Methodology

This page explains how Accused.scot produces its analysis, where material comes from, how it is assessed, and what standards are applied before anything is published. Understanding the methodology is relevant to anyone who wants to assess the reliability of the site's work or engage critically with its conclusions.

Primary sources

Where possible, analysis is grounded in primary source material. This includes:

• Acts of the Scottish Parliament and UK Parliament
• Court judgments and appeal decisions
• Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission decisions and reports
• Official publications from the Scottish Government, Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, and Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service
• Parliamentary questions, debates, and committee reports
• Freedom of Information responses from Scottish public bodies
• Verified public records and established reporting

Secondary sources are used where primary material is unavailable or where established commentary assists interpretation. Where a secondary source is relied upon, this is indicated.

Freedom of Information

A significant part of the site's work involves Freedom of Information requests submitted under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Requests are directed at Scottish public bodies, including the Scottish Government, COPFS, the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, and Police Scotland, where there is a specific analytical reason to seek the information.

Responses are published and analysed in terms of what they reveal, what they decline to disclose, and what the refusal grounds themselves indicate about how institutions handle transparency obligations.

Where a response confirms that no recorded information exists, that finding is treated as analytically significant in its own right.

Distinguishing fact, analysis, and opinion

Material on the site is assessed against three categories before publication.

Fact — information that can be traced directly to an identifiable source. If a fact cannot be sourced, it is not presented as fact.

Analysis — interpretation of legal procedure, evidential rules, institutional behaviour, or public reporting. Analysis is clearly presented as such and is distinguished from the underlying facts it draws on.

Opinion — editorial reflection on broader questions of fairness, justice, or public understanding. Opinion pieces are presented in that context and are not represented as factual conclusions.

These categories may appear within the same article. They are not treated as interchangeable.

Verification

Claims are checked against available source material before publication. Where a claim cannot be independently verified, this is stated. The site does not publish allegations against named individuals as though they were established facts. Where material involves ongoing proceedings, care is taken to report only what is part of the public record.

Limitations

The site operates without access to full court records, confidential legal correspondence, or material that has not entered the public domain. Analysis is therefore bounded by what is publicly available or lawfully obtained. Conclusions are presented accordingly, as reasoned assessments of available material, not as definitive findings.

Where the available material is insufficient to support a firm conclusion, this is said plainly rather than papered over.

Updates and corrections

Where new information materially affects a published analysis, the relevant article is updated with a dated note explaining what has changed and why.

Factual errors are corrected promptly. The correction is noted in the article rather than made silently.

Corrections can be submitted to contact@accused.scot.