: The full hearing will take place for 5 days from October 9th in Parliament House.
-   Date: 29 Jun 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Enclosed the transcripts from Boyle, Johnson and Rogers – received on 5th July.
-   Date: 3 Jul 00 [view full text]

From: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: As an amicus curiae he is independent of all parties and his role is to provide assistance to the Court by ensuring all relevant arguments are before the Court. He will continue to act as amicus curiae subject to any directions from the Court.
-   Date: 3 Jul 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: Thomas Higgins (Acting Deputy Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Asking for immediate confirmation in writing that I will be permited to represent myself as the 1st respondent in the LAR no.1 2000 and that I will be permitted to address the court in person in protection of my interests.
-   Date: 13 Jul 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Stated I still had not received replies from letters 21 Jun 00 and 3 Jul 00 and asked for:- i) confirmation that I would be allowed to address the court in person; ii) information as who the initials refer to on the Interlocutor Sheet and when it was signed as no date; iii) information on the procedure to enable me to tape-record the proceedings; iv) confirmation I will be given a copy of the written judgement; v)confirmation in writing that Lord Prosser and not Lord Rodger will be on the bench; vi) information on the procedure to remove Moynihan as amicus curiae and copies of all communications between the Court and him; vii) the LAR proceedings to be dismissed; and I also acknowledged the receipt of the expert testimony of Boyle, Rogers and Johnson but noted my concern at the inaccuracies and omissions. Enclosed a copy of the letter from Moynihan.
-   Date: 13 Jul 00

From: Bryan Watson (Acting Deputy Principal Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: ’I can confirm that you will be able to represent yourself at any hearing in respect of the lord Advocate’s reference’.

-   Date: 21 Jul 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: Enclosed letter from Colin Boyd, Lord Advocate to Austin Mitchell of 14 Jul 00 and noted that its contents were at variance with his impression of whose interests he was meant to be representing. Asked for more detail as to what exactly his role would be and how he would fulfil it.
-   Date: 22 Jul 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: ’I would like you to clarify in detail what Mr. Moynihan’s role is’. I enclosed copies of a letter from Colin Boyd to Austin Mitchell MP which says that Moynihan was appointed in respect of my position and a letter from Moynihan saying he was to provide assistance to the court and was independent.
-   Date: 15 Aug 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: I wrote asking to enrol the following motion:- ’In the light of the fact that Lord Rodger had to recuse himself due to a conflict of interest, all previous orders made by him are invalid including his personal appointment of Mr. Moynihan and thus the Court is requested to rescind all the previous orders’. Also asked to have replies to my previous letters.
-   Date: 16 Aug 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Letter enclosing a walling slip with the dates for the 5 day Hearing in October commencing Monday 9th October at 10.30 a.m.
-   Date: 19 Aug 00 (Undated – date received) [view full text]

From: Justiciary Office

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: A slip of paper just stating that the Nobile Officium would be heard on Tuesday 12th September 2000 in Edinburgh at 10.30 a.m.. It was headed ’Judge:- Lord Prosser (Appeal Court).’
-   Date: 21 Aug 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: ’The Lord Advocate’s letter does not alter my understanding of my role’. The 12th September Hearing may be an appropriate time to address points concerning his appointment..
-   Date: 23 Aug 00

From: J K Cumming (Senior Assistant Clerk of Justiciary), Supreme Courts

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Enclosed Sheriff Gimblett’s Report and noted that the Bench for the full hearing would be Prosser, Kirkwood and Penrose.
-   Date: 23 Aug 00 [view full text]

From: Thomas Higgins, Acting Deputy Principal Clerk of Justiciary

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: I write in response to your letter dated 15 August 2000. I have placed your letter before Lord Prosser. It may be that your motion can be dealt with on 12 September 2000. The bench that will sit to hear the reference will consist of The Right Honourable Lords Prosser and Kirkwood and The Honourable Lord Penrose.
-   Date: 12 Sep 00

From: Liz Crocker [view full transcribed notes]

To: Trident Ploughshares

Contents: Report of 2nd Procedural Hearing at High Court. Fully transcribed notes taken from Liz’s shorthand of the proceedings at the LAR Hearing.
-   Date: 20 Sep 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: Said it was good to have met him; sent him my draft submissions for the answers; asked him to let me know if he disagreed with any of my submissions; asked him to let me know his arguments as to Crown challenges of Sheriff’s rulings and competency of Q2; whether he was ready to argue for my costs at the next hearing; whether he would add to our arguments for getting the LAR recorded; and ideas on how to get the Court to put Trident properly on trial.
-   Date: Undated but received on 22 Sep 00

From: Justiciary Office

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: A slip of paper just stating that the Continued Hearing would be heard on Friday 29th September 2000 in Edinburgh at 2p.m. It was headed ’Judge:- Lord Prosser (Appeal Court).’
-   Date: 22 Sep 00

From: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Had received my letter of 20/9/00 and agreed on my summary of his role. Will investigate the question of expenses for next hearing.
-   Date: 23 Sep 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: Sent him Liz’s notes of Hearing of 12th and a list of the references I would be using in my LAR answers and asked for a meeting just before the next hearing.
-   Date: 26 Sep 00

From: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: Agreed that Q2 should not be answered and stated his position would be that the critical question in the LAR should not be considered because it does not address the issue in the trial.

-   Date: 26 Sep 00

From: Angie Zelter

To: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

Contents: Asked him to expand on his arguments so I would know whether he was undermining my arguments or not.
-   Date: 26 Sep 00

From: G J B Moynihan Q.C.

To: Angie Zelter

Contents: The court will not consider the question of criminality of Trident and it has not been put by the L.A. who cannot be forced to insert this question. But there is an argument that the court should not be asked by the LA to consider the wrong questions and therefore Moynihan will prepare a submission agreeing with mine that the LA question is wrong because our action was not a protest and in any event the issue at the trial concerned the threat and use of Trident not the possession of Trident.
-   Date: 26 Sep 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: I wrote asking to enrol a motion to hear my arguments for changing the wordings of the LAR Questions and enclosing the arguments for this. I asked for any interlocutor sheets from the 12th September Hearing and put a summary of my understanding of the role of Moynihan as agreed at the last Hearing and asked the court to let me know if they did not agree with it.
-   Date: 2 Oct 00 [view full text]

From: Angie Zelter

To: John Anderson (Principal Clerk of the Justiciary), Supreme Courts

Contents: Enclosed skeleton answers and asked for the interlocutor sheets from hearings on the 12th and 29th September.