There are several issues in the Utopia Tours case which remain unclear and to some unconvincing. I have laid out the case based on what I have recently been reading (including the very long yawning bread articles which I had not seen before) and on what I recall from being here at the time and a client of Utopia Tours. I accept much of what Scottish says, but not all. As in all issues that are not cut and dried, there are bound to be several interpretations. Since I can find nothing on the internet, I have had to assume that Scobie was not found guilty of any offence in his native Australia. But, as I'm sure Scottish is aware, when someone has "previous" - or is presumed for some reasons (and in this case there were at east two) of having access to under-age materials - it is natural that more than a degree of suspicion can be attached - rightly or wrongly.
The only other comment I'll make now (as this was a long time ago) is to take issue on your comments re the media release. Sorry, Scottish, here I totally disagree - and PR and damage limitation has been part of my business for a very long time. If a company lawyer issues a statement, it must never leave any hint of doubt that any of the parties involved might be anything other than innocent. Company lawyers don't ditch one to save another - even if they themselves had serious doubts about the truth of the issues surrounding Scobie. In doing so they run the very serious risk of damaging the reputation of both the other director and the business itself - guilt by association. As I recall, this was not the lawyer for Goss - it was a lawyer retained by the company to help fight the charges against it, of which Scobie was the Managing Director. Now if he in fact had concrete proof about Scobie, it would make sense. But not if there was any doubt.