ALEX Salmond has told a court he had a “consensual sexual liaison” with a woman who alleges he tried to rape her.
The former first minister began giving evidence at his trial at the High Court in Edinburgh yesterday. He denies 13 allegations of sexual offences against nine women.
Salmond earlier told jurors he believes some of the accusations against him have been “deliberate fabrications for a political purpose”.
A former Scottish Government official, known as Woman H, had told the court Salmond attempted to rape her at the first minister’s official residence, Bute House, in June 2014 and sexually assaulted her in May 2014.
READ MORE: Alex Salmond trial: Sexual assault charge dropped
Salmond told the court there were no incidents during those months but there had been a “sexual encounter” the previous year after a dinner and “one thing led to another” on the complainer’s “initiative”.
Under questioning from his lawyer, Gordon Jackson QC, Salmond said: “There was then a consensual sexual liaison. Neither party was naked but in a state of partial undress, in terms of buttons or whatever. It shouldn’t have happened but both of us agreed it would be put behind us.
“It was just two old friends and things had gone too far. Both of us realised it wasn’t a good idea and we parted good friends.”
Salmond said Woman H’s account of an alleged attempted rape was “not true” and she was not at Bute House that night. He said Woman H was “one of my biggest cheerleaders” but seemed “annoyed” after he did not help her professionally in 2015. Alex Prentice QC, for the Crown, suggested: “You attempted to rape her.”
Salmond replied: “I didn’t.”
Questioned about another allegation that he assaulted a woman in his bedroom at Bute House in late 2013, Salmond said he and a Scottish Government official, referred as Woman F, had “collapsed into what I would describe as a sleepy cuddle” on a bed after they drank the Chinese spirit Maotai together.
Salmond said the issue was later raised by one of his staff. He said: “I apologised. I was the first minister. She was in my bedroom. We were tipsy, it shouldn’t have happened.”
Asked if he had intended to rape her, Salmond said: “I have never attempted a non-consensual sexual relationship with anyone during my entire life.”
READ MORE: Woman compares alleged Alex Salmond assault to 'wrestling with an octopus'
Earlier, Salmond said one of his accusers, Woman A, had encouraged at least five other people to exaggerate or make claims against him.
Salmond told the court: “I’m of the opinion, for a variety of reasons, that events are being reinterpreted and exaggerated out of all possible proportion. There were two reasons – one is that some, not all, are fabrications, deliberate fabrications for a political purpose. Some are exaggerations taken out of proportion.”
Salmond agreed with his lawyer that “things that didn’t happen” or “innocent things” had been “turned into sexual offences”. He denied claims there was a policy that prevented him being alone with female civil servants at Bute House.
Salmond is on trial accused of sexual assault, including attempted rape, spanning a period between June 2008 and November 2014.
His lawyers previously lodged special defences of consent and alibi to some of the charges. The trial, before judge Lady Dorrian, continues.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article