> I want to touch on one other aspect of liberty in my own imprisonment that appears not understood, or perhaps simply neglected, because somehow the very notion of liberty is slipping from our political culture. One point that features plainly in the troll talking points to be used against me, recurring continually on social media, is that I was ordered to take down material from my blog and refused.
> There is an extremely important point here. I have always instantly complied with any order of a court to remove material. What I have not done is comply with instructions from the Crown or Procurator Fiscal to remove material. Because it is over 330 years since the Crown had the right of censorship in Scotland without the intervention of a judge.
...
> What is even more terrifying in my case is that the Court explicitly states that I should have followed the directions of the Crown Office in what I did and did not publish, and my failure to not publish as the Crown ordered is an aggravating factor in my sentencing.
> If the Crown thinks something I write is in contempt and I think it is not, the Crown and I should stand as equals in court and argue our cases. There should be no presumption I ought to have obeyed the Crown in the first place. That Scottish “justice” has lost sight of this is disastrous, though perhaps as much from stupidity as malice.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/08/keeping-free...
Even if they have no legal right to?
You can seek relief from other judges if you don’t like it. Anything else and you go to jail.
My experience doing tech support for them when I was young is that they are the most arrogant people imaginable.
If you don't think the order is within the legal bounds of the power, you can appeal it. (News organisations do this semi-regularly). What you shouldn't do is breach it and hope to get off at the contempt hearing.
applied to all but journalists?