In my Tommy Sheridan post yesterday afternoon I missed one name from the list of supporters – Jim Monaghan. The name bugged me though as it was familiar. A quick trawl through my Sheridan archive reveals why.
In September 2006 the Observer reported that Jim Monaghan, a media co-ordinator for Solidarity, had had some of his e-mails (sent in the immediate aftermath of the trial) leaked and they stated
“I belive (sic) that some of the stories about Tommy are true but they are overstated and have added sleaze like drinking and spanking.”
He is then quoted as saying in these e-mails that,
“Tommy was asked if the Notw story (married MSP is swinging spanker) could be him, he said yes, some would take that to mean all of it, Tommy meant that it probably was him as he once went to that club with Anvar Khan. So he denied parts of it (cocaine, champagne, spanking). Some remember the denial bits, some remember the admission bits. Human memories are faulty and we remember things the way we want to.”
The report in September 2006 indicated that Monaghan as of that point completely believed Mr Sheridan and did not believe that he attended the club in Manchester – and while he obtained a correction for a description of him in the report, the existence of the e-mails was not denied.
Will Mr Monaghan’s e-mails which suggests that certain comments were made in SSP meetings be used in evidence?
ETA corrected date of Observer story