J'accuse, the greatest legal case in Scottish history might be about to kick off as a Rambler accused of urinating on Donald Trump's golf course is to possibly sue US Presidential candidate, forget Cadder, forget Named Person, forget Fitba, oh to be alive at this special time in history!

Dear All

We are coming to the end of what I call the ‘silly season’ where newspapers will publish any old pish!

And as it transpires here is a story in the public about alleged urination in public.

Peeing in public especially in the urban jungle is not on, we have all seen in our time people jumping up a close or standing beside a wall letting rip. In my street in Govan after a summer session run by the DF Concert mob, one of the female revellers doing a piss beside the hedge outside my close.

Bold as brass with the Police Station in plain view right across the street, and as a political activist been up many a close stinking of urine, and see the odd shit through in there as well. Once during campaigning I witness an activist who needed a piss let rip in a housing scheme of posh houses, what was hilarious was the look on the householder’s face as he looked out of his window.

All we all need to pee, the hills maybe alive with the sound of music, but as people like to do hill walking they do when nature calls pee and empty their bowels, behind my old flat there used to be a farm, the land was covered in cow shit, serious big lumps and a bit whiffy.

This tale of alleged wee is set on Donald Trump's golf course where a 62 year old ‘heroine’ was filmed by  the Republican presidential candidate's staff allegedly urinating behind a sand dune.

The woman Rohan Beyts, a retired social worker and critic of the development at Menie has said to have been charged by police.

In turn this has led to Ms. Beyts being deeply embarrassed and contacting the Govan Law Centre to get the ball rolling and suing the Trump crowd.

Mike Dailly, Solicitor Advocate at Govan Law Centre, which is acting on behalf of Ms Beyts, said:

"We have intimated a civil damages claim against Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd for the sum of £3000 (approximately $4000) for the unauthorised processing and storing of video recordings of Ms Rohan Beyts without the legal authority of the Data Protection Act 1998. These video recordings caused her significant distress. We have strict laws in Scotland on the collection, holding, sharing and processing of personal data to protect an individual's privacy. In Scotland we also have ancient laws - which have also been enacted by the Scottish Parliament - giving individuals the right to roam in the countryside."

I have to say did Mike Dailly advise his client that under the Data Protection Act 1998, a person is allowed to collect evidence if they have a reasonable belief that it is for the prevention of crime. The term ‘reason belief’ is what the employee must have thought and not what Ms Beyts or anyone else thinks.

So, although MS. Beyts who is 62 maybe a tad embarrassed or not I don’t know, she might be onto a sticky wicket.

  

A spokeswoman for Ramblers Scotland said the case is astonishing and that outdoor recreation sometimes requires responsibly answering the call of nature.

One way to end the great pee debate is of course DNA, yes, although this isn’t a murder, if Ms Beyts did as claimed stop off for one, her urine would be soaked into the ground. If the filming doesn’t show her ‘in the act’, this maybe clear up the whole situation, I am see Trump staff out with a bucket and spade as we speak!

Mr. Dailly added:

"We have strict laws in Scotland on the collection, holding, sharing and processing of personal data to protect an individual's privacy”.

As he would also be aware, those strict laws don’t apply if you take into account the exemptions to the Data Protection Act 1998.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/exemptions/

This little bit:

“Crime and taxation

The Act recognises that it is sometimes appropriate to disclose personal data for certain purposes to do with criminal justice or the taxation system. In these cases, individuals’ rights may occasionally need to be restricted.

In particular, the Act deals with several situations in which personal data is processed for

the following “crime and taxation purposes”:

the prevention or detection of crime;

the capture or prosecution of offenders; and

the assessment or collection of tax or duty.”

I wonder if Mr. Dailly has considered this aspect when advising his client?

He also added:

"In Scotland we also have ancient laws - which have also been enacted by the Scottish Parliament - giving individuals the right to roam in the countryside."

Of course those “ancient rights” don’t apply if a crime is allegedly committed by anyone, no matter who passed the law and where. The right to roam doesn’t give you the right to urinate in public and it also doesn’t give you the right to do it on someone property either.

Finally, Dailly added:

"The public right of way is a legally protected route through the Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd golf course."

I doubt the staff are complaining about the protected legal route through the golf course, that would be a waste of their time, their complaint passed on to the Police is a whole different animal indeed.

If more of this gripping story makes it into the public domain then I will keep the blog readers updated of course, the law must always be tested even if the case is seen by some as a load of pish!

I hope the BBC run with this story, it has a certain value.

Yours sincerely

George Laird

The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University