Peter Murrell court delay sparks fury as embezzlement case pushed beyond election, handing SNP a politically convenient escape from scrutiny
The former SNP chief executive will not be required to enter a plea in his embezzlement case until after the Scots vote in the Scottish Parliament Election – with the Scottish Government denying any involvement in the delay
A senior SNP figure has refused to say if the party will benefit from the Peter Murrell court case being pushed back until after the Scottish Parliament election. The former Nat chief faces embezzlement charges but will now not have to enter a plea until May 25, after it was delayed from February 20.
It means that the case will not be concluded until after voters go to the polls to decide on the next Scottish Government. According to reports, the delay was at the request of Murrell’s legal team who want more time to prepare the case. However, it also came after extensive details from the indictment were published on Friday, breaking Scotland’s strict reporting guidelines.
The SNP executive faced pressing questions about what it knew about this and whether it was involved in the decision. Former Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross probed Parliament Minister Graeme Dey on the issue at Holyrood, where he denied knowing or interfering in the case.
Mr Ross worded his query "very specifically" as he asked "whether anyone who works for the Scottish Government, including ministers, special advisers or civil servants, was involved in discussions concerning the postponement of the trial of Peter Murrell until after the Scottish Parliament election in May."
He was told no, and contested this, pointing out that there are "almost 20 special advisers, almost 30 government ministers and over 9,000 civil servants within the Scottish Government." He went on: "So given Graeme Dey has just given a categorical reassurance that none of these almost 10,000 individuals had any involvement or any discussions at all, can he update Parliament on how he was able to assemble that information from over 10,000 individuals in the last couple of days?
"And if he wasn’t, has he just come here to try and fob off Parliament, which is a signal of this corrupt government and from a corrupt party of government?" Mr Dey "refuted" these allegations and warned that it is still a live court case and we should "be cautious about our comments in relation to that."
Mr Ross was furious about this response, saying: "The Minister is still avoiding this. So has he gone round almost 10,000 people in the last couple of days to check whether they had discussions or not? And if he hasn’t, he cannot give that categorical response. And this comes down to transparency, because this stinks.
"It absolutely stinks that an accusation that was first made before the 2021 Scottish Parliament election will now not come to court until after the 2026 Scottish Parliament election. And does the Minister not even realise or simply accept how bad this looks for his party, and the party that are in government at the moment because of this delay and this postponement, the reporting restrictions cannot now be lifted until after the Holyrood Election. Will he at least accept that his party benefits from that?"
Mr Dey refused to answer this question, pointing that the court process is independent of the government. Mr Murrell will appear at Edinburgh High Court on May 25, nearly 20 days after polling day. He was charged with embezzling funds from the SNP following Operation Branchform.
Speaking afterwards, Mr Ross said: “This was pure evasion from an SNP minister who was carrying the can for this corrupt government. The public will find it hard to believe that Graeme Dey was able to get a categorical reassurance from his colleagues and the army of civil servants over the last few days that they had no discussions whatsoever around the postponement of this hearing.
“He also clearly didn’t want to admit that the SNP breathed a collective sigh of relief at hearing this news. They were dreading the prospect of an election campaign being dominated by headlines and questions about the alleged behaviour of their disgraced former chief executive.
“Scots deserve an explanation as to why this case which was first reported in 2021 against Nicola Sturgeon’s husband will now not be dealt with until after she is no longer an MSP after May’s election.”
Read more similar news:
Comments:
comments powered by Disqus
