HAD the builders of the Skye bridge put the tollbooths on the Skye side of the bridge rather than at Kyle of Lochalsh, the Skye bridge cases would have been heard in Portree Sheriff Court and not 80 miles away in Dingwall, bailiwick of Sheriff James Fraser.
It was on his shoulders and those of the resident procurator-fiscal, David Hingston, that the bulk of the Skye bridge work fell. It was quite a load: about 400 prosecutions started; almost 130 completed; all peppered by appeals to relevancy and competency to the High Court, not to mention appeals against conviction.
Until last summer, when there was a change in prosecution policy, the Skye bridge campaigners were effectively clogging up the judicial system in the north. It was clear from the outset that the Crown Office did not appreciate the pressure that was being put on the court in Dingwall. What effect it had on Sheriff Fraser and Mr Hingston, hearing what was, in substance, the same case over and over again, we shall never know.
Without any thought of a campaign of direct action, the Government had made it a criminal offence not to pay the tolls without reasonable excuse, so all those who refused to pay had to be tried. The sheer volume of casework became ludicrous, but for more than a year there was no relief.
Although other sheriffs did and still do some of the work, it was Sheriff Fraser who became most closely associated with it in the public mind.
His reputation had gone before him; a notoriously short temper which would brook no mischief in his court, particularly from visiting lawyers from the south who might in any way appear to patronise. Lawyers, advocates, or QCs heading up from Edinburgh are counselled by fellow professionals, who have appeared in his court and do not always feel they are given a chance to develop their defence because of his bullying.
Certain other things are not done at Dingwall; for example, woe betide anyone who parks in Sheriff Fraser's reserved parking space, or even on occasion the one behind it.
For all his awesome reputation, Sheriff Fraser can display considerable humanity, going to some lengths to give some poor wrongdoer another chance to stay out of jail. A highly intelligent man, he is also possessed of considerable humour. What confuses most, however, is that the extremes of his temperament can follow hard on each other.
Despite it all, Sheriff Fraser very nearly established himself as a Skye hero. On June 10, he staggered most by warning that the Skye bridge legislation could be flawed in that it did not say who should pay the tolls.
He would not hear any other cases for a month while he pondered this proposition.
The absence of any formal identification of who was liable to pay the tolls was serious: ''I consider that to be a real argument on both sides. If I was to decide the point causing me concern in favour of the defence, then, subject to appeal, the Crown has no escape. If I was to decide that, the Crown can't succeed in this prosecution nor in any other.''
The implications for the Government would have been enormous, but Sheriff Fraser dismissed the complaint as irrelevant on
July 10.
The tolls stayed in place, however, because the Crown appealed, and on July 30 three appeal court judges overturned Sheriff Fraser's ruling. It was back to Dingwall.
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