Seòmar agus comataidhean

You said that the similarity is that children and adults can waive their anonymity. What is the difference between them when it comes to telling your story? Do you have to go to court in order to tell your story?

I just want to check that I have understood how the provision applies.

A child under the age of 18 can go on TikTok and talk about their experience as a child victim. That can be shared, presumably, because they are sharing it themselves. Are there any lines there between publishers and other people being able to use that content?

That is where I am having some difficulty. Russell Findlay raised this question.

My understanding of Scots law is that not knowing is not generally a defence. You cannot say, “Oh—I didn’t know what the law was.” I do not know how the law can make a distinction between your auntie and anyone else.

I know what you are trying to say; the auntie should have known that the person was under 18, so yes, that would be the ordinary understanding of it. However, we are legislating here, and we need to get these bits right, so it exercises me a little bit that the defence seems to be extremely broad. My concern is that other people with an interest might use that defence more widely.

You do not think that a good lawyer could drive a coach and horses through that last defence, because it is extremely broad.

That is interesting.

So you are doing that anyway.

My question is about a specific point, Lord Advocate. You have given the committee a lot of food for thought about the implications of having a majority of seven to five rather than two thirds. You previously told the committee that you thought that the Crown should have a right—not an automatic right—to a retrial. Do you agree that there should be clear rules about that or transparency about what the grounds would be? I would have thought that, naturally, you would be pressurised by victims and their families to use that right in every case. Do you think that the Parliament should legislate for retrials?

Good morning. Lord Matthews, I will start by asking about a point that you made in answer to my colleague about not putting the accused’s statement to the victim, because it always results in an answer of “No”. The committee has had a lot of exchanges about the culture and the way that some defence counsel question victims. Would you have to agree that with the defence’s solicitors in order not to have to put the statement to the victim? How would that operate?

Some of those cases would have been tried in the sheriff court.

That is very helpful.