Peter Murrell still waiting on court date five months after first appearance in front of judge
Peter Murrell is still waiting for a second court date to be confirmed five months after he first appeared in front of a judge.
The former SNP chief executive is charged with one count of embezzlement and made no plea or declaration after appearing at Edinburgh Sheriff Court on March 20.
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) told the Record there was no update on when he would next appear in court.
Murrell, who is separated from his wife Nicola Sturgeon, was SNP CEO for over 20 years before he stood down from the post in 2023 following a row over membership numbers. He was arrested in April that year as part of the Operation Branchform police probe into the party's finances, but was released without charge pending further investigation.
Murrell was charged with embezzlement in 2024 and subsequently appeared in court in March this year.
Prosecutors have been working on the case since police completed their Branchform investigation in August last year and handed their findings to the Crown.
Alex Neil, a former SNP health secretary, said it was unfair for anyone in the justice system to wait so long for their day in court. He told the Record: "You have to look at it from two angles. Those are impacted by the alleged crime, but also the individual accused.
"This has been going on for an inordinate amount of time. It's very unfair for anyone who has been accused to be kept waiting this long."
The Record previously revealed how taxpayers are set to foot the bill for Murrell 's legal costs. Solicitors acting for the ex-CEO had an application for legal aid approved.
According to the Scottish Legal Aid Board, an application for solemn legal aid by his solicitors was granted on April 30 and no payments have been made to date.
A spokesperson for the SLAB previously said: 'When assessing an applicant's eligibility for legal aid we look at their financial position at the time of their application to ensure they meet tests set by legal aid legislation.
'This includes information they give us about their salary, the amount of money they have in the bank and any investments, which might be available to fund their own defence privately.
' Peter Murrell 's application met the tests we have to apply when deciding whether to grant legal aid.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Within the UK, we get what we need and deserve - no more, no less
The GERS figures, which are published by the Scottish Government, were pretty dire. They measure the amount of public money spent in Scotland against the taxation that is raised here. The difference, this year, is £26.2 billion which is a remarkable 11.7 per cent of GDP. As part of the exercise, the GERS deficit is rapidly translated, without the help of AI, into the per capita variation between public expenditure in Scotland and England, which now runs at £2669, up by £358 in a year. That number is, understandably, trumpeted by those who favour the constitutional status quo. If there was ever another referendum, it would frighten all but the most dedicated horses. Read More: It is a pity however that the GERS figures have been reduced to political cudgels without greater understanding of what they represent. First, it needs to be understood that, within a United Kingdom, it makes perfectly good sense that Scotland enjoys these advantages, which were embedded long before devolution or independence became significant terms in the political vocabulary. Higher public expenditure in Scotland was based on two main factors – our heavily disproportionate geography vis-à-vis population and our levels of urban poverty, exacerbated by the decline of heavy industry in post-war years. In other words, the distribution was broadly founded on fairness and need rather than any political or constitutional fix. The Barnett formula brought order to that principle but certainly did not invent it. This point is reinforced by the pattern of public spending in England. The figure of £2669 is misleading since it is a comparison with a figure generic to the whole of England, within which there are actually large divergences. The poorer areas 'up north' are not far off Scottish levels of per capita spending while those in the effete south-east are significantly lower. In other words, the Scottish funding 'bonus' is based on needs rather than munificence and it is on these grounds it should be defended and argued for. If Scotland does well out of Barnett, which it does, it is because of our history and geography rather than a political decision either to buy us off or, as Nationalists would have it, sell us short. Within the UK, we get what we need and deserve. No more, no less. At that point, Nationalists resort to a hypothetical argument rather than the actual one. On the basis of no evidence, they assert that the need for this relative largesse – or simple fairness, as I would have it - would disappear if all the economic levers were in their hands. I do not believe that to be true and have no wish for my children or grand-children to be on the receiving end of finding out. But let's park that argument, as the SNP seems to have done, for another decade. Recall instead the grounds for the Barnett formula in the first place – scattered geography and the consequences of industrial history, leading to a higher level of poverty and need. Logically, within that context, these are the areas of Scottish life which should have been prioritised, in the interests of 'levelling up' before the term was fashionable. The 'differential' money should really be ringfenced for post-industrial communities that have never recovered from the loss of their raisons d'etre, and also for the Scottish periphery where per capita costs of delivery are inevitably greater. If that principle had been maintained, we would see very different outcomes today and the myth of the poor and the peripheral being subsidy supplicants rather than entitled priorities would evaporate. But where has Scotland's 'extra' money, via the Barnett formula, actually gone? Is it to the periphery, which continues to shed population at an alarming rate? Is it to the depressed industrial communities and opportunities for their new generations? Or, in fact, has the bonus enshrined in the Barnett formula simply become one big funding trough which serves disproportionately the interests of the better-off? At this point, I revert to the National Records of Scotland which reported on our shifting demographics. The headline figure is that the Scottish population has reached new heights of over 5.5 million, due to net immigration more than making up for the excess of deaths over births. In some parts of Scotland, however, the figures give very little sign of encouragement that anything is being levelled up. Where I live in the Western Isles, for example, the under-16 population is down by13 per cent in a decade and the working age population is down by 10 per cent. The implications of this are not difficult to discern. There are not enough people to do the jobs on which an ageing population depends. So more people leave and the trend continues. There is very little sign of population growth in old industrial areas either. North Ayrshire's young population, for example, is down by ten per cent and working age numbers by 5.7 per cent. And be warned- what the most peripheral and poorest parts of Scotland face today in terms of not having enough people to support the services on which an ageing population depends is coming for others which still regard themselves as secure from demographic trends. Money is not the answer to everything but it rarely does any harm. So let's not apologise or be excessively grateful for the 'extra' £2669 each of us gets a year through the Barnett formula. But let us not forget either why we get it – which is off the backs of places which represented the original case for that extra money but are still left behind when it comes to addressing poverty, disadvantage and population loss. Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician. He was MP for Cunninghame North from 1987 until 2005 and served as a Minister of State from 1997 to 2003
Scotsman
5 hours ago
- Scotsman
Affordable homes shortage is adding to Scotland's social unrest
Save Our Future & Our Kids Futures protesters at the Cladhan Hotel, Falkirk. Picture Michael Gillen Apart from the ongoing madness of cancel culture institution-alised by former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and her promotion of gender politics, the weekend's Scottish news bulletins were dominated by demonstrations outside a Falkirk hotel being used to house asylum seekers. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The Cladhan Hotel is managed by Mears Group on behalf of the Home Office and feelings in Falkirk have been running high since an Afghan asylum seeker was jailed for nine years in June for the 2023 rape of a 15-year-old girl in the town centre. As was rightly pointed out, it's wrong to label all Asian men seeking refuge as rapists, but many of those demonstrating against the arrival of refugees were motivated by a sense that the needs of the existing population are less of a priority. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Who can blame them? Lengthening NHS waiting lists, no NHS dentistry, popular schools over-subscribed and an acute shortage of affordable homes. How can we keep taking more immigrants when we can't house the people who are here, they ask? It's a reasonable question with no satisfactory answer and the argument that the economy needs more immigrants because of a skills shortage wears thin when over a fifth of the working age population are not in employment. The situation has become so dire in Edinburgh that only the most pressing requests for council and registered social landlord housing have been met since last November, because without nearly enough suitable accommodation for homeless families the council was breaking the law. Now the suspension of normal letting policy has been extended until March 2027 to give the council more time to sort it out, using portable buildings if necessary, which is likely to cause neighbourhood problems if not carefully sited. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Council data shows that of 3800 households presenting as homeless in 2024-25, just over three-quarters with a connection with Edinburgh ─ and over 800 were single people forced out because of violence ─ so the problem is largely home grown, especially as some connection claims are tenuous. But 466, an eighth, were from asylum seekers or people granted refugee status, so the number is not insubstantial. The point is not that they shouldn't be housed, but as long as the council is unable to restore normal allocation policies then it creates fertile conditions for the rise of extremism. Even with the continued suspension of the letting policy, the council still anticipates just over 500 households will remain in unsuitable temporary accommodation, while it deals with applications from around 900 households with no connection to the city it would normally expect to arrive. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The problem has been building for far longer than the declaration of a housing emergency, going back to inadequacies in planning at both council and national level. and the SNP has been responsible for a lot of talk about bold ambition but without anything like the necessary action to avert the current crisis. In my time as a councillor, meeting after meeting heard senior SNP councillors ─ whose expertise would have improved by watching a series of Bob the Builder ─ bragging about their house-building programme when it was glaringly obvious from the start they wouldn't achieve even half their target. And their Labour pals, now trying desperately to cling to power, just nodded along in agreement. A better plan than the current sticking plaster approach is urgently needed.
Scotsman
5 hours ago
- Scotsman
Lothian Buses urged to rethink change to night bus service
SNP candidate Lyn Jardine has written to the operator Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Lothian Buses is being urged to rethink a change to its "lifeline" night bus service. Lyn Jardine, the SNP's candidate for Edinburgh North Western at next year's Holyrood election, said a looming shake-up would cause problems for late-night workers such as hospitality staff and cleaners. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad From Sunday, September 7, services on the N22 and the Haymarket to Clerwood section of the N26 will be withdrawn. SNP candidate Lyn Jardine has written to Lothian Buses | Scotsman Lothian Buses has announced a new N1 service will partly replace these routes, however with only one journey midweek and three journeys at the weekend. While additional late departures on the 26, the overnight Airlink 100 and the N18 provide some cover, Ms Jardine said significant gaps remain for residents and staff in Corstorphine, Drumbrae, Clerwood and South Gyle. She has now written to Lothian Buses with a proposed 'extra late-night N1' service that would serve the A8 corridor and west-side communities. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ms Jardine said: 'For the workers who finish shifts around 00:30 to 01:00 - hospitality staff, cleaners, hotel workers, and others in the night-time economy - the night-time buses are a lifeline and ensure they can get to and from work safely and affordably. 'It is disappointing to see the reduction of services, which will force staff leaving venues on Lothian Road, Fountain Park, or working late in Corstorphine and South Gyle, with a choice of either paying for taxis or walking home in the early hours. 'The safety and wellbeing of late-night workers must be a priority. That's why I am urging Lothian Buses to introduce a service to cover the gap which has between created between 00:07 and 03:20 to protect both workers and businesses. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'The one additional journey I am proposing could make all the difference for dozens of workers every week. Whilst everyone appreciates that resources are tight, that does not have to mean workers are left struggling.' A spokesman for Lothian Buses said: 'Lothian is committed to delivering for our customers and continue to operate a comprehensive and socially responsible night bus network. 'As a wholly commercial operator, we must regularly review our services to make sure that they reflect customer demand. Any changes to our night services are based on detailed analysis of travel patterns. 'We welcome customer feedback and will continue to review and monitor the network after these changes take effect.'
