The Misgovernment of Scottish Justice - my email to the new Justice Secretary

To: Neil Gray MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Justice

CC: MSPs
BCC: Press Release

Dear Mr Gray,

I write to complain about the misgovernment of the justice portfolio under your predecessor Angela Constance MSP and to offer some helpful advice as to how a competent Justice Secretary should remedy the currently prevailing evil state of affairs.

THE PROBLEM

The establishment by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body last session of what is misnamed as the "Social Media Monitoring Unit" but which actually operates as a Gestapo censorship unit

because of the oppressive arrests, seizures of digital devices and prosecutions arising from complaints from this unit to officers of Police Scotland.

This MSPs-led attack on the rights of Scots to freedom of expression was an attack on Scottish democracy itself, which was held to account by me, for example, as follows.

See also the video SHAME on Swinney's GESTAPO helping Taliban stone Afghan girls.mp4

wherein I say -

An innocent Afghan girl was stoned to death after Pakistan helped the Taliban takeover Afghanistan.

Hello, I'm Peter Dow from Aberdeen.

SHAME on the EVIL WOMEN AT THE CORE OF JOHN SWINNEY'S GESTAPO which is arresting and prosecuting me to try to stop me saying one word to help the women and girls of Afghanistan - that word being "Paki" meaning "Pakistani".

Swinney's Gestapo claims "ooh, you can't use THAT word - that's "racist", that's "prejudice", that's a "hate crime", that's a "breach of the peace".

Well, no, actually, it's not. I'm correctly using the word "Paki" to hold Pakistanis to account for Pakistan's crimes against humanity.

So shame on Kate Forbes, Dorothy Bain, Ruth Charteris, Jo Farrell, Angela Constance, Alison Johnstone, Christine Grahame, Claire Baker, Maggie Chapman and Lynsey Hamill.

Shame on John Swinney and all his Gestapo's men and women, who are a disgrace to Scotland.

The Scots should call off Swinney's Gestapo police state and let me do my feminist duty. Thank you.

THE SOLUTION

As Justice Secretary, your duty is to defend Scottish freedom and democracy by the following governing decisions.

1. Replace the Scottish Government's law officers - Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain KC and Solicitor General Ruth Charteris KC - with much more democratic, pro-freedom-of-expression lawyers who are determined to order the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to cease and desist all prosecutions arising from complaints from the "Social Media Monitoring Unit" and instead to reverse the harm already done by ordering the Crown to appeal any convictions which the Crown has already obtained from such social-media-posts cases with a view to any fines imposed and already paid being repaid to all those so sentenced and compensation paid for any time in custody at the daily rate of the salary of the Chief Constable - £745.21 per day - and to order the police to return to their owners any digital devices seized by police in the context of such cases.

For your information, as an example of a social-media-posts case which any good Lord Advocate would order prosecutors to desert the prosecution of, I am linking to my defence documents from a case that is currently live in Edinburgh Sheriff Court 

DEFENCE FOR THE ACCUSED - DOCUMENT June'26 FOR THE ACCUSED

Feel free to ask prospective candidates for the positions of law officers - "What would you order as a law officer in such a case as this?" showing them my documents to give their opinions on as part of the job interview procedure.

2. Replace the Chief Constable Jo Farrell with a competent police officer who is determined to command police officers to "NO ACTION" any future complaints from the "Social Media Monitoring Unit" and who is sufficiently competent at policing to understand that genuine safety and security for MSPs consists of professional security staff diligently searching for weapons etc. those who are coming into the close proximity company of MSPs at Parliament, Constituency Surgeries, public meetings etc. - but that Gestapo-style censorship of peaceful social media commentary is entirely counter-productive for good police/justice-system/community relations.

I should also advise all MSPs that the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body should shut down its "Social Media Monitoring Unit" which has proved to be a spectacular failure of the last session of parliament and I genuinely hope for better from this new session of parliament.

Good luck in your new job Mr Gray!🙂

Yours sincerely,
Peter Dow
etc.

Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 at 10:46
Subject: The Misgovernment of Scottish Justice
To: Cabinet Secretary for Justice <scottish.ministers@gov.scot>

I call for the army to arrest Chief Constable Jo Farrell

Swinney's Nazi Chief Constable, Jo Farrell

Yesterday, I lodged with Edinburgh Sheriff Court the 9-page document titled "Document June'26 for the Accused".

Link to view on-line

To quote -

 IN THE SHERIFF COURT OF LOTHIAN AND BORDERS

AT
EDINBURGH

DOCUMENT June’26 FOR THE ACCUSED
in
Procurator Fiscal, EDINBURGH
against
ALASTAIR PETER DOW, B.Sc.(Hons)

PF Ref: ED25014082
SCS Ref: SCS/2025-094701
Local Ref: EDI/2025-010308
Police No: PSSECRWCH0725

Lodged by email -   11th June 2026
Lodged by the accused representing himself
Link to view on-line

CONTENTS                          PAGE

DOCUMENT June’26 FOR THE ACCUSED     1
CONTENTS                  2
DEFENCE LODGED 23rd FEBRUARY ‘26     3
DEFENCE LAPTOP THEFT          3
EMAILS TO LORD PROVOST                 3
X ACCOUNT “@_Peter_Dow”          5
MOTION TO RETURN LAPTOP          5
ARREST/HEARING 14/16th MARCH ‘26         6
COMPENSATION                          6
MOTION REGARDING BAIL                     6
PLEAS IN LAW                         6
MOTION TO ADJOURN                       8 PRODUCTIONS                  8
DIGITAL PRODUCTIONS LIST                  9

DEFENCE LODGED 23 FEBRUARY

The Accused adheres to the truth, pleas and arguments of the 32-page defence document, titled “DEFENCE FOR THE ACCUSED”, lodged by email to Edinburgh Sheriff Court on 23rd February 2026 and accessible as an online document - print-outs of which were provided by the defence at the hearing of 27th February 2026 - a copy for the Sheriff and a copy for the prosecution.

This new 9-page defence “DOCUMENT June’26 FOR THE ACCUSED” was produced in June 2026 and is concerned in the main with matters arising immediately after the hearing of the 27th February 2026 in Court Room 8 of Edinburgh Sheriff Court and matters arising since.

DEFENCE LAPTOP THEFT

At the last hearing, on the 27th February 2026, the Accused represented himself in court, with the assistance of a defence laptop available to refer to and to quote from the defence’s legal case documents and productions stored on this laptop and in addition, offering the option to display the defence’s digital productions to courtroom display monitors.

Just after the hearing, In the circumstances described by the defence production documents
“8.3.1 Property Theft Report.pdf” & “8.3.2 LiberationfromPolice27Feb26.pdf”
this defence laptop has been seized by officers of Police Scotland and not yet returned to the Accused, obstructing the defence case presentation at future hearings and in violation of the Accused’s property rights in law and right to a fair trial.

EMAILS TO LORD PROVOST

Councillor Robert Aldridge is the 258th and current Right Honourable Lord Provost and Lord Lieutenant of the City of Edinburgh.

In emails of 27th May and 5th June, the Accused wrote to the Lord Provost of Edinburgh with subject “Requesting the army to arrest Chief Constable Jo Farrell” as reproduced in the defence production document “8.4.1 Gmail - to Lord Provost Requesting the army to arrest Chief Constable Jo Farrell.pdf”. To quote from the Accused’s email of 5th June - 

“Dear Lord Provost,

I write to update you that the police have written to me (see attached PDF) to refuse to investigate my complaint of theft by the police of my defence laptop (and mobile phone) on the perverse pretext -

"that any investigation at this stage is likely to .. unnecessarily delay criminal proceedings"

whereas in reality it is precisely the police's theft of my defence laptop which would unnecessarily delay criminal proceedings, which cannot proceed in any manner where justice is seen to be done while the defence is deprived of a laptop for defence documents and productions which are necessary for the defence to present my case in court.

Railroading criminal proceedings while obstructing the defence presentation would be a clear case of the prosecution attempting to pervert the course of justice / defeat the ends of justice / holding justice itself in contempt.

So just, non-railroaded criminal proceedings would have to be delayed, by successive adjournments until such time as the police return the defence's laptop to the defence or pay compensation for a replacement defence laptop.

Therefore the decision of the police not to investigate the police theft of my laptop and mobile phone is guaranteeing the delay of any proper, fair or just criminal proceedings.

So the pretext given by the police for refusing to investigate my complaint is invalid and the police refusal to investigate my complaint is a dereliction of police duty.

The pretext given does not remotely excuse the police refusing to return my defence laptop and mobile phone but merely perpetuates police criminality and is further validation of my reasons for writing to the Lord Provost.

According, I must repeat my request to the Lord Provost of 27th May 2026 -

I write to you asking that you exercise your powers as Lord Lieutenant of Edinburgh to ask that the army do now arrest the Chief Constable of Police Scotland Jo Farrell and hold her in army custody until such time as she has been suspended from her office and duty as chief constable pending what I hope will be a Scottish Police Authority and Scottish Government review into the criminality of police officers under Farrell's command.

Yours sincerely,
Peter Dow” etc.

X ACCOUNT “@_Peter_Dow”

As stated in the “DEFENCE FOR THE ACCUSED”, the defence reiterates that the Accused is indeed the owner of the X account “@_Peter_Dow” and he accepts responsibility for authoring both the complained-about post of the 20th May 2025 and all the posts made using that account before and after that date.

If it pleases the court, the defence is happy to agree and to sign a memorandum of agreement with the prosecution regarding the uncontroversial nature of the undeniable evidence that he is indeed the owner of the “@_Peter_Dow” account and the author of all the “@_Peter_Dow” account’s posts.

What is exceptionally controversial however is the false and malicious charges the prosecution makes in respect of the Accused’s lawful and dutiful social media posts.

MOTION TO RETURN LAPTOP

The defence moves the Court to order the return of the Accused’s defence laptop and mobile phone, the police and the prosecution having no lawful purpose nor entitlement to seize the Accused’s property - specifically, there being no investigatory nor evidential requirement to conduct an expensive and time-wasting forensic examination of the accused’s electronic devices with a view to redundantly and pointlessly confirming the uncontroversial truth that the Accused is indeed the author of the “@_Peter_Dow” posts.

Whereas the Accused has need of his defence laptop to present his defence case in court so it is imperative for justice to be seen to be done that the Accused’s defence laptop be returned to the Accused as soon as possible and some weeks before proceeding to trial so that this laptop can be updated with recent documents etc.

ARREST / HEARING 14/16 MARCH

The Accused was arrested from his home in Aberdeen on Saturday 14th March 2026 and transported in a prison van to Edinburgh that day to St Leonards Police Station in Edinburgh where he was held in a spartan police cell through Sunday 15th March 2026 and was brought to the spartan custody of Edinburgh Sheriff Court on Monday 16th March 2026 where at a brief hearing, the prosecution offered bail conditions, which the Accused, representing himself, promptly agreed to without debate, because the Accused in custody had been deprived of the facilities to present his defence against the imposition of any oppressive and offensive bail conditions, deprived of even a pen or a pencil, deprived of a good night’s sleep, deprived of his defence laptop, deprived of all reasonable requirements to defend himself to the best standard.

At the hearing of the 16th March 2026, rather than extemporaneously challenge the oppressive and offensive bail conditions offered, the Accused seized upon the most welcome prospect of an imminent release from custody and accepted those bail conditions which the defence now challenges in this document.

COMPENSATION

The Accused seeks compensation from Police Scotland for his unlawful and unjust 3 days 14th-16th March ‘26 in police and court custody at the daily rate of pay of the Chief Constable of Police Scotland - 3 days at £745.21/day = £2,235.63.

MOTION REGARDING BAIL

The defence moves the court to lift the following oppressive and offensive bail conditions - see digital production “8.6.1 BailEdinburgh16Mar26.pdf”- which violate the Accused’s human rights in law to freedom of expression and restrict his ability to carry out his political duties by posting on social media -

(f) not to use the social media platform ‘X’ previously known as Twitter
(g) not to make reference to any MP, MSP or Lord Advocate in any social media

The Accused has demonstrated due diligence in attending court while ordained to do so. Accordingly, there is no need for the Court to do other than ordain the Accused to appear at any further hearing of this case.

PLEAS IN LAW

The Accused applies to the Court to use its power under Section 30 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 to remove the imposed oppressive and offensive bail conditions considering that the Accused’s circumstances have changed in that he now has an opportunity to oppose these bail conditions in writing because he has now had “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” [Human Rights Act, Article 6, 3 (b)] because he is not now, as he was then on 16th March 2026, appearing from spartan police and court custody and may now have an opportunity to put before the Court documented material information such as the Accused has posted using the X account “@_Peter_Dow” since December 2021, so the X site owner and managers are evidently content to allow the Accused to continue to post on X - and were the X site owner and managers at any time not content they could simply suspend or delete the “@_Peter_Dow” account but have not done so.

The material information which was not available to the Court on 16th March is the defence’s now documented plea that the Court would be violating the Accused’s legal human rights by imposing such oppressive and offensive bail conditions, illegally restricting the Accused’s legal right “to impart information and ideas without any interference by a public authority” [Human Rights Act, Article 10, 1] such as the Court.

THE LAW

The Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, Section 30, Bail review, legislates -

(1) This section applies where a court has refused to admit a person to bail or, where a court has so admitted a person, the person has failed to accept the conditions imposed or that a sum required to be deposited under section 24(6) of this Act has not been so deposited.

[F1(1A) This section also applies where a person who has accepted the conditions imposed on his bail wants to have any of them removed or varied.]

(2) A court shall, on the application of any person mentioned in subsection (1) [F2 or (1A) above, have power to review (in favour of the person) its decision as to bail, or its decision as to the conditions imposed, if—

(a) the circumstances of the person have changed materially; or

(b) the person puts before the court material information which was not available
to it when its decision was made.]

The Human Rights Act (1998), Schedule 1, The Articles

ARTICLE 6
RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

3 Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence;

ARTICLE 10
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2 The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are

prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of

national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

MOTION TO ADJOURN

The defence moves the court to adjourn, the defence not being ready to proceed to trial until the police return the Accused’s defence laptop to facilitate a fair trial and the defence not being willing to accede to be railroaded to an unfair trial now by a prosecutor or a sheriff in contempt of the Accused’s legal right to a fair trial.

PRODUCTIONS

The digital productions list below lists additional digital productions to those already listed in the “DEFENCE FOR THE ACCUSED” document.

All the defence’s digital items may be previewed online by anyone with the link using the following Google-Drive Link to Digital Productions
and these additional items in the folder named “8. Productions added in June 2026”,

The Defence intends to make these digital productions available for display on a court-room monitor by two alternative methods

1. bringing a USB stick or pen drive to be plugged into the court-room’s computer stack.

2. bringing a defence laptop to be plugged into the court-room’s display monitor HDMI cable, subject to the police returning the Accused’s defence laptop 

The first method is only really suitable for the display of audio-visual video digital productions whereas the second method is required for convenient defence hands-on laptop navigation between documents and for scrolling up and down within documents being displayed on the courtroom monitors.

The defence laptop is also required for the defence to find items in the file directory and to refer to and to quote from legal documents which are not necessarily required to be displayed on the courtroom monitor but are essential to the presentation of the defence case anyway.

DIGITAL PRODUCTIONS LIST

Numbering scheme - document.page.item

8. Productions added in June 2026

8. Document June'26 for the accused.pdf - Google-Drive - Docs
8.3.0 Defence for the accused.pdf - Google-Drive - Docs
8.3.1 Property theft report.pdf - Google-Drive
8.3.2 LiberationfromPolice27Feb26.pdf - Google-Drive
8.4.1 Gmail - to Lord Provost Requesting the army to arrest Chief Constable Jo Farrell.pdf - Google-Drive
8.6.1 BailEdinburgh16Mar26.pdf - Google-Drive
8.9.1 @_Peter_Dow Paki-SNP Islamic Terror 9Dec25.jpg - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.2 VIDEO PeterDow Paki-SNP Islamic Terror - 9Dec25.mp4 - Google Drive
8.9.3 @_Peter_Dow SAVE Khadija Ahmadzada 21 Jan 2026.jpg - on X - Google Drive
8.9.4 SIZWE-BANSI tweet 20 Jan 2026.jpg - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.5 VIDEO - SIZWE-BANSI Khadija Ahmadzada sentenced_to_be_stoned_to_death_in_Afghanistan.mp4 - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.6 @_Peter_Dow Help Afghan Women Girls 7Mar26.jpg - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.7 VIDEO SHAME on Swinney's GESTAPO helping Taliban stone Afghan girls.mp4 - Google-Drive
8.9.8 @_Peter_Dow SWINNEY Afghan girls sold 12Mar2026.jpg - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.9 @_Peter_Dow Kaukab's Pakistan's Taliban sells Afghan girls 12March26.jpg - on X - Google-Drive
8.9.10 VIDEO SkyNews Afghanistan Poor families sell underage daughters into marriage.mp4 - YouTube - Google-Drive
8.9.11 VIDEO Humza Yousaf Pakistani impunity.mp4 - YouTube - Google-Drive

The former First Muslim vs. Peter Dow on "impunity" in international relations

Humza Yousaf, the former First Muslim of Scotland, was interviewed for BBC Sunday Show (BBC1 Scotland) broadcast on 29th March 2026.

This video includes excerpts from that interview and commentary in rebuttal by Peter Dow. The transcript follows.

Gary Robertson: "I started by asking Humza Yousaf about his thoughts about the war in the Middle East and how perilous a moment this is for the world."

Humza Yousaf: "I think it is one of the most challenging, fractious and really worrying times for us as certainly post-war in terms of the the complete collapse of the rules-based order.

International law is being breached and violated with absolute impunity and we are now living in an era where those who are the mightiest and the strongest are the ones who are doing whatever it is, frankly, that they want to do with virtually zero consequences and that of course leaves everybody else at the peril and the mercy of those superpowers."

Gary Robertson: "How should politicians deal with the likes of Donald Trump."

Peter Dow: "Politicians should thank Donald Trump for ending the impunity of Iran, by bombing Iran.

Politicians should deal with Pakistani-organised terrorism by ending Pakistan's impunity and by complaining when the BBC supports Pakistan's impunity by platforming Pakistanis like Humza Yousaf."

Humza Yousaf: "I think, actually, what I would have liked to have seen from world leaders, across the entire globe, is saying, well, actually, we are going to stand by the international rules-based order and there should be consequences for those that violate that and not just ignoring when our allies breach international law but when our enemies breach international law that's the only time that we speak up. That hypocrisy .. clearly erodes trust in the international order."

Peter Dow: "There should be consequences for our enemy Pakistan for supporting the terrorism of Al Qaeda and the Taliban - we should break off diplomatic relations with Pakistan.

The hypocrisy of Pakistani diaspora politicians like Yousaf claiming that Pakistan is our "ally" while Pakistan secretly betrays us and attacks us as our enemy is hypocrisy which erodes trust in Pakistanis and in Muslims generally so Scots and Britons should not vote for them.

Thank you."

The SNP GESTAPO force me off X, & censor me in any social media site

Bail conditions imposed - 16th March 2026

(f) not to use the social media platform 'X' previously known as Twitter

(g) not to make reference to any MP, MSP or Lord Advocate in any social media

After a sleepless weekend in police custody and facing the SNP GESTAPO's threat of remand to Saughton (HMP Edinburgh), I accepted (temporarily) the draconian bail conditions offered.

Saturday, 14th March, began with my tweet to the SNP Conference with hashtag #SNP26

Soon 2 plain clothes detectives from Police Scotland were at my flat door insisting on arresting me. They hurried me into locking the flat up and they drove me to Kittybrewster Police Custody Centre after reading another trumped-up charge from their smartphone. On what pretext I can't remember - was it the "John Swinney's Gestapo women of Scotland - the Taliban's useful idiots" video 

which had set them off - or was it the 

"BASTARD JOHN SWINNEY😡
Afghan girls, same age as Dunblane victims, are sold into marriage under Pakistan's Taliban rule as the SNP GESTAPO arrests and prosecutes me for holding the Pakis to account"

 tweets of the 12th March? Who knows?

I had my finger prints taken by a fragrant Greek woman police officer, which was nice. I asked for a book to read and was offered a paperback copy of "Bravo Two Zero" by Andy McNab. Reading about very brave men in a much more dangerous situation than police custody was fortifying to my own courage.

Later in the day, a prisoner transport van transported me and my borrowed copy of "Bravo Two Zero" from Aberdeen to Edinburgh. (Annoyingly the prisoner cell light was on a timer and it kept switching itself off and I had to repeatedly remind the van staff to put the cell light back on).

It was dark by the time we arrived at St Leonards Police Station where the cells are not as "luxurious" (sarcasm) as Kittybrewster - no intercom, no basin with trickle of water to wet your hands and no way to flush your own toilet - just a push button "help" light. The dim lighting made reading my paperback very difficult.

There I was imprisoned in spartan conditions through Saturday, all day Sunday until a bigger van took all the St Leonards prisoners to Edinburgh Sheriff Court on Monday morning. I asked for and was granted a court custody cell to myself which is less stressful for me.

I had an interview with a mental health nurse where I declared myself to her to be "Fit for court".

Late in the afternoon I was handed a bundle of legal papers, told I couldn't keep them, but I could read them now.

Just from memory they were seeking an order to remand me to HMP Edinburgh, a letter offering legal advice for those facing a "solemn" procedure (with jury and longer prison sentences) and a letter saying that I didn't have to attend the hearing in April as per my signed undertaking to the police of 27th February.

So then I was taken upstairs to the court room where I was asked if I was Alastair Dow?

I told the court that I was Alastair Peter Dow, Bachelor of Science with Honours, a graduate of the University of Edinburgh.

The Sheriff wasn't interested in my supplementary details and said they didn't normally ask for a plea at this stage (of a solemn procedure presumably) but the matter of bail was addressed at this stage.

I suggested simply being ordained to appear (no additional bail conditions beyond the routine).

The fiscal depute said, "in this case" (a politically-motivated witch-hunt) he was prepared to offer bail with the additional bail conditions to get off X etc (see above).

I told the court "Those bail conditions are acceptable to the defence".

With that the Sheriff granted bail with those conditions and ended the hearing.

Short and sweet because that was the quickest and surest way out of the hell of custody. The legal argy-bargy about bail conditions could wait for another day.

The court staff reclaimed the bundle of legal papers and I was soon a free man.

I urgently bought some mouthwash from a shop on Princes Street because my dental health needed it by then and mouthwash is refused in police or court custody.

Then the bus back to Aberdeen for around 10pm.

That was me safe and sound again after another rough long weekend for a political prisoner in John Swinney's SNP GESTAPO police state.

John Swinney's Gestapo women of Scotland - the Taliban's useful idiots

The video begins playing an inset of an Afghan girl being stoned to death. The background's central image is an AI-generated image dressing in Nazi SS uniform Scotland's First Minister and SNP leader John Swinney MSP and Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar MSP in front of the entrance to Auschwitz-Birkenau.

The left and right sides of the background feature the women who run the police state in Scotland. They are -

Kate Forbes MSP, Deputy First Minister,
Dorothy Bain KC, Lord Advocate
Ruth Charteris KC, Solicitor General
Jo Farrell, Chief Constable of Police Scotland
Alison Johnstone MSP, Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament
Christine Grahame MSP, SNP member of the parliament's corporate body
Claire Baker MSP, Labour member of the parliament's corporate body
Maggie Chapman MSP, Green member of the parliament's corporate body.
Lynsey Hamill, Director of Operations at the Scottish Parliament - operations including the Social Media "Monitoring" (actually GESTAPO censorship) unit.

Then Peter Dow speaks saying -

"An innocent Afghan girl was stoned to death after Pakistan helped the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.

Hello. I'm Peter Dow from Aberdeen.

SHAME on the EVIL WOMEN AT THE CORE OF JOHN SWINNEY'S GESTAPO which is arresting and prosecuting me to try to stop me saying one word to help the women and girls of Afghanistan - that word being "Paki" meaning "Pakistani".

Swinney's Gestapo claims - 'Ooh, you can't use THAT word - that's "racist", that's "prejudice", that's a "hate crime", that's a "breach of the peace"'.

Well, no, actually, it's not. I'm correctly using the word "Paki" to hold Pakistanis to account for Pakistan's crimes against humanity.

So shame on Kate Forbes, Dorothy Bain, Ruth Charteris, Jo Farrell, Angela Constance, Alison Johnstone, Christine Grahame, Claire Baker, Maggie Chapman and Lynsey Hamill.

Shame on John Swinney and all his Gestapo's men and women, who are a disgrace to Scotland.

The Scots should call off Swinney's Gestapo police state and let me do my feminist duty. Thank you."

Swinney's Gestapo ambushed me in Edinburgh Sheriff Court yesterday

Yesterday, Friday 27th February, just after representing myself at a "Defence for the Accused" hearing in Edinburgh Sheriff Court, as I was leaving the courtroom, I was arrested by two officers of Police Scotland and taken to St Leonards police station, where at a recorded interview, I owned up to my harmless, dutiful political posts on X, which they charged me was some sort of "crime" and after 5 hours, they liberated me from custody on condition that I attend another court hearing and that I don't mention someone on social media.

Jo Farrell, Chief Constable of Police Scotland

But my property was NOT "liberated" with me. I can't forgive Chief Constable Jo Farrell's thieving pig bastards for stealing my laptop and smartphone for "evidence" that the prosecution won't ever need to prove the complained-about posts were mine.
😡
I, however, need the laptop which I had in court with me to display digital productions evidence for the defence on the courtroom monitor. So the police seizing of my laptop is police criminality by ATTEMPTING TO DEFEAT THE ENDS OF JUSTICE and CONTEMPT OF COURT.

I also used that laptop for science duties in the service of humanity, so police obstructing science by seizing my laptop is police criminality by a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.

Scotland needs a new Chief Constable who will focus on real crime and stop police officers taking their orders from the Scottish Parliament's Gestapo to take political prisoners, crush democracy and commit various other crimes in the process.

I was in custody for about 5 hours and was dropped off at Edinburgh bus station and back to Aberdeen after midnight - long day.

The Scottish Parliament's Gestapo was set up by MSPs of the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body - Jackson Carlaw (Conservative), Maggie Chapman (Greens), Claire Baker (Labour), Alison Johnstone (was Greens now Presiding Officer), Christine Grahame (SNP).

John Swinney (left) and Anas Sarwar (right) in fetching Nazi SS uniform pictured outside the place which inspired their vicious assault on Scottish democracy - Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Lodged "Defence for the Accused" with Edinburgh Sheriff Court

I have today lodged with Edinburgh Sheriff Court the document of some 32 pages, titled "Defence for the Accused".

Link to view online

This is in relation to my tweet as described in my blog post of Wednesday, 12 November 2025

John Swinney's GESTAPO make fresh false charges against me