Peter Murrell embezzlement - Part 2

[Sunnnyday]

Feel free to post anything about corruption in Scottish politics, and related issues.

There's plenty of corruption at the top of the SNP. Remember this one from 2023, by an SNP minister?
Michael Matheson: Furore over £11,000 iPad bill 'completely blown out of all proportion', says shamed MSP | UK News | Sky News
Matheson said that the reaction to his basically trying to steal £11,000 from the taxpayer was overblown for political reasons. After doing everything he could to pretend that the bill had been incurred on constituency work, so that he could get the taxpayer to pay for his family's personal use of the iPad while abroad on holiday. His sons had been watching the football.
Here's an earlier stage of the scandal, when he was only asked to repay £3,000, out of his expenses budget (so he wouldn't have paid anything out of his own money), with the Scottish Parliament paying the extra £8,000:
Minister Michael Matheson racks up £11k roaming fee on parliament iPad - BBC News

The Scottish Parliament's Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, according to Wikipedia: "reported on 23 May 2024, recommending a 27-day ban from the Scottish Parliament, as well as Matheson's being withheld his salary as an MSP for 54 days. This was described as the toughest sanction ever recommended for an MSP. The First Minister, John Swinney, declared that he would not support the committee's recommended sanction, describing Matheson as a "friend and colleague" who had "made mistakes", and casting doubt on the integrity of the committee's process: describing the process as "prejudiced"". The SNP as a party abstained on the vote to sanction Matheson, as recommended by the committee.

Matheson, having resigned from his ministerial job, continued as an MSP until this year's Holyrood elections. He submitted an application to stand again, but it seems that his constituency wasn't very happy with the idea.

But please don't worry about him too much. He is apparently in gainful work connected to his political roles.

Yes, we should certainly stop trying to hold them to account. I mean, who cares about over 2 million pounds allegedly going missing, on top of what Murrell's admitted to stealing?
And it's very reassuring that John Swinney and the whole of the parliamentary SNP party voted against Matheson being sanctioned for lying to have his personal £11,000 debt paid by the taxpayer. On the basis that Matheson was "a colleague and a friend".
John Swinney, our First Minister. You know, the one who'll do anything to avoid an enquiry into what's happening over funds.

When I was Treasurer of the PT thee was more scrutiny of the accounts than Murrell got

I don’t mean we stop holding them to account, I am all for open transparency around public money. However, going on and on about things that have been decided (like NS being cleared), is just a waste of time and frankly, a distraction, generally driven by those with an agenda. Also, as I understand it, it was agreed to look into party funding, all parties funding. Given how sneaky they can all be re that, I think that’s a good thing, and look forward to seeing that be progressed with all parties.

I really wish they would get on with running the country. Not more stupid court cases; asking for a referendum every five minutes; passing resolutions about world affairs that are outwith their competency or influence; and failing the people of Scotland on every level

And the corruption does matter

Yup. No more banning greyhound racing when we have no tracks, no more banning the theft of dogs when it’s already illegal, no more meaningless platitudes about Gaza, no more burning through piles of public money to ‘protect’ your illegal misogynistic anti-women policies.

Address the £5bn black hole, the soaring violence in schools, fix the shite curriculum, the ever expanding public sector, dualling the A9, fixing the ferries, addressing whether giving all public housing to immigrants is sustainable, get growth and jobs moving. You know all of the hard stuff that you’ve been voted in to do that you keep shirking?

That is really useful thank you…I had not seen this. If only the COPFS didn’t have a glaring conflict of interest with their Lord Advocate undertaking a role in the Scottish Government then it might be compelling. Alas they fail independence by appearance which calls credibility into question. I’m surprised this baffles you.

They don't want to do the hard work of actually running the country like grown-ups. And they never, ever admit that they've got it wrong. As education standards plummet and people with cancer are stuck on waiting lists.

no more banning the theft of dogs when it’s already illegal

And what about cats! The felines of Scotland were very disappointed at the lack of concern for them.

If you remember, there was a committee set up which considered whether Scottish cats should be allowed to go outside. They recommended that legislation should be passed requiring all cats to be kept inside.

From the Scottish Daily Express: "Mr McManus said: "Had a review meeting with my principal solicitor on Friday. The evidence we now have is UTTERLY DEVASTATING. The shocking truth will out. Meanwhile I hope those elite types with a penchant for carefree alfresco boozy lunches in posh London hotspots enjoy … whilst they can"."

McManus (very wealthy man) has taken over Alex Salmond's case against the SNP, despite not being a Salmond ally:

"Speaking in February, he said: "I did not know the late Alex Salmond, and I disagreed with his politics, especially on the matter of Scottish independence. However, I strongly believe that those at the top of the SNP plotted against him and used levers of state which could have resulted in him being wrongly imprisoned. If the government can do this to one of their own, what chance do we, Joe Public, have if they decide to target us? I want to see those responsible held to account and to face consequences."

"Mr Salmond was suing the Scottish Government for misfeasance – a civil law term that means the wrongful exercise of lawful authority – when he died in October 2024 while attending a conference in North Macedonia."

Right, so COPFS, Police Scotland, Crown Counsel, and the Independent KC they consulted, are all in the pocket of the SNP and conspiring to let NS off the hook, and your premise for this assertion is that the Scottish Government, in keeping with a multitude of other governments in democracies, takes legal advice from an appointee who also happens to be a KC themselves.

So what are you getting at here precisely? That Dorothy Bain somehow had the clout to influence every single person from these bodies who played a role in the investigation and prosecution despite not being directly involved herself, or, that these bodies have a vested interest in not showing up Dorothy Bain because she was Lord Advocate at the time, a position which is not an SNP party political appointment, but also a position which would persist and service the needs of government no matter the particular party of governance at the time.

Either way, that's one hell of a lot of corrupt people, and an amazing coincidence that they'd all be SNP-inclined and onboard with protecting NS.

So yes, the continued insistence by some people that NS has been protected from prosecution by a convoluted, wide-ranging conspiracy by the establishment is baffling, as well as absolutely absurd given COPFS's extraordinary transparency in releasing a summary pertaining to the particulars of this prosecution. It's the stuff of tinfoil-hat wearing bampots.

@Sunnnyday

Yes, we should certainly stop trying to hold them to account. I mean, who cares about over 2 million pounds allegedly going missing, on top of what Murrell's admitted to stealing?

Presumably to reach your figure of £2million you are including the 600k originally ringfenced for an Indi campaign. I feel I should point out that it was a complaint about this money having been spent which precipitated the entire Branchform investigation, so yes, that absolutely has already been looked into thoroughly, and there have been no charges or any suggestion that anyone did anything untoward by spending this on day-to-day campaigning.

John Swinney, our First Minister. You know, the one who'll do anything to avoid an enquiry into what's happening over funds

You mean apart from the Holyrood enquiry into all-party management of party funds announced a few weeks back?

Just because this isn't an SNP-only exercise does not mean there is no enquiry. It isn't the enquiry SNP opponents were desperate to see, but then if the other parties have their house in order then there is nothing for them to fear in it.

Wings over Scotland say that the police have responded to them that they don't have evidence of fraud in relation to the £600,000. But they're not alleging that the money was obtained fraudulently. They're alleging that it was misused. It will be interesting to see what comes out of their civil court claim.
It will also be interesting to see what the police conclude after looking at the allegation that over £1.5 million is missing from Scotland First (linked to the SNP). I don't understand what Scotland First mean when they say that the £1.5 million discrepancy in their books is because they changed accountants. Surely accountants use the same methods when dealing with the books, and it's not as though it's a negligible amount of money.

Crown Council is part of the COPFS. There is no information about the independent KC…properly independent of the COPFS or independent of the case under review but still within the COPFS? I don't know…do you? Police Scotland asked for advice from COPFS. You make it sound like they are all completely independent but at least 2 possibly 3 of your list of 4 are part of the same organisation…the same organisation that the fourth party, ie Police Scotland, sought advice from.
Independence here is incredibly easy to blow holes through given all the conflicts.

Just on this point by @XDownwiththissortofthingX :
"John Swinney, our First Minister. You know, the one who'll do anything to avoid an enquiry into what's happening over funds
You mean apart from the Holyrood enquiry into all-party management of party funds announced a few weeks back?
Just because this isn't an SNP-only exercise does not mean there is no enquiry. It isn't the enquiry SNP opponents were desperate to see, but then if the other parties have their house in order then there is nothing for them to fear in it."

I have no interest in protecting any political party. But when one party "loses" hundreds of thousands of pounds by way of its chief executive stealing the money, year after year after year, and a number of people tasked with keeping an eye on the finances resign because they're not allowed proper access to financial documentation, one expects THAT political party to be looked into. John Swinney's response is that the SNP were duped by Murrell who (shock horror) bypassed the expenses protocol. But apparently he had direct access to the accounting system and was able to log purchases himself, while also involving a junior staff member.

Trying to deflect your own misconduct and incompetence is a common tactic, not worthy of the political party that has been entrusted with ruling the country. They have a very serious problem. Own up to it and get it sorted.

As a former PTA and playgroup chair I agree. And I wasn't married to the Treasurer.

There is no information about the independent KC…properly independent of the COPFS or independent of the case under review but still within the COPFS? I don't know…do you?

There is mention of consulting a KC from the Faculty of Advocates re examination of the accused's phone, so it wouldn't be outrageous to suggest they may have approached FoA to independently review the evidence and charges.

You make it sound like they are all completely independent but at least 2 possibly 3 of your list of 4 are part of the same organisation…the same organisation that the fourth party, ie Police Scotland, sought advice from.
Independence here is incredibly easy to blow holes through given all the conflicts

This still changes nothing about the fact you are seemingly alleging a conspiracy which involves dozens, if not hundreds of individuals once you factor in the investigation and not just the prosecution. None of them have broken ranks and blown the whistle, and they all just happen to be onboard with protecting NS.

Furthermore, why would the same people, who supposedly have a vested interest in scuppering a prosecution of NS not afford the same courtesy to Peter Murrell?

If you are suggesting some sort of connivance, corruption, or even just good old fashioned incompetence, it needs to be noted that this was the exact same investigation and prosecution, carried out by the exact same people, which resulted in the conviction and imprisonment of Peter Murrell. By calling their integrity into question, you are also calling Murrell's conviction into question, but unsurprisingly not one of the people who are screaming blue murder about stitch-ups, "deals", and underhandedness is suggesting PM might have been the victim of these corrupt individuals and institutions, no, they got him, so that's all well and good, they are just bent and incompetent with respect to NS, because she "got off".

It really is playground level nonsense

The SNP finances merit investigation as they are the government, and thus charged with managing the finances of the country as well as their own finances

So it matters to us all if they are incompetent or dishonest

There was clearly a huge amount of incontrovertible evidence against Murrell. I think that's what it takes to be charged if you're high up in the SNP.

But approx £60,000 of embezzlement was taken off his charge sheet through negotiation by his lawyers. And some of what was taken off related to "feminine" gifts he bought with SNP money, including female underwear. I can understand why his lawyers asked for those items to be removed from the charge, because no-one would have believed that those presents weren't bought for Nicola Sturgeon, and they would have raised more questions about her knowledge, and possibly about her marital relationship with Murrell. But why was that request agreed to?

Ah well. If it's all nonsense it doesn't matter if we discuss it, does it?

But I would say we need a functioning democracy, with competent politicians running it.

It's not really too much to ask.

The CPS and Police Scotland should be looked at.

Dorothy Bain needs an eye on.

And Sturgeon's friendship with Claire Mitchell KC - is the covid enquiry going to be fair and even handed?

Craig Murray's conviction was also an egregious miscarriage of justice. We shouldn't be jailing journalists for political reasons, even if they are daft pricks.

The list of iffy arrangements over the past ten years is only getting longer and longer, and I say that as an ex SNP member, Yes voter, and leftie. The public needs to be able to have faith in the government and institutions. Democracy is undermined and society is damaged when that is compromised.

If it's all just nothing then the peeps at the top have nothing to worry about.

The photos of Sturgeon with Claire Mitchell KC are very telling.

The Covid Inquiry is a matter of such significance and importance, what is Claire Mitchell thinking?
It demonstrates such a lack of professionalism, cronyism and an astonishing arrogance that seems to seep through the SNP, civil service and legal profession.

Are they entitled to enjoy a drink in the sunshine?
Yes, but honestly, optics folks.

It’s further confirmation that they treat the Scottish electorate with disdain and I really feel for the families involved with the Covid Inquiry.