Former SNP chief Peter Murrell granted legal aid in embezzlement case
Legal aid is usually granted to those who cannot afford to pay for legal help themselves, though in some cases they still need to make their own contribution.
According to the Scottish Legal Aid Board website: "Financial eligibility is just one of the tests for legal assistance. So even if you qualify financially there are additional tests which your case will need to satisfy."
READ MORE: Inside the SNP's political strategy ahead of 2026 Scottish election
The Scottish Legal Aid Board said no payments have been made so far, following a successful application for solemn legal aid by Murrell's lawyers on April 30.
A spokesperson 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.'
READ MORE: Scots back independence as Keir Starmer's popularity at record low, new poll finds
Murrell, 60, was first arrested in April 2023 as part of the police investigation into the SNP's finances.
He appeared at Edinburgh Sheriff Court in March this year where he faced a charge of embezzlement, making no plea.
Until he stood down in 2023 during the leadership race to succeed Sturgeon, Murrell had been chief executive of the SNP for more than 20 years.
Earlier this year Sturgeon announced she and Murrell had 'decided to end' their marriage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Sturgeon's legacy lives on
Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon with her chief of staff Liz Lloyd With a budget of over £63 billion this year and millions squandered on ferries, one of which won't carry its first passenger until the middle of next year at the earliest, what's £300,000 amongst friends? 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... I use the phrase deliberately, because that's exactly what seems to have happened with the bumper package revealed last week for the Edinburgh International Book Festival. Last year its spineless management caved into pressure from climate change extremists, encouraged by a handful of high-profile authors, to end its association with venerable Edinburgh fund managers Baillie Gifford for the crime of having a miniscule proportion of its investments in oil companies, and other legitimate firms doing business in Israel. It was a needless panic reaction under the pretext of staff safety, preferring to risk jobs than offending any trendy left-wing sensibilities, and leaving the event not just with a funding gap but a disincentive for other potential sponsors. But last month in stepped the Scottish Government with a 'one-off' £300,000 package to bankroll the festival's schools programme. God bless the SNP for looking out for our children's reading abilities now the Programme for International Student Assessment shows literacy levels are at their lowest since the first measurement 25 years ago. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It's very hard to understand why the SNP saw fit to hand this supine organisation another £300,000 when the value of the Baillie Gifford sponsorship was only about £35,000 a year, unless we are not being told the full story about its financial management. What's even more difficult to fathom is why SNP ministers didn't tell festival chief executive Jenny Niven that the £1,880,000 she was already receiving from the government's Creative Scotland agency to cover the next three years was all she was getting. Only in the SNP's Scotland can a publicly funded event already handed £2 million of taxpayers' money blow a hole in its own budget and be rewarded with another grant twice as big as the amount it had thrown away. Which brings us to the friends connection. Of course, it's a coincidence that earlier this year the book festival's board was joined by one Liz Lloyd, Nicola Sturgeon's most senior adviser throughout her time as First Minister. And who is top of the book festival bill this year? Why Ms Sturgeon herself, with a book to punt while still taking public money for her day job as an MSP. And, no I've not seen much of her around Holyrood this past year. Surely to goodness someone in government should have realised just how bad it might look and said no. It was agreed months ago but not officially announced, claimed the Scottish Government. In the words of another literary event, aye right. This tawdry episode could be a metaphor for Sturgeon's Scotland, where political patronage mattered more than prudence. It's been two years since she resigned, but her legacy lives on. Sue Webber is a Scottish Conservative MSP for Lothian
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Choice is more decline or new direction with Labour
Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, bottles whisky during a visit to the Glenkinchie Whisky Distillery to mark the UK-India trade deal (Picture: Andrew Milligan/) Tomorrow marks a year since the general election, when people across Scotland voted decisively for change. Since then, we have got to work delivering our Plan for Change to invest in Scotland's renewal, raise living standards and put more money in people's pockets. 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... Consider some of the achievements of the Labour Government so far. We've increased the minimum wage, delivering a pay rise for 200,000 Scots, and protected pensioners' living standards by guaranteeing the Triple Lock, something the Conservatives are now wavering over. We've ended austerity and provided a record budget settlement for the Scottish Government, with an additional £9.1 billion over the next three years thanks to Labour, meaning more money for Scottish public services. The SNP voted against it at Westminster but were happy enough to spend the money in the Scottish Budget. The public will rightly ask where they have spent their money? We've introduced the Employment Rights Bill, the most ambitious set of workers' rights proposals in a generation, which will ban fire and rehire, strengthen parental leave and end exploitative zero-hours contracts. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad We've safeguarded the UK's last blast furnaces at Scunthorpe, allocated £200 million for Grangemouth's future and brokered a deal to secure the Methil and Arnish fabrication yards. Contrast this with the SNP's years of inaction on Grangemouth, and their silence on the mothballing of the Dalzell and Clydebridge steelworks. We've invested for the long-term, with the recent Spending Review confirming £750m for Edinburgh University for the UK supercomputer, billions for GB Energy and a big commitment to nuclear south of the border. Meanwhile, in Scotland, the SNP clings to its ideological objection to nuclear. In England, where health is delivered by the UK Government, we are already seeing marked improvements in the NHS. We promised two million additional NHS appointments in the first year and have delivered four million. This could not be more different to the desperate situation in Scotland; last week the chair of BMA Scotland warned that the Scottish NHS is 'dying before our eyes'. On the international stage, we've agreed historic new trade deals with India and the United States, which will see Indian tariffs on Scotch whisky immediately halved, and then further reduced to just 40 per cent, and US tariffs on steel and aluminium slashed to zero. Additionally, we've reset the relationship with the EU with a new partnership which stands to be of enormous benefit to Scotland's young people and businesses. This comes alongside my Scotland Office Brand Scotland mission, which seeks to promote Scottish exports and attract foreign investment. In the face of unprecedented geopolitical instability, we've remained firm in our support for Ukraine and increased defence spending, which, in addition to keeping Scotland safe, will support our thriving defence industries from the Clyde to Rosyth and create jobs across the country. Changing a country is not like flicking a switch. We've had to make tough choices, and I know that people are as impatient as I am for change to come faster and go further. But be in no doubt, the work of change has begun. A year from now, that work continues in the Scottish elections, when Scots will have the opportunity to choose between more decline with the SNP or a new direction with Scottish Labour. Ian Murray is MP for Edinburgh South and Secretary of State for Scotland
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Yes, it's time for change, Sir Keir: time for you to go
Ruth Marr, Stirling. • We are already waiting for any (even one) of Anas Sarwar's election promises from 2024 to come true, and yet here he goes again in a desperate bid to stay relevant: 'no tax hikes if Labour win in Scotland' ("No Scots income tax rise if Labour wins, insists Sarwar", The Herald, July 2). The fiscal position in both the UK and Scotland make this assertion difficult, if not impossible to sustain, as the IFS states 'since departmental spending plans are locked in and the Government has had to row back on planned cuts to pensioner and working age benefits, tax rises seem increasingly likely' ("Welfare U-turn raises questions over Labour's tax plans", heraldscotland, July 2). Given Mr Sarwar's record on promises I know who I believe. GR Weir, Ochiltree. Read more letters John Swinney's woolly words Two articles on facing pages today (July 1) are an interesting contrast in style and content. The First Minister's contribution ("'There is nothing wrong in Scotland that cannot be fixed'") is to my (admittedly unsympathetic) eye a blancmange of aspirations and largely unfulfilled, or at least untested, promises (and, Mr Swinney, the baby boxes are a sorely over-used example of something actually done). Kevin McKenna's piece ("We are being softened up to no longer believe in the sanctity of life") about assisted dying is, in contrast, clear and unequivocal. The difference between them, which to me is crucial, is that everything the First Minister says is theoretically achievable and measurable (though not by the current administration) and is, by any standard, aimed at the common good for all of the people. Mr McKenna uses the ideology of a single and highly-organised group in society to argue for an outcome which, equally, would affect us all and, for me, would take away the right to decide when life had become unbearable. It seems wrong that the untestable and so unverifiable beliefs of that one portion of our society should be allowed to have a disproportionate influence on this or any other article of legislation of such importance. The First Minister's words are woolly but lacking in harm: Mr McKenna's, better expressed though they may be, are potentially dangerous to our democratic process. Bryan Chrystal, Edinburgh. The lesson of Ukraine Stan Grodynski (Letters, July 2) continues to write from the independent state of La La Land. His belief that an independent Scotland would not require to defend itself is counter to the fact that Scotland is essential in the defence of the gateway to the North Atlantic and the North Sea, both strategically important routes commercially and militarilly. Mr Grodynski might look to the Crimean peninsula for a good example of a very similar situation where Ukraine, in a referendum, relinquished its 30% of the USSR's nuclear arsenal in return for security guarantees. Those guarantees have been proven worthless by President Putin and the rest, as they say, is history. Peter Wright, West Kilbride. • Stan Grodynski is clearly an unhappy man, with a long list of grievances about the UK in general and the Westminster Government in particular. There is however one goodish aspect of Britain that he might like to consider, which is that he can spout his nonsense on one day, and will still be at the same address the next day. Malcolm Parkin, Kinross. Veiled allusion In 2014 we were promised the earth and all that is in it. Rishi Sunak vowed to lead us to sunlit uplands. Today a 'socialist' government lurches from one disaster to the next and London-based newspapers are seeking any number of heads to roll. The outgoing chief of the Institute of Fiscal Studies has warned that the state pension triple lock should be scrapped as soon as possible. I am reminded of Ronald Reagan's story about the woman of some mature years who walked into a bridalwear shop. An assistant asked: 'How can I help you?' "I would like a dress for my fourth wedding." "What sort of dress exactly?" "Oh, virgin white, veil and a long train – the full works." As delicately as possible the assistant inquired as to whether that would be appropriate for a fourth-time bride. "Oh, I'm just as entitled as a first-time bride." "How so?" inquired the assistant. "Well my first husband got so excited at the wedding, he collapsed and died of a heart attack." "I'm sorry to hear that. And the second?" "We had a heated argument on the way to the reception and never spoke again." "Oh dear. And the third?" "The marriage was never consummated." "Never consummated?" "He was a unionist. He just sat on the edge of the bed each night saying how great it was going to be." Alan Carmichael, Glasgow. IDF are the terrorists As I sign a petition to allow baby food into Gaza (with no hope it will make a difference) and watch coverage of yet more atrocities committed by the Israeli Defence Force, the British Establishment continues to try to squeeze the last drops of faux rage out of the comments of a couple of musicians. Hundreds of unarmed Palestinians are shot every week queuing for food because the Israeli state backed by the US closed down 400 food distribution centres run by experienced independent agencies and replaced them with four distribution centres. A reputable Israeli newspaper has reported that soldiers were told to use live ammunition to help control crowds. This is the Hunger Games added to the destruction of all schools, hospitals and homes. The rap duo at Glastonbury were wrong to shout for anyone to be killed. They should have been shouting "The IDF is a terrorist organisation". There is no other way you could describe an organisation that has carried out the atrocities it is guilty of. But British senior politicians and sections of the media want to divert attention from the horrifying reality with the trivia of paint on planes and music festival chants. And let us expose the antisemitism claim for what it really is. It has been used for years to bully people who criticise the actions of the Israeli state. It no longer works. Too many people see the reality and those who continue to use it need to question their own ethics. We know that there are many honourable people of Jewish ethnicity in and outwith Israel who are also strong critics of the government of that state. Isobel Lindsay, Biggar. What did Benjamin Netanyahu know in advance of the October 7 attack? (Image: PA) • Otto Inglis (Letters, July 1) is correct in reminding us of atrocities committed at that other music festival on October 7, 2023. What he chooses to ignore is the apparent complicity of Prime Minister Netanyahu, a situation now generally accepted, even by many of his Israeli subjects. Over a period of weeks he is known to have received information from frontier guards who saw, and heard through increased wireless activity, the necessary extensive preparations for the attack. Information is also said to have come from Egypt. In spite of the repeated warnings, frontier defences at that crucial point were not strengthened. The Prime Minister's craven response, which incidentally involved betrayal of the hostages, appears to have been made in relation to a number of current personal and political problems. But, from a longer perspective, the vastly exaggerated retaliation and unprecedented slaughter in modern times of thousands of innocent civilians, especially the children who would have formed a future Palestinian Gaza, helped to further his personal aim as founder of a greater Israel. Further proof of the real situation on October 7 and determination to distance themselves is provided by the resignations, soon after the event, of three top generals and the head of Shin Bhet, on the basis of "not on my watch." Why does our own Prime Minister, after those months of slaughter, not have the courage to join so many of us in saying the same? Murdo Grant, Rosemarkie.
