Our fundraiser to bring a judicial review of Police Scotland’s decision not to charge anyone with embezzlement in the case of the SNP’s missing £700,000 indyref fund is now live, and can be reached by clicking on this image, or here.
The target of £30,000 represents the cost of the initial application (with contingency for the other side’s costs should it fail).
Yesterday afternoon John Swinney announced an independent review into the dual roles of Scotland’s main law officers, the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General, which have been a subject of great controversy since the Scottish Parliament was re-convened in 1999.
Wings welcomes this development unequivocally, albeit we’re slightly concerned that the former judge leading the review is himself a former Lord Advocate who may be inclined to regard any suggestion that the role – in which the LA is an independent law officer but also a government minister answerable to the First Minister – carries a huge conflict of interest as a personal slight.
But what’s interesting is that the SNP promised such a review way back in 2021, in its manifesto for that year’s Holyrood election.
We can’t imagine what can have caused them to delay it until now.
We don’t have much to say about this graph that it doesn’t say for itself.
The arrest of Peter Murrell on 5 April 2023, just a couple of weeks after his wife had realised the game was up and walked away before the cops came round and put a big blue tent up on their front garden, changed everything in Scottish politics.
We’re sure the matter will be handled with the exact same professional diligence and complete and fearless impartiality that it would be for any other accused person.
More than three months ago now, we sent Police Scotland a Freedom Of Information request. A few minutes ago we finally received a response. Brace yourselves.
(We must conclude from all this, incidentally, that John Swinney LOVES the Tories, because he had no problem accepting an indyref from a right-wing party in 2012.)
If Scotland leaves the UK, who might be the Prime Minister of the remains of it is none of his business, and certainly shouldn’t be a dealbreaker in achieving independence.
If there’s anyone left in the SNP with a shred of integrity (and if there is they must be very deep undercover indeed), Swinney ought to be challenged for the leadership at next month’s conference and replaced with someone – the Lord alone knows who – who’s actually willing to pursue the party’s supposed primary goal, because Swinney has now dismissed every possible route to it out of hand.
Something rather extraordinary happened yesterday, dearest readers. Very briefly, we absolutely genuinely thought someone in a position of some influence in the SNP had taken a meaningful step towards being serious about independence.
We are not being sarcastic. Look: here it is. (Transcript at bottom of article.)
Dave Doogan is the SNP’s leader at Westminster. And let’s be clear: that is EXACTLY what the SNP’s stance ought to be. Its only purpose is supposed to be the securing of Scottish independence, and no peaceful democratic means of achieving that ought to be off the table. We couldn’t believe what we were hearing, like it was a dream.
The SNP was not formed with the purpose of denying England/the UK the government it voted for, it was formed to completely sever the governance of Scotland and England from each other as a matter of permanent principle, regardless of the prevailing political climate at any given point in time.
If England wants Nigel Farage as Prime Minister, that’s England’s business. The point of independence is that Scotland doesn’t have to get him too. No more, no less.
So obviously, the hapless Doogan’s brave and bright new dawn was brutally slapped down within a matter of hours.
Frank Gillougley on In The Eyes Of The Law: “50 in with pleasure and appreciation.” Oct 2, 21:11
Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Yes Hatey, dealing effectively with the colonial ‘condition’ requires difficult treatment; liberation is the only remedy and takes effect through…” Oct 2, 20:38
Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Sell some of your tea towels and you could donate more.” Oct 2, 20:07
Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “How come you’re immune to the pathology then, Alf? The vaccinations aren’t available on the SNHS. Did you pay to…” Oct 2, 19:50
Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: ““Those of us with an open, questioning and independent mind” That’s perhaps a rather theoretical assumption, Spartan, especially for a…” Oct 2, 18:50
Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “BS, sam. 1715 and 1745 were dynastic and sectarian uprisings. Attempts to depose the Protestant Hanoverian royal line and replace…” Oct 2, 18:50
sam on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Not so sure about this claim, Alf. There were many armed uprisings in colonial Ireland against English rule. The 1715…” Oct 2, 17:21
Dave on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Wow, the fund is filling up fast, excellent news! I, for one, cannot wait to see the miscreants sweating on…” Oct 2, 17:18
agentx on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Why it is considered secure • Direct Lawyer Payouts: Funds do not go to the individual starting the page. Money…” Oct 2, 17:16
Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “@Alf – No, those of us who learn read the theory then use it to put it into practice and…” Oct 2, 16:54
James on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Keep ’em coming, ‘Confused’. Larry, curly and Moe bite every time. Speaking of stooges I wonder when the fragrant ‘Adrian’…” Oct 2, 16:53
Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Who had Freire on their Bingo card?” Oct 2, 16:39
Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “I’m assuming “sparky” refers to “Spartan”, if I can read correctly through your blurry alcohol-fuelled stupor, 8 Ace. “tell (sic…” Oct 2, 16:30
Alf Baird on In The Eyes Of The Law: ““uses the quotes of others” This is nothing new for academics who logically base their research first on the available…” Oct 2, 16:17
Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “You are right Confused! Your unhinged idiocy is truly legendary., even here. Very conversation-worthy, personally I find it incredible. Always…” Oct 2, 16:04
sarah on In The Eyes Of The Law: “@ douglas – you can reduce the tip, even to zero.” Oct 2, 16:01
douglas on In The Eyes Of The Law: “happy to contribute, not happy with crowdjustice. Imposing an extra 20% and calling it a tip is taking the p.…” Oct 2, 15:44
lothianlad on The Turning Point: “The SNP leadership have actively working FOR the british state. Sturgeon is the greatest traitor to Scotland in the modern…” Oct 2, 15:22
lothianlad on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Well done Stu! They are rattled! Only those with integrity should be allowed power.” Oct 2, 15:20
Confused on In The Eyes Of The Law: “The only thing worse than being talked about, is NOT being talked about … I seem to have the WORST…” Oct 2, 15:13
Spartan 117 on In The Eyes Of The Law: “James likes to label anyone he disagrees with as “Unionist” or “Yoon”. A bit like Confused’s rantings when its necked…” Oct 2, 14:44
Hatey McHateface on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Cesaire wrote about “goitrous academics”. I don’t think he was being complimentary, although I do recommend that anybody interested should…” Oct 2, 13:57
Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “I’m not going anywhere, Fatty. Enjoy.” Oct 2, 13:34
James on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Unionist shill; **** off. There’s a good chap.” Oct 2, 13:03
Connor on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Why no paypal option ? Sorry I do not feel safe having to give my card details to all, paypal…” Oct 2, 11:39
Captain Caveman on In The Eyes Of The Law: “I respect anyone who gets up for work every morning, goes to work, pays their own way, pays their taxes…” Oct 2, 11:28
crisiscult on In The Eyes Of The Law: “Middle class, working class, etc have become a bit meaningless in how they are used today, the terms often being…” Oct 2, 11:09