Nicola Sturgeon

  • Thread starter Thread starter worsleyweb
  • Start date Start date
The SNP had a Treasurer during the period of criminality. Colin Beattie who is still my MSP. The internal controls and governance inside the party must have been pretty much non existent to allow this to happen over a prolonged period yet Swinney's approach seems to be 'someone has fessed up, let the law deal with him, lets move on'.

Well no. That isn't fucking good enough. It needs a proper independent investigation of how this happened and how governance has been 'strengthened' if he and his party are to be ever trusted again. The fact that they have been voted back into government tells you how fucking atrocious the other parties are in Scotland. Gain independence? This lot cannot even control their own bank account.


Edit

just double checked and its worth adding to some of that. In fact prior to the appointment of Colin Beattie, In 2021, while Nicola Sturgeon led both government and a dominant SNP machine run by her husband Peter Murrell, party treasurer Douglas Chapman resigned, saying he had not received the financial information or support needed to fulfil his fiduciary duties. That should have set alarm bells ringing. A treasurer publicly saying he cannot properly oversee party finances is not routine dysfunction. Sturgeon did not publicly launch any independent inquiry or visible governance improvements; the issue largely passed as internal party friction. With Murrell now convicted of embezzlement, the unanswered question is pretty stark: was this an ignored warning sign of systemic governance failure?

The Chapman resignation made it difficult for Sturgeon to credibly claim ignorance of governance concerns around SNP finances, even if there is no proof she knew of criminality.
 
Last edited:
Not quite sure what the script is with proceeds of crime in Scotland but in England and Wales, given the nature of his offending he would definitely be subject to a POCA order. A lot may depend on whose name the house is in. I’m pretty sure POCA can only go back six years from the criminal proceedings commencing though, civil limitation period applying. And he would do more bird if he didn’t pony up. POCA can be brutal.

And he will be getting a good stretch btw. Too egregious a breach of trust and over too long a period of time for that not to be the case.

Think the maximum sentence for theft is ten years in England and Wales. If so, after a guilty plea at a late stage reckon he’s looking at a five stretch.

Edit, theft is seven, it’s fraud that is ten. Haven’t even checked what he’s pleaded to. Assumed it was theft. If so, given the lower statutory maximum I’ll adjust that prediction to four years.

Second edit: having looked it up I think embezzlement is normally charged under the Fraud Act 2006, so I re-revert to a five year prediction if that is the case.

Fuck me, I’m all over the place!
 
Last edited:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Not quite sure what the script is with proceeds of crime in Scotland but in England and Wales, given the nature of his offending he would definitely be subject to a POCA order. A lot may depend on whose name the house is in. I’m pretty sure POCA can only go back six years from the criminal proceedings commencing though, civil limitation period applying. And he would do more bird if he didn’t pony up. POCA can be brutal.

And he will be getting a good stretch btw. Too egregious a breach of trust and over too long a period of time for that not to be the case.

Think the maximum sentence for theft is ten years in England and Wales. If so, after a guilty plea at a late stage reckon he’s looking at a five stretch.

Edit, theft is seven, it’s fraud that is ten. Haven’t even checked what he’s pleaded to. Assumed it was theft. If so, given the lower statutory maximum I’ll adjust that prediction to four years.

Second edit: having looked it up I think embezzlement is normally charged under the Fraud Act 2006, so I re-revert to a five year prediction if that is the case.

Fuck me, I’m all over the place!
Click to expand...
From what I understand, the court has not yet finalised confiscation values. That comes later in proceeds of crime proceedings. The indictment listed dates, purchase prices and transaction details. No final disposal of proceeds will be made until much later albeit it is unlikely the SNP will get back that much. In fact other scenarios are the state keeps what’s left or the proceeds are shared between state/snp.
If the proceeds fall short of what was embezzled then prosecutors will look at whether he has recoverable financial interest in other assets such as property. Hope I have got that right. Does that sound similar to England?
I think your estimate of a sentence is pretty much bang on. I think it’s scheduled for 23rd June.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
From what I understand, the court has not yet finalised confiscation values. That comes later in proceeds of crime proceedings. The indictment listed dates, purchase prices and transaction details. No final disposal of proceeds will be made until much later albeit it is unlikely the SNP will get back that much. In fact other scenarios are the state keeps what’s left or the proceeds are shared between state/snp.
If the proceeds fall short of what was embezzled then prosecutors will look at whether he has recoverable financial interest in other assets such as property. Hope I have got that right. Does that sound similar to England?
I think your estimate of a sentence is pretty much bang on. I think it’s scheduled for 23rd June.
Click to expand...
Yes it’s sounds the same mate.
 
Police: Did you know your husband was stealing your party’s money?
Sturgeon: No comment.
Police: Where did you think the camper van came from?
Sturgeon: No comment
Police: Are you thick or a thief?
Sturgeon: No comment.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Not quite sure what the script is with proceeds of crime in Scotland but in England and Wales, given the nature of his offending he would definitely be subject to a POCA order. A lot may depend on whose name the house is in. I’m pretty sure POCA can only go back six years from the criminal proceedings commencing though, civil limitation period applying. And he would do more bird if he didn’t pony up. POCA can be brutal.

And he will be getting a good stretch btw. Too egregious a breach of trust and over too long a period of time for that not to be the case.

Think the maximum sentence for theft is ten years in England and Wales. If so, after a guilty plea at a late stage reckon he’s looking at a five stretch.

Edit, theft is seven, it’s fraud that is ten. Haven’t even checked what he’s pleaded to. Assumed it was theft. If so, given the lower statutory maximum I’ll adjust that prediction to four years.

Second edit: having looked it up I think embezzlement is normally charged under the Fraud Act 2006, so I re-revert to a five year prediction if that is the case.

Fuck me, I’m all over the place!
Click to expand...

I hope you’ve tracked how much time you’ve spent on this so you can bill it mate ;)
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Not quite sure what the script is with proceeds of crime in Scotland but in England and Wales, given the nature of his offending he would definitely be subject to a POCA order. A lot may depend on whose name the house is in. I’m pretty sure POCA can only go back six years from the criminal proceedings commencing though, civil limitation period applying. And he would do more bird if he didn’t pony up. POCA can be brutal.

And he will be getting a good stretch btw. Too egregious a breach of trust and over too long a period of time for that not to be the case.

Think the maximum sentence for theft is ten years in England and Wales. If so, after a guilty plea at a late stage reckon he’s looking at a five stretch.

Edit, theft is seven, it’s fraud that is ten. Haven’t even checked what he’s pleaded to. Assumed it was theft. If so, given the lower statutory maximum I’ll adjust that prediction to four years.

Second edit: having looked it up I think embezzlement is normally charged under the Fraud Act 2006, so I re-revert to a five year prediction if that is the case.

Fuck me, I’m all over the place!
Click to expand...
The daft **** should have pulled a “Kaufman” and self-diagnosed OCD as the reason he bought such lavish gifts.

To this day, I’m staggered how supine we all were about the expenses scandal.
The French would have guillotined the cunts .
 
Gray said:
Come on if she is as clever as she made out she was, she must have known what was going on.

A bloody great motorhome in the front of the house should have rung some bells.

I have always been one of her biggest critics and have come in for a fair bit of stick for my views.
Click to expand...
Mother in laws home….thought it belonged to her
 
Must be thick as mince if she honestly didn't know how the fuck they were affording shit like a 140k motorhome that was parked on the driveway. Thick as mince with too much money

Or the truth is she's a lying ****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top