accusing the UK leadership of a “generational fumble”that's the sort of antics that usually makes it into the Sun!
I really wanted to like Jeremy Corbyn I thought he had principles. I really wanted Your Party to be more than a flash in the pan. I don't like Jeremy Corbyn so far as Scotland is concerned he has no principles. Your Party never even reached "flash in the pan " status.
Sturgeon, who served as an MSP from 1999 until the dissolution of the Scottish parliament earlier this month,
That would be news to her constituents given she's been MIA since stepping down as FM.
She was in holyrood for the assisted dying debate at least - voted against in the end Grrrrrrrrrr
I thought i would resurect this thread
but what a dull election really in Scotland. much as predicted really with a small drop in snp support. labour and tories getting pasted. reform getting a few seats and greens doing well
the hybrid electorl system has worked in tbe snps favour with them being over represented
greens winning two constituencies is probably the biggest news
just to reiterate reform did not win a single constituency and thus would be unlikely to gain any scottish seats in a ge. came close in one
In a delightful little ray of irony it appears that J.K.Rowling is now represented by a transgender MSP.
Ooft indeed. Tin pail for him surely?
The charges admitted start from the month after he married Sturgeon so to me it's perfectly plausible it's access via her records that's allowed them to have the proof that means he had to admit his guilt. The dates are just too coincidental. It feels entirely implausible that he wasn't doing similar before his marriage. He's just got away with it (thus far). Surely Sturgeon needs to answer questions about how she didn't notice how the family household coffers were so amply stocked. I 'think' I'd notice if Mrs C and I were on average £40K a year better off than I'd expect after tax. Even a very incurious (and busy) spouse would be a bit curious.
Well I never. I am very suprised and as ever my prediction was totally wrong.
Murrell and Sturgeon were really living seperate lives for many years were they not?
The charges admitted start from the month after he married Sturgeon so to me it's perfectly plausible it's access via her records that's allowed them to have the proof that means he had to admit his guilt. The dates are just too coincidental. It feels entirely implausible that he wasn't doing similar before his marriage. He's just got away with it (thus far). Surely Sturgeon needs to answer questions about how she didn't notice how the family household coffers were so amply stocked. I 'think' I'd notice if Mrs C and I were on average £40K a year better off than I'd expect after tax. Even a very incurious (and busy) spouse would be a bit curious.
So very much this.
I 'think' I'd notice if Mrs C and I were on average £40K a year better off than I'd expect after tax. Even a very incurious (and busy) spouse would be a bit curious.
Sometimes consistency is the way to hide these things - often fraud only becomes apparent when the fraudster stops. It means that a fraudster is paradoxically often driven to continue offending simply by the fear of being caught if they stop. An 'extra £40k' isn't extra if it's always there. Becomes very apparent when it suddenly isn't there of course. And by the same measure from the victims point of view £40k a year suddenly being available when it routinely isn't gives the game away.
But in Murrell's case a lot of this wouldn't have been evident in terms of their being extra money sloshing around in the joint bank account or wads of cash under the bed - its seems more to have been using company transactions to buy goods/services for his own (or perhaps their own) use.
I mean a lot of people on this forum seem to have a strategy for slipping another new bike in the shed without their wife noticing - how different is it to do the same with motor home? 🙂 But then cosmetics and jewellery are amongst the purchases - I think Nicola would definately noticed if he'd stopped wearing makeup.
The charges admitted start from the month after he married Sturgeon so to me it's perfectly plausible it's access via her records that's allowed them to have the proof that means he had to admit his guilt. The dates are just too coincidental. It feels entirely implausible that he wasn't doing similar before his marriage. He's just got away with it (thus far). Surely Sturgeon needs to answer questions about how she didn't notice how the family household coffers were so amply stocked. I 'think' I'd notice if Mrs C and I were on average £40K a year better off than I'd expect after tax. Even a very incurious (and busy) spouse would be a bit curious.
1. I have no idea what Mrs P earns - I could probably come up with a rough guess, but it could be out by 10k in either direction - that’s before her annual bonus is taken into account, even she doesn’t seem to know what that’s going to be until someone produces a spreadsheet,. I have even less idea how much of her earnings she decides to put in her pension and how much she takes out.
2. She is probably similarly unaware of my earnings. We occasionally discuss large financial transactions. We have a joint account but mostly use our own separate accounts for “life”.
3. we don’t have “investments” but I know people who have their sort of incomes and lifestyles who do and their income/wealth becomes even less transparent.
4. The reports don’t suggest he was taking cash but rather putting stuff through the “company” which was for personal benefit. The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying) and it’s not unusual for executives to have company cars. Given she couldn’t drive - cars were probably low down her priority list.
5. Early reports suggested he had leant significant sums to the party to support cash flow - I’d suggest that is not something which would raise suspicion.
so whilst some people are convinced she must have known I think that’s based on superimposing your relationship onto theirs, and presuming your financial circumstances translate to theirs. Even if she had been suspicious or fully aware - proving it is very different from throwing allegations around.
The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying)
Wow. Surprised that anyone is still hanging on to this nonsense.
Wonder if we can get that police team to look at Farage and his mates.
Not a snowballs chance in hell of Farage being investigated in that same way. IMO he's very much an establishment creation.
Is there some evidence I missed that they actually used it? I'm not saying it was a good use of funds, I'm saying that if you are the FM and your party CEO says we've bought you a camper in case you need it for accommodation during a covid election campaign I don't think your first thought is "sounds like a racket", rather more "that's one less thing on my plate". Its likely that it was the process of buying it rather than the purchase itself where he's come unstuck. I'd certainly hope that the FM (of any party) isn't scrutinising the party finances in great detail nor auditing the CEO's adherence to financial process. That doesn't seem a good use of their time.The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying)
Wow. Surprised that anyone is still hanging on to this nonsense.
I have no idea what Mrs P earns
Similar-ish here but the other way round. Mrs Bob has no idea about our household finances. She doesn't know who we're paying, what it's for and how much. I look after the household finances as 80% of our household income comes from me. I sort out the council tax, the insurances, the cars, the household maintenance etc. if I got hit by a bus tomorrow she wouldn't have a clue what was due and when (I really should write this down for her!)
So it's not a huge leap of faith to assume she was oblivious to what he was doing. It wasn't massively frivolous spending. He wasn't rocking up in a new Ferrari every 6 months.
1. I have no idea what Mrs P earns - I could probably come up with a rough guess, but it could be out by 10k in either direction - that’s before her annual bonus is taken into account, even she doesn’t seem to know what that’s going to be until someone produces a spreadsheet,. I have even less idea how much of her earnings she decides to put in her pension and how much she takes out.
Whilst I appreciate most of your points but this.....
Yes, I appreciate for a lot of couples (especially if you get together later in life) you won't be all over each others incomes. But your suggestion of being out by as much as £10k is telling...because it sounds like a lot. Assuming Mrs P is a reasonable earner that £10k is what, £3.5-4k pa take home. This is ten times that. Or to put it another way, he'd have have to be earning roughly £100k pa more a year to have an equivalent level of liquidity.
2ndly - they worked for the same party. Surely as part of her job as leader of the party, bits of paper detailing the accounts and the earnings of those on the pay role would drift past her from time to time. She was in a much better position to be aware of the financial position of her spouse than most.
Obviously lots of people live with partners that are not entirely honest about their financial goings on. And I'm not suggesting she was complicit. It's just a very bad look.
The resignation of Douglas Chapman as Treasurer over claims of a lack of openness should have been a massive red flag.
@poly - is the timing of Murrells guilty plea significant? I'm just wondering why wait until the appearance in court?
you need stop listening to tories about how much tax you pay! Even at Scottish higher rate tax, + NI, + default pension you’d take home 50% of the difference. As she works 4 days a week, and salary sacrifices into her pension then I think she would probably either be taking 10k more into here pension or about 7k more home!1. I have no idea what Mrs P earns - I could probably come up with a rough guess, but it could be out by 10k in either direction - that’s before her annual bonus is taken into account, even she doesn’t seem to know what that’s going to be until someone produces a spreadsheet,. I have even less idea how much of her earnings she decides to put in her pension and how much she takes out.
Whilst I appreciate most of your point but this.....
Yes, I appreciate for a lot of couples (especially if you get together later in life) you won't be all over each others incomes. But your suggestion of being out by as much as £10k is telling...because it sounds like a lot. Assuming Mrs P is a reasonable earner that £10k is what, £3.5-4k pa take home.
but it doesn’t sound like he was bringing home cash - the list of stuff is now being published in the press, it’s expensive watches etc - I find it staggering that people spend more on a watch than a bike and it would easily be possible for a spouse to be unaware of that. The other big transactions were vehicles and although these seem to have been bought outright it would not be at all unusual for them to be on finance.This is ten times that. Or to put it another way, he'd have have to be earning roughly £100k pa more a year to have an equivalent level of liquidity.
I don’t know? I’m not quite sure what the responsibilities of the leader and CEO are? I assumed the CEO ran the party so she could focus on politics. I don’t know if that’s a common structure.2ndly - they worked for the same party. Surely as part of her job as leader of the party, bits of paper detailing the accounts and the earnings of those on the pay role would drift past her from time to time.
well I assume his salary was “public” knowledge - but put bluntly many people only worry about how much their spouse earns if they are struggling to make ends meet. Clearly they weren’t.She was in a much better position to be aware of the financial position of her spouse than most.
Obviously lots of people live with partners that are not entirely honest about their financial goings on. And I'm not suggesting she was complicit. It's just a very bad look.
I think there are others more directly involved in the governance and financial oversight of the party who would seem to have more questions to answer. I wouldn’t want to be in Sturgeons shoes, and agree that even if she’s another victim, that it makes whatever is next for her in life difficult. But there are people in the party who should have been protecting the party from awkward questions never mind fraud!
@poly - is the timing of Murrells guilty plea significant? I'm just wondering why wait until the appearance in court?
I don't think so. The system is pretty archaic and I don't think he's actually formally had the opportunity to plead until this court sitting (the process can start by letters before hand, but in this case seems to have been by negotiating away certain parts of the charge).
Cheers 👍
@poly - is the timing of Murrells guilty plea significant? I'm just wondering why wait until the appearance in court?
I don't think so. The system is pretty archaic and I don't think he's actually formally had the opportunity to plead until this court sitting (the process can start by letters before hand, but in this case seems to have been by negotiating away certain parts of the charge).
Could he not have pleaded at Edinburgh Sheriff Court last year, minus the disputed £50k?
That seems like a good plea bargain to me
Or even admitted his guilt in early 2023? That would have cut the investigation costs and time to charging by a year.
I've just read the list of stuff he was buying on BBC, and even if Nicola had nothing to do with the home finances, rocking up with £2.6k salt and pepper grinders should arouse anyone's suspicion.🫣 Even my Mrs would Google them and ask WTF!
The types of things he was purchasing do paint a certain picture about him
he’s been remanded pending sentencing.Ooft indeed. Tin pail for him surely?
Another SNP fraudster got 2 years for stealing £25k so what's the guesses for Murrell,s sentence for stealing far more?
4 years?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-61994020
I'd think 6 years or even 8. £400k is a serious amount.
As ever the local right wing press are using this as a stick to beat the SNP with.
if you are the FM and your party CEO says we've bought you a camper in case you need it for accommodation during a covid election campaign I don't think your first thought is "sounds like a racket",The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying)
Wow. Surprised that anyone is still hanging on to this nonsense.
"The campervan was just resting on my mother's driveway".
@poly - is the timing of Murrells guilty plea significant? I'm just wondering why wait until the appearance in court?
I don't think so. The system is pretty archaic and I don't think he's actually formally had the opportunity to plead until this court sitting (the process can start by letters before hand, but in this case seems to have been by negotiating away certain parts of the charge).
Could he not have pleaded at Edinburgh Sheriff Court last year, minus the disputed £50k?
That seems like a good plea bargain to me
Or even admitted his guilt in early 2023? That would have cut the investigation costs and time to charging by a year.
I don’t *think* he could have pleaded at the Petition hearing in the Sheriff Court - it might theoretically be possible but it would be exceptional - they are closed courts which are reported in the press as “no plea or declaration was made”. Usually the first time the accused is officially asked their plea is at the hearing held today. That was originally scheduled for February but put back (possibly because they were discussing £59k of stuff).
if you are the FM and your party CEO says we've bought you a camper in case you need it for accommodation during a covid election campaign I don't think your first thought is "sounds like a racket",The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying)
Wow. Surprised that anyone is still hanging on to this nonsense.
"The campervan was just resting on my mother's driveway".
I don’t think there is parking at the SNP HQ? So whilst you might expect they’d keep it in a recognised storage place if would save them a chunk to keep it somewhere else. It IS apparently listed in the SNP accounts as an asset of the party so it seems it’s Shrodingers van - both a party asset and something acquired by Murrell. It will be interesting to see what the detailed narrative says at the sentencing.
well to be fair they quite often blame the victims of crime whether it’s cyclists or young women who were asking for it or did too little to protect themselves / fight back!As ever the local right wing press are using this as a stick to beat the SNP with.
if you are the FM and your party CEO says we've bought you a camper in case you need it for accommodation during a covid election campaign I don't think your first thought is "sounds like a racket",The cars and the campervan. The camper actually had a moderately plausible excuse (especially as they don’t seem to have used it for holidaying)
Wow. Surprised that anyone is still hanging on to this nonsense.
"The campervan was just resting on my mother's driveway".
I don’t think there is parking at the SNP HQ? So whilst you might expect they’d keep it in a recognised storage place if would save them a chunk to keep it somewhere else. It IS apparently listed in the SNP accounts as an asset of the party so it seems it’s Shrodingers van - both a party asset and something acquired by Murrell. It will be interesting to see what the detailed narrative says at the sentencing.
As Swinney says
: “ We had just hired a bus for two and a half weeks for the election campaign, that makes sense to me."
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/16305860/peter-murrell-campervan-trips-spend-clue/
It IS apparently listed in the SNP accounts as an asset of the party so it seems it’s Shrodingers van - both a party asset and something acquired by Murrell.
Well it makes up more than a 1/4 of the sum he's been charged over and pled guilty to and not part of the £50-60k that was being quibbled over. Putting something 'through the books' thats actually for personal use would fall quite happily under 'false accounting' I'd have thought. I wonder if the HMRC will take an interest - they'll be looking for their BIK if a company vehicle is being kept at a private address, especially as it was never actually used for campaigning.
Would be interesting to know if anyone other than him have ever even had their hands on the keys
I've just read the list of stuff he was buying on BBC, and even if Nicola had nothing to do with the home finances, rocking up with £2.6k salt and pepper grinders should arouse anyone's suspicion.
Even my Mrs would Google them and ask WTF!
It's been an education reading that list. I know from threads on here that some people are daft enough to pay ridiculous money for watches and fountain pens, for some reason, but who knew that you could buy a pair of Lalique salt and pepper grinders for a mere £2,618.16.
I mean, for a start, why would you price them like that? If you're going to price them in the knowledge that you're selling them to idiots with more money than sense, surely you'd round it up and say '3 grand for those salt and pepper grinders mate. Nice aren't they? You'll taste every penny of that 3 grand and know it's been money well spent when you put some salt and pepper onto your poached eggs, trust me!'
Mrs Binners did comment that she wouldn't be able to tell the difference between some Lalique salt and pepper grinders and some that I'd just ordered from Amazon (and doubted anyone else could either?), so she wouldn't question those.
However, if I rocked up one day in a brand new camper van (125 grand), then turned up in a new Jag (80 grand), she'd be asking a few questions as to where I'd suddenly found not far shy of quarter of a million quid.
Nichola Sturgeon is either the most cluelessly naive person on the planet or she knew fine rightly what he was up to . Neither is a good look.
Lalique salt and pepper grinders for a mere £2,618.16.
You can pick them up at the that discount store in Knightsbridge for £2,200 as well.
Idiot.
Nichola Sturgeon is either the most cluelessly naive person on the planet or she knew fine rightly what he was up to . Neither is a good look.
Apparently she was unconcerned because "Both of us are high earners, and neither went on holiday or socialised much"
Lalique salt and pepper grinders for a mere £2,618.16.
You can pick them up at the that discount store in Knightsbridge for £2,200 as well.
Idiot.
To be fair - if I came back from the antiques shop with those my wife would believe me if said they were a tenner!!
yep, it's remarkable how much the Venn diagram of "expensive" and "tasteless" overlap.
I'm sure there were plenty of people during the pandemic who were working their backsides off whilst their other half was sat at home on furlough buying a ton of overpriced tat they didn't need.
I had a look at the list. Other than the motor vehicles I can accept that there was nothing that individually screamed "how can we afford that"? The S&P set is a good example as I'd have no clue how much they cost and could easily imagine them being from IKEA. If the motorhome is listed as a party asset then even that wouldn't have raised my suspicions, though I'd have thought the party leader would have been involved in the decision to acquire it in the first place.
If it's true that Sturgeon intentionally hampered the investigation then that maybe puts a different light on things. Her multiple denials of financial issues in the party also make me suspicious. Was she simply asking Murrell if they were true or was she looking into it at all? Again, the resignation of the previous SNP Treasurer over lack of openness should have been a concern.
And there's still the question of why a £675,000 independence fund was diverted to party coffers in the first place.
yep, it's remarkable how much the Venn diagram of "expensive" and "tasteless" overlap.
I had the misfortune of visiting the 'Masterpeice' show at Battersea a couple of times for work. With a few exceptions it was a confirmation that taste and the accumulation of money are not necessarily symbiotic. it must take a particular sort of crafts person to work in this world - "how can I make this thing look a bit more shiny and bit more shit so some brain dead half wit will pay me a stupid amount of money yet still retain myself any credibility as a creator". I think you'd have to have an alter ego.
