Last week nine High Court judges sat to hear the Lord Advocate argue an 87-year-old ruling on how the law of corroboration is interpreted acts as a barrier to justice, and as such should be overturned. Whatever decision their noble lords reach injustice will continue somewhere in the system and the question should be asked if one interpretation of injustice is simply being traded for another.

Thirty years ago I sat rigidly in the dock in Inverness High Court. A colleague in full dress uniform sat to my left. Between us – a man accused of rape. The evidence had been substantially heard before my stint on “dock duty.” I arrived as the prosecution case was coming to a close.

The experience was horrific. I listened to the testimony of the victim as she sobbed and wretched her way through her account. There was no chicanery on the part of the defence but the experience of retelling the ordeal was harrowing. Right there and then I was in no doubt the man sitting beside me was a rapist. A few hours later the verdict was returned – Not Guilty!

I never slept a wink that night and have often thought about that poor woman over the years. Ultimately that I believed her is of little solace as a jury of 15 had sufficient doubt to acquit.

Some five years later I found myself, as the police often do, in the midst of a tactical series of complaints in a messy marital breakdown. As is not uncommon in such partings, the man was accused by the woman of abusing their........

© Herald Scotland