Forum menu
Private Eye reporting today that Murrell, SNP Compliance Officer Ian McCann, Kirsten Oswald MP, and SNP Nth Lanarkshire chief Tracy Carragher all likely to be interviewed by Police Scotland as part of investigation into sexual assault and harassment allegations against Jordan Linden (the old SNP boss in North Lanarkshire). Presumably as witnesses rather than suspects, and with no arrests.
Are you suggesting that Police Scotland can interview witnesses without them being suspects? Makes you wonder why they had to arrest Nicola Sturgeon eh?
If you are interviewing witnesses there is no need to do it under caution. If you are interviewing potential suspects there is a need to do so under caution. Thats the differnce
If you are interviewing witnesses there is no need to do it under caution. If you are interviewing potential suspects there is a need to do so under caution. Thats the differnce
Unless the witness is a close relative/friend of the suspect, which is almost certainly the case here.
Yep, when I got arrested last it was because it wasn't all that clear if I was a witness or a suspect, so arresting and then releasing without charge covered both bases. In Sturgeon's case there's presumably a possibility that she gets charged so it's being handled for that possibility. (though, I bet 20 scottish pence she never is)
This has been bugging me. I am surprised no one picked me up on it. I posted "The glee some of you show is rather unseemly." which is somewhat hypocritical given the glee I show for the downfall of Trump and the tories.
apologies and you guys missed a chance there 🙂
Tbh I, an SNP member have no idea what the leadership thought they could achieve by sending Nicola Sturgeon a bunch of flowers.
I commend Michelle Thomson for sticking to her guns
TJ cuts out the middleman and argues with himself, good job my man 🙂
TJ
This has been bugging me. I am surprised no one picked me up on it. I posted “The glee some of you show is rather unseemly.” which is somewhat hypocritical given the glee I show for the downfall of Trump and the tories.
I see it as completely different.
I've yet to see the outcome... but I saw Sturgeon as perhaps a very rare mostly honest politician who wants to do the best for the people as she see's it.
Trump, Boris and probably many Tories are from all evidence in it simply for their own benefit.
This also seems like a completely trivial amount of money... not that I'm fully up but isn't it £600k or something? That's only 1/2000th of what my local (Tory) council (for pop 100k) managed to lose somewhere.
’ve yet to see the outcome… but I saw Sturgeon as perhaps a very rare mostly honest politician who wants to do the best for the people as she see’s it.
That's a bit much, she's a politician, so will always embellish the information to support her arguments, same with doing the best for the people, she's not there to do that either.
I put her in the same band as good politicians, the likes of call me dave cameron, tony blair, etc, those who are good orators and are able to ride a popularity wave to the end, we've had so many god awful politicians lately that she stood out in this day and age, but she certainly isn't a shining beacon of honesty, she's had to claw her way up there, for a long time stood shoulder to shoulder with Salmond, who was also deemed a great leader, not look at him after the accusations and nastiness he's shown since being kicked out.
"for a long time stood shoulder to shoulder with Salmond, who was also deemed a great leader,"
If you look at results there is no comparison. Salmond took the SNP vote from a steady 30% to a steady 45-48%and got a referendum. Sturgeon hasn't moved the SNP vote up at all.
Sturgeon failed on drug deaths, NHS waiting lists, ferries, roads, education, etc. Oh, and alcohol deaths.
Her main effort the Minimum Unit Price, based on the flawed idea that alcoholics would cut down if you increased the price has failed. A recent study by a group of Sheffield academics whose model was the justification for the policy admits it didn't work.
https://snowdon.substack.com/p/minimum-pricing-modellers-eat-humble
Plans to deal with drug deaths were quashed by westminster - Drug policy is a reserved issue. just saying like.
Sturgeon became a very marmite figure and a significant % of the Scots population can see no good in anything she did, whilst others can see no wrong. there is not many of us who try to see the reality
So far as I'm aware MUP was not introduced with the intention of preventing "alcoholics" from buying alcohol. When someone has become an alcoholic they're already addicted and require much more than a mere price rise to help them stop drinking.
The point was to reduce drinking amongst those who drink to a very unhealthy level but are not yet addicted. The survey's conclusions show some support for that and for an increase in the minimum unit price which was set in 2011, but which is now too low.
There are many studies which show some support for MUP. For example -
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)00497-X/fulltext
MUP has only been in effect since 2018 since the drinks industry fought so hard to prevent it. It's much too early to make any definite conclusions yet.
If you look at results there is no comparison. Salmond took the SNP vote from a steady 30% to a steady 45-48%and got a referendum. Sturgeon hasn’t moved the SNP vote up at all.
Sturgeon failed on drug deaths, NHS waiting lists, ferries, roads, education, etc. Oh, and alcohol deaths.
Her main effort the Minimum Unit Price, based on the flawed idea that alcoholics would cut down if you increased the price has failed. A recent study by a group of Sheffield academics whose model was the justification for the policy admits it didn’t work.
Can you really compare them? for most of Salmond's term (2004-2010) , nothing happened - the vote share remained around 20-22%, it wasn't until the financial crisis (2008/9), the Tory government (2010) and the resulting austerity (2011 onwards) that the needle really shifted. So, I'd give credit to the Tories for increasing the SNP vote. Sturgeon then had to deal with Brexit, a global Pandemic and a Cost of living crisis, all within 7 years. It's no wonder it was difficult to achieve her goals.
@IRC reread your post and acknowledge that you understand what alcoholism is.
My point remains that MUP was not expected to help alcoholics, but in the longer term to reduce the number of people who are drinking heavily enough to become dependent on alcohol.
Doesn't appear to have worked so far.
"Alcohol-specific deaths in Scotland have increased from 1,020 in 2019 - the year after MUP was implemented - to 1,245 in 2021, the highest count since 2008. "
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23400058.minimum-pricing-count-deaths-never-happen/
TBH I wasn't expecting to see results any time soon. I thought it was more a generational thing.
Well, hold on - to be fair:
And yet, the Lancet study says MUP has saved lives; in short, that without it, the death toll would be even worse.
This is particularly the case in the most deprived areas, where alcohol-specific deaths are estimated to have been up to 33.6% lower than they would have been otherwise.
That seems like a success, doesn't it?
irc
Full MemberIf you look at results there is no comparison. Salmond took the SNP vote from a steady 30% to a steady 45-48%and got a referendum. Sturgeon hasn’t moved the SNP vote up at all.
The real result is, Salmond left behind a party in good order and an heir apparent who'd had the best political training any british political leader except maybe Brown's had for decades. Sturgeon... Not so much. On that alone I'm going to judge her harshly, she was the beneficiary of all that and didn't seem to make any attempt to repeat it.
But to be fair Salmond was always leading towards a single obvious goal, Sturgeon never had that luxury, and a lot of SNP members and voters agree on little apart from independence (and of course a lot of people who moved to the SNP were more comfortable when there was no indyref in sight- my mum would never have voted SNP pre-referendum but afterwards she liked everything else about them). Not to mention the hilarious avalanche of unqualified MPs that were never supposed to actually win seats. Holding that rabble mostly together was not a small achievement. It's like, imagine the tory party if they didn't have one unifying thing to look forward to in the short term? The whole party'd break up by friday if they weren't allowed to make a child cry or rob a hospital.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68850088
Maybe not the right thread but I couldn't find a Murrell one.
According to The National Police Scotland have turned off commenting on their article. Might be worth bearing in mind before commenting on here
https://www.thenational.scot/news/24263341.former-snp-chief-executive-peter-murrell-re-arrested-amid-police-probe/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0op16E89DBz9RvCYOpWV7p0_g3X9aJNGAfDb8Mupd3OmWX7uIlGP8Anho_aem_AdPUfjOmErueLji91mZLTQfUAw4O6g2GP-I3nzUTBePbGFlBymr1hyxn5rWjo53C5ELL339I5No7soReSetWto-h
Now charged with embezzlement. Not a good day overall for the SNP
Methinks this thread should be closed given the warning by Scotland's finest?
Well, the Tories are giving a collective sigh of relief!
Salmond was arrested, charged and acquitted; Sturgeon's spouse was arrested and charged; Yusuf's spouse's brother was arrested and charged. I suppose it's a positive trend that arrests get progressively further away from each successive SNP leader...?
Sorry I must have missed that, what did TJ say?
🤣
Maybe not the right thread but I couldn’t find a Murrell one.
I'm sure that whatever it is that Peter Murrell is alleged to have done, Nicola Sturgeon - his wife and leader of the party of which he was CEO - knew absolutely nothing about it.
Meanwhile, back in mainstream Scottish politics:
- the Scottish government has binned its decarbonisation targets and adopted the pisspoor English and Welsh approach
- life expectancy in Scotland is the worst in Western Europe and the drugs death rate is 3 times higher than in England, despite child poverty being about ⅔ of that in England.
– life expectancy in Scotland is the worst in Western Europe and the drugs death rate is 3 times higher than in England, despite child poverty being about ⅔ of that in England.
perhaps just how you’ve worded that but the likely benefits of child poverty for life expectancy won’t be seen for decades. It IS an important metric but it the important point of Devi’s article is not that the life expectancy is poor but rather that it’s very varied and directly correlates to deprivation.
im not really sure why it in a thread about the former first minister(‘s husband) being arrested though?
im not really sure why it in a thread about the former first minister(‘s husband) being arrested though?
A pathological hatred of the snp ?
As above. The reduction in child poverty which is a direct result of SNP policies will take many years to have any effect on life expectancy and anyway is only one factor.
The SNP government has made mistakes but its important to recognise also what they have done well and one big win is Scotland is a better place to live if you are a child of low income parents or are an adult on benefits
On Murrell. Im suprised he has been charged. I'll still bet no conviction for anything serious
I'm sure life expectancy will shoot up and drug deaths will plummet as soon as we have we have a Labour/whoever coalition after the next Scottish Parliament election.
"the important point of Devi’s article is not that the life expectancy is poor but rather that it’s very varied and directly correlates to deprivation."
And yet deprivation is worse in England but life expectancy and drug death rates are better (well, less worse). It doesn't directly reflect deprivation.
Across a basket of other European countries, drug-induced deaths are highest in Finland (very rich) and lowest in Romania (pretty poor). They don't directly correlate to deprivation.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1066573/drug-induced-deaths-europe/
"A pathological hatred of the snp ?"
Reality has an anti-SNP bias too!
Having briefly viewed drug-death stats the best correlations I can come up with are an inverse correlation with daylight hours in Winter and a positive correlation with crap weather.
When looking at the legal differences I'm stuggling to find any Scottish-made laws that are worse for poorer people than in England. Perhaps the SNP haters can quote some.
Charges brought, so obvious something worth taking through the courts. That'll explain the sudden completely unrelated 'retirement' from politics then.
For the charges to stick they'll have to prove it, in all likelihood everyone concerned is likely to have a 'forgetful' moment so its unlikely the case will hold. Does that mean they didn't do something dodgy / incredibly stupid?
life expectancy in Scotland is the worst in Western Europe and the drugs death rate is 3 times higher than in England, despite child poverty being about ⅔ of that in England.
The Union is working well then...
On Murrell. Im suprised he has been charged. I’ll still bet no conviction for anything serious
Same as with Rayner, it'll be the square root of FA and won't be 'completed' until after the General Election - the latest 'arrest' I reckon is for the local elections.
"the latest ‘arrest’ I reckon is for the local elections."
Just to be clear - are you suggesting someone is directing Police Scotland (and possibly COPFS) to arrest SNP figures before the local elections? If yes, who, and why?
For the charges to stick they’ll have to prove it, in all likelihood everyone concerned is likely to have a ‘forgetful’ moment so its unlikely the case will hold.
Don't you just follow the money trail in an embezzlement case? It's either moved from X account to Y account or it hasn't.
Same as with Rayner, it’ll be the square root of FA and won’t be ‘completed’ until after the General Election – the latest ‘arrest’ I reckon is for the local elections.
This is nowhere near the same as Rayner, she is being investigated currently due to the tories putting in a complaint about potential historic activities, Murrell has undergone investigations for a while now, and has been rearrested and charged on the basis of the evidence.
Again, i think it's a storm in a teacup, but now that Police Scotland have charged him, i do think that he may be found guilty of something, it sounds like he may have bungled up what he was attempting to do, so a slap on the wrist and hopefully it all ends.
The only common thing between them is the absolute waste of police time on this, by that i mean the amount of resource being used on both these issues, which is well out of line with this occurring outside of politicians.
Don’t you just follow the money trail in an embezzlement case? It’s either moved from X account to Y account or it hasn’t.
And whether the paper trail of authority matches the transactions made. It should be a Y/N sort of thing rather than needing anyone to remember anything.
"This is nowhere near the same as Rayner, she is being investigated currently due to the tories putting in a complaint about potential historic activities"
Rayner is either guilty or she isn't. Tax evasion and lying about residence in elections are serious, particularly for someone in a position of public trust (Sturgeon's husband wasn't in such a position, I think). The fact that the Tories made the initial complaint is irrelevant - it's up to the police to investigate independently and the CPS to decide whether to prosecute independently. There's no room for double standards here. Let them investigate and charge and convict - if there's evidence of wrongdoing.
Don’t you just follow the money trail in an embezzlement case? It’s either moved from X account to Y account or it hasn’t.
A bit more to it than that, the crown require to show (with corroborated evidence for each of these points):
1. The accused held another persons money or property, with that person’s permission.
2. The accused had a duty to account to the owner for what he did with the money or property.
3. The accused took the money/ property for his own or did something with it that he did not have authority for.
4. The accused’s actions were in bad faith or were dishonest.
Nobody knows the detail of the charge (ie the specifics they think there is evidence to support - not the rumours and claims originally made to the media. Theoretically it could be he posted a birthday card to him mum using the franking machine at work. Presumably if the evidence chain was really simple and clear there would have been a charge long before now - it’s not like this case has been sitting at the bottom of some overworked PC’s in tray. Because:
The only common thing between them is the absolute waste of police time on this, by that i mean the amount of resource being used on both these issues, which is well out of line with this occurring outside of politicians.
and it probably is right that politicians are held to the highest account given their role in law making. He wasn’t technically a politician but he had a very significant role in political life and I’ve no issue with big questions being asked. But everyone who will say “no smoke without fire” will likely also be angry about sub-postmasters being convicted wrongly!