Nicola Sturgeon's house 'looked like a murder scene' on day of arrest
Scotland's former First Minister Nicola Surgeon has said her home "looked like a murder scene" on day of Peter Murrell's arrest.
Nicola Sturgeon said she 'blacked out'
(Image: YouTube)
Nicola Sturgeon has described her house as "looking like a murder scene" on the day of Peter Murrell's arrest.
In ITV's Nicola Sturgeon: The Interview, the former First Minister of Scotland spoke of her family home being searched by police in 2023. Sturgeon spoke about not having a clear memory of her then husband Peter Murrell being arrested.
The arrest came following a police investigation into the spending of more than £600,000 in donations for independence campaigning.
Nicola Sturgeon, who had been married to Murrell since 2010 and resigned as first minister and SNP leader in February 2023, was arrested two months after her husband was first arrested, while former party treasurer Colin Beattie was also arrested the same year.
Both Beattie and Sturgeon were later exonerated before Murrell was re-arrested and charged with embezzlement in April 2024.
Scottish Police previously attended Nicola Sturgeon's and Peter Murrell's house
(Image: Ross Turpie / Daily Record Sunday Mail Reach PLC)
Speaking with ITV News presenter Julie Etchingham, she said: "I genuinely don't know whether the fact that I don't have a clear image of that in my head is because I didn't witness it or that I have kind of somehow blocked it out.
"It wasn't till I got to mum and dad's that I saw the pictures of my house looking like a murder scene effectively.
"I'm just working out that it's really hard to articulate how I felt that day.
"Obviously, the last two years of my life have been torrid. You know, finding myself at the centre of a police investigation under suspicion for a couple of years, all the while, knowing I had done nothing wrong.
"The whole, no smoke without fire is a really basic human instinct. We all have it. If somebody's accused of something that we might think, well, that's maybe not true, but there's always a little part of your brain saying, well, no smoke without fire.
"So I was just, yeah, just totally shaken to my core. It was really, really dark and really, really difficult.
"If you described it to me in advance, I would've said, I, I won't survive that."
Nicola Sturgeon has separated from her husband, Peter Murrell
(Image: AFP via Getty Images)
Sturgeon previously described being arrested and questioned by the police following the arrest of her ex-husband and the Scottish National Party (SNP) treasurer as one of her toughest days.
She described waking up with her stomach in knots prior to June 11, 2023 - the date she was arrested and questioned.
Sturgeon was told she would face no further action over the investigation on March 20, 2025.
Elsewhere in the interview, Sturgeon claimed trans rapist Isla Bryson has forfeited the right "to be the gender of their choice" because of their "heinous" crimes.
Bryson was jailed in February 2023 after being convicted of raping two women while living as a man named Adam Graham.
The rapist was sent to a women's jail after identifying as female - prompting a huge uproar from opposition parties and womens' rights campaigners. They were later moved to a men's wing at HMP Edinburgh.
Article continues below
Self-identification was at the heart of the Gender Recognition Reform (GRR) Bill, which Sturgeon championed before it was blocked from becoming law by the UK Government in 2023.
The row was one of the last acts of Sturgeon's premiership before she announced her intention to resign as first minister.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
24 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Scottish Greens must broaden appeal beyond middle-class urbanites, says leadership candidate
The Scottish Greens have to broaden their appeal beyond middle-class urbanites by talking to voters in industrial towns facing wholesale job losses, a Green leadership candidate has said. Gillian Mackay is one of four Scottish Greens bidding to win two co-leader posts after Patrick Harvie, the UK's longest-serving party leader, quit as co-convener earlier this year. The pro-independence Scottish Greens are currently Holyrood's fourth largest party, with seven MSPs, and could play a key role in the devolved parliament after next year's elections. The Greens prop up the Scottish National party government in Edinburgh, which does not have a majority at Holyrood and is expected to form a minority administration again next year. Recent polls place the Greens as high as 15%, suggesting they could win several more seats. Mackay said her area around Falkirk had been devastated by industrial decline, including the closure of Grangemouth oil refinery earlier this year, yet the Scottish Greens historically had failed to connect with local voters. The Scottish and UK governments knew Grangemouth would close, affecting several thousand jobs in the region, but had failed to put in place an industrial strategy to guarantee green jobs, she said. Two factories owned by Alexander Dennis making electric buses were also expected to close within weeks and their jobs to shift to Nottinghamshire. Farmers and workers dependent on the oil industry around Aberdeen also felt excluded. That meant the just transition from fossil fuel industries to sustainable jobs had failed, Mackay said. 'The Green narrative of green jobs and green industry actually needs to have teeth,' she said. The party was very good at the 'high-level' policy but poor at making it meaningful to people directly affected. 'What matters to our voters is what they see, feel and hear in their communities and I don't think we're quite cutting through at that level.' Voting for the two co-convener posts opened on Wednesday, with about 7,500 party members eligible to vote before a result is declared on Friday 29 August. Alongside Mackay, the candidates are Lorna Slater, Harvie's current co-convener, who had a torrid time as a Scottish government minister in the Greens' power-sharing deal with the SNP, Ross Greer, a backbencher, and Dominic Ashmole, a party activist in the Scottish Borders who is vying to become a councillor for the first time. Unlike Green party elections in England and Wales, Scottish rules make it harder for two candidates to run on joint tickets, because their names cannot appear on the ballot paper as joint candidates. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion And for the first time, the Scottish Greens have also dropped a rule that requires the party to elect at least one woman as co-leader, after legal advice partly influenced by the UK supreme court ruling on the Equality Act's definition of a woman. Greer, who has called for free travel on all of Scotland's buses, is widely seen as a favourite to win one of the two posts. With Ashmole considered a rank outsider, the contest for the second post is between Slater and Mackay. Given her almost three years as a junior minister, Slater is presenting herself as the most experienced continuity candidate, who has told party members she believes co-conveners are their delegates and are not in overall control. Her critics point to the intense controversy surrounding her failed bid to introduce a wide-ranging deposit return scheme for drinks containers in Scotland before the rest of the UK. Greer, an architect of the Bute House power-sharing agreement with the SNP, believes the party needs stronger political leadership and has to be much clearer on its core policies, on poverty, climate and nature. 'We need to nail down which voters we're trying to speak to and what we're trying to achieve,' he said.
Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Scots receive a record £2,669 more public spending each than UK average
Scots receive nearly £2,700 more public spending each than the UK average, according to official figures revealing that the gap has widened to record levels. A major report, published by SNP ministers, showed total spending by the UK and Scottish Governments equated to £21,192 per person in Scotland in the 2024/25 financial year. This compared with an average £18,523 of public spending per person across the UK as a whole – £2,669 lower than the figure for Scotland. The cross-border spending gap was by far the largest on record, £2,311 up on the previous year and having nearly doubled over the previous decade. The Scottish Government's annual Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland report also found public spending accounted for a record 52 per cent of the country's GDP, compared with 44.4 per cent of the UK as a whole. This was more than five points higher than before the pandemic. And Scotland's deficit – the difference between total revenue and expenditure – has surged to 11.7 per cent of GDP. This was more than double the UK figure of 5.1 per cent and higher than anywhere else in Europe. The report was published after SNP ministers recently confirmed they backed full fiscal autonomy, with Scotland getting control over all taxes and the abolition of the Barnett formula that provides the higher spending from Westminster. But Ian Murray, the UK Government's Scottish Secretary, said that would mean a funding gap of more than £14bn, resulting in 'turbo-charged austerity and economic chaos for Scotland'. He said: 'These figures underline the collective economic strength of the United Kingdom and how Scotland benefits from the redistribution of wealth inside the UK. 'By sharing resources with each other across the UK, Scots benefit by £2,669 more per head in public spending than the UK average. It also means that devolved governments have the financial heft of the wider UK behind them when taking decisions.' Mr Murray added that Scots want to see 'better outcomes' from the extra money the SNP has to spend on schools, hospitals and policing. Craig Hoy, the Scottish Tories' shadow finance secretary, said: 'The SNP Government's own figures highlight the huge, and rising, Union dividend that Scots enjoy thanks to being in a strong United Kingdom. 'Every single person in the country is almost £2,600 better off because we are part of the UK. If we lost that – as we would if the SNP achieved their goal of Scottish independence – it would have a catastrophic impact on the nation's finances.' He said the figures also demonstrated the 'economic lunacy' of Sir Keir Starmer's opposition to allowing new exploration licences to be issued for the North Sea. Oil and gas revenues in Scotland's geographic share of the UK's waters fell by £800m last year to £4.1bn. The Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland report is produced by Scottish Government economists and calculates public spending on devolved services, such as health and education, by SNP ministers and local authorities. Scotland is also allocated a population share of spending by the UK Government on reserved policy areas such as defence and debt interest. The report said the main reason for Scotland's deficit increasing from 9.7 per cent to 11.7 per cent was 'Scottish revenue growing more slowly and Scottish expenditure growing more quickly than the UK'. Oil and gas raise tax revenue total Public spending in Scotland rose by £6.2bn to £117.6bn last year, the report said, with the cost of benefits rising more quickly than across the UK. This was partly thanks to the Scottish Government's more generous welfare system. Tax revenues north of the border totalled nearly £91.4bn, £91 per person higher than the UK average. However, they were £578 per person lower when oil and gas were excluded. Scotland's 11. per cent notional deficit amounted to £26.5bn, a rise of more than £5bn compared to the previous year. The next highest deficits in the EU were recorded in Romania (9.3 per cent of GDP), Poland (6.6 per cent) and France (5.8 per cent). Shona Robison, the Scottish finance secretary, said: 'The decisions we have taken here in Scotland are helping support sustainable public finances. For the fourth year in a row, devolved revenues have grown faster than devolved expenditure. 'Scotland's public finances are better than many other parts of the UK, with the third highest revenue per person in the UK, behind only London and the South East.' But Struan Stevenson, the chief executive of the pro-Union Scottish Business UK group, said: 'The sharp rise of the 'Union dividend' once again in the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland figures show that independence would be a disastrous calamity for Scotland, costing us tens of billions and almost bankrupting the nation at a stroke.'
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
The case for Letby's innocence looks weaker than ever
The annual Panorama documentary on Lucy Letby appeared on BBC 1 this week, barely a week after a more one-sided pro-Letby documentary was shown on ITV. Channel 4 has a Letby show in the works and Channel 5 has already broadcast two. Fortunately, there is plenty of material for producers to get their teeth into. Not only did her trial last ten months but there was a retrial after that, plus two appeal attempts, and her supporters have been making new claims on any almost weekly basis ever since. The ITV documentary was Letbyism 1.0, mostly consisting of talking points about shift patterns, Post-it notes, door-swipe data etc. that have either been debunked or which are now understood to be irrelevant. The Panorama documentary – the third in what is sure to be an ongoing series – focused on the second phase of Letbyism that began with two press conferences, the second organised by Letby's PR firm (yes, she has a PR firm working for her), in December 2024 and February 2025. In the first press conference we were told that the insulin tests used to convict her of poisoning Baby F and Baby L were wrong, and that Baby O was accidentally killed by a doctor. In the second press conference we were told that no murders had taken place, that the insulin readings for Babies F and L were perfectly normal, and that Baby O died from a liver injury sustained during childbirth. Confused? So are they. Letby has a number of distinguished medics in her corner but they seem to be finding it difficult to put forward a consistent narrative. A panel of experts convened by the Canadian neonatologist and economist Dr Shoo Lee has offered innocent explanations for all of the 22 collapses and deaths on Letby's indictment (including the ones for which she was not convicted, which seems over-eager). Thanks to the unexpected appearance of credible physicians on Team Letby, her supporters have been playing a game of 'my expert is bigger than your expert' ever since, but the Court of Appeal is not interested in how 'eminent' or 'world leading' a witness is. It only wants to know if they have a point, and it is far from obvious that the 'international panel', which contains no pathologists, radiologists, endocrinologists or haematologists, have cracked the case by looking at some medical records a decade after the events took place. Dr Michael Hall, a neonatologist who was ready to give evidence for the defence in Letby's first trial but was never called, gave short shrift to the panel's theory that Baby A died from thrombosis. He pointed out that this suggestion had been raised in court and said 'I'm not sure that the expert witnesses have added anything to that conversation.' Nor was there any evidence that Baby A's mother had passed a rare blood-clotting disorder onto the child. On the contrary, blood tests had disproved this. Hall was also dismissive of the idea that Baby O suffered a liver injury during childbirth. Baby O's mother had plenty of complaints to air about the Countess of Chester Hospital at the Thirlwall Inquiry, but the standard of her planned Caesarean section was not one of them. In any case, Baby O's haemoglobin readings strongly suggested that he had not suffered a liver injury at birth and even Letby admitted that whatever happened to his liver had happened 'on my watch' the following day. Speaking anonymously – presumably to avoid the wrath of Letby's increasingly militant fanbase – a pathologist told Panorama that the theory about Baby O being killed by a doctor's misplaced needle was poppycock. Indeed, everyone on the show seemed to agree that this never happened, despite Dr Richard Taylor stating it as fact on live television eight months ago. With regards to the insulin poisonings, Shoo Lee relied on the expertise of the mechanical engineer Dr Geoff Chase and the chemical engineer Dr Helen Shannon, possibly because he couldn't get any paediatric endocrinologists to come out to bat for Britain's most prolific child-murderer. In their report, they claimed that the incredibly high insulin readings and extremely low C-peptide readings for Baby F and Baby L were 'within the expected range for preterm infants'. Professor John Gregory, a paediatric endocrinologist, told Panorama that such readings were 'exceedingly unlikely' to be natural; in other words, the babies were almost certainly given exogenous insulin. Interviewed by Panorama, Dr Chase said that 'within the expected range' was a poor choice of words, but insisted that such results were 'not uncommon'. He then downgraded this to 'unusual' and 'possible'. The only British member of Lee's panel is Professor Neena Modi. Asked about the claim that Baby O had suffered a liver injury during childbirth, her response was essentially that although there wasn't any evidence that such an injury had been sustained in this instance, a traumatic childbirth is the kind of thing that could cause a liver injury. It was at this moment that the penny dropped: from the outside, Lee's panel do not seem to have been looking for the theory with the most evidence to support it, nor even for the most likely explanation. They appear to have been looking for anything that sounds vaguely plausible so long as it doesn't involve Lucy Letby inflicting deliberate harm on defenceless infants. Dr Hall, who seems genuinely unsure whether Letby is guilty or innocent, said that he feared that the tenuous opinions of the international panel could 'rebound' on her. As this Panorama showed, many of them can be batted away with ease since they were either raised and rejected in court or have no evidence to support them. Letby can go to the Criminal Cases Review Commission as many times as she likes, and is likely to have plenty of time to do so, but every application takes years and the Court of Appeal does not appreciate having its time wasted with lengthy submissions of little merit. The eminence of the experts and the hard work of the PR company do not come into it. Meanwhile, the public may see distinguished doctors disagreeing and conclude that there must be reasonable doubt by definition, but that is not how it works. Only one side can be right and the medical evidence, though important, was only one part of the case. Hundreds of pieces of evidence could be cited, almost all of it circumstantial but almost all of it pointing an accusing finger at staff nurse Letby. It will take many more documentaries for it all to be broadcast to the viewing public, but at the current rate we should get there by the end of the decade.
