In The Eyes Of The Law
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).
As the page explains, our intention is to then apply for a Protected Expenses Order which would place a relatively low ceiling on the costs of the case itself. To that end our KC is working pro bono and our solicitors at a greatly reduced rate, because they believe, like we do, that this is a crucial matter to the integrity of Scotland as a nation.
Is it to be the case that the powerful of our country are simply immune from the law, and the police and prosecution service able to refuse any sort of explanation – even when the First Minister himself has publicly admitted the embezzlement took place – and cynically blame each other for the decision? We’re about to find out.
Bizarre pic of Swinney taking a leak.
I guess that was intentional.
Caption competition.
“Naw, ah didnae pish oan yer new trainers. Ye did it yersel.”
“How’s he *that* big, min?”
“Couple o’ shakes and ah’ll be oot, hen.”
“This changing room’s lying empty.”
“Not every day I get to pish 600 thousand up the wall”
That reminds me – who was that SNP guy that got busted for hiding a camera in the bogs or something?
Is that even a real thing, or I am thinking of someone/something else?
Was a Labour MSP, Colin Smyth.
I wish you all the best in this legal action [and am sending a modest donation]. This time you have Roddy Dunlop on your side so it stands a better chance than most.
Just don’t mention justice for people from around Ramallah or your Crowdjustice donations will be seized, as Craig Murray’s have been. Can you draw down the donations before the deadline? It would be a sensible precaution.
Sell some of your tea towels and you could donate more.
It’s worth remembering that some legal processes are much narrower than the big stories often attached to them. And they very often can’t deliver the dramatic outcomes people expect — they mostly just check procedure and not much else.
“check procedure and not much else.”
A judicial review of Police Scotland’s decisions might be brought on grounds that the decision was illegal, irrational, or procedurally improper, such as acting beyond legal powers, making an unreasonable decision, or failing to follow proper procedures.
Documents and witnesses are likely to be examined… so hardly “narrow”. Were the decisions within polis and Copfs within their legal authority?
Was the decision not to prosecute justified based on the public interest?
Done. This is excellent and important work, regardless of which side of the Indy debate we sit.
All power to your elbow, Rev.
Signed, Not A Rev.
Donated a tenner but as time goes on I’ll donate more as and when needed.
I actually believe this is more important than Independence its self, who wants to live in a country were justice is decided by who you are.
For me I’d rather we where fundraising for Independence but that isn’t the case and we all know why.
I’ve no doubt Rev will make front page of The National the paper that supports and defends the SNP regardless.
Reading the comments I’ve noticed unionist donating as well. This isn’t about what side of the political argument your own its about principle of law.
Well done Wings.
Done. Go get them rev.
£100 donated.
Just ask if you need more. You might not get, because I may not have, but no harm in asking.
My understanding is that Justice Reviews are really narrow — they don’t look at the underlying merits or reopen investigations, they just check whether the decision-making process followed the correct steps. Even a successful JR only sends the decision back to be re-made using the correct procedure, and the outcome can still end up exactly the same.
You are wrong on this as well. The Court can find the decision unlawful and order a reconsideration. It can require additional inquiries and evidence gathering.
Yes, the court can say the original process was unlawful and require it to be done again properly — which is what I meant when I said ‘sending the decision back to be re-made’.
But even then it still can’t tell Police Scotland or COPFS what decision to make — only that they must follow a lawful process. They can still reach the same conclusion as long as the procedure is legally sound.
Just to add one point of clarification: when a decision is sent back for lawful reconsideration, the court doesn’t direct specific investigative steps.
It doesn’t tell Police Scotland or COPFS what inquiries to make or what evidence to gather — it’s entirely for them to decide whether any additional inquiries or evidence are needed to reach their decision.
The court’s role is only to ensure the process is lawful, not to supervise or expand the investigation.
The police would have to pay attention to the findings of the court in considering what fresh evidence there might be.
That is not all. If the judicial review is successful fresh evidence may be put forward, for example, by a whistleblower. It might be difficult or impossible for police or COPFS to ignore such evidence.
Don’t post much, not on Twitter/X anymore (nothing to do with Musk, just find it unusable these days), but always read the blog and really admire his indefatigability (word correctly used on this occasion, George). Keep up the fight. I’ve just donated 50 quid. Will donate more if it gets to the next stage and more needed.
As Fanon wrote, in a colonial society “The national middle class discovers its historic mission: that of intermediary”, between who else but the oppressor and the oppressed.
And it remains the case that “the native…hardly ever seeks for justice in the colonial framework”, because the system is loaded against them.
And inevitably the elites are “condemned by their own hypocrisy” (Cesaire).
Which group, oppressor or oppressed, does Fanon put Professors into?
Once you become a professor in this country you become middle class whether you were before or not.
Alf suggests the ‘natives’ are distinct from the middle class, cannot be middle class. But is he not both? And the middle class are also now the ‘elites’ too.
It’s a confused analysis but that is what you get when you cherry pick quotations and string them together as an argument. Makes you wonder about these professorships.
So have you donated or not, Alf?
Or are you rudely derailing ANOTHER thread with your garbage?
Alf doesn’t have any of his own opinions, he just uses the quotes of others.
That Masters or PhD must’ve been pish easy to achieve, just coping others’ work.
The arrogance of the middle class academia, legends in their own time, detached from reality. Laughable.
Yep, I reckon Messrs. Fanon and Césaire were early pioneers of Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.
Middle class, working class, etc have become a bit meaningless in how they are used today, the terms often being misused by grifters like Bonnie Prince Bob (remember him) to appear radical and worthy. I think there’s a lot to be said for still understanding them in their relationship to capital and economic function – what we might say these days as where your financial interests lie – rather than social prestige or certain lifestyle choices.
The middle classes? Bourgeoisie and petit bourgeoisie might apply to some uni workers who have particularly marketable skills or knowledge, and of course some, like people in many other walks of life, are multiple property owners who gain income from renting those properties or from other capital such as share portfolios. However, many academics have no control over the means of production, no share portfolios, and, indeed many have little in the way of a safety net.
So, if you have uni lecturers whose parents own several houses, and they earn income from a trust fund their parents set up and will inherit their parents’ wealth and you lump them together with lecturers whose parents came from a council house and who rely solely on their salary, that is as valid as lumping together a multiple property owning builder who runs his own company and a 20 year-old labourer. Just because they both like a pint rather than red wine says little.
Who do you have solidarity with – builders? university lecturers? Personally my solidarity is with honest people earning money in ethical ways and who understand what society means. I have little time for Brits these days, but in respect of this fund-raiser, I can respect both lecturers and builders, Brits and Scots (I use the terms to distinguish between those who see the UK as their nation, and those who see Scotland as their nation) who want to see justice done when dishonest people earn money in not just unethical ways, but illegal ways. Middle class, working class, British, Scottish – we all have an interest in the law applying equally to everyone.
I respect anyone who gets up for work every morning, goes to work, pays their own way, pays their taxes and supports their family. I have no care about which particular “class” they consider themselves part of.
I particularly respect those who choose to work for a pittance (e.g. McDonalds, eh Fatso/James), often in lousy circumstances or conditions, rather than just collect benefits and watch TV, and also those SME owners who’ve put their houses on the line and provide employment for others.
Unionist shill; **** off. There’s a good chap.
I’m not going anywhere, Fatty. Enjoy.
Cesaire wrote about “goitrous academics”. I don’t think he was being complimentary, although I do recommend that anybody interested should read his works in the original French, to avoid any translation errors.
Other researchers have written about “goitrous cre tins”, which brings us neatly to James.
James likes to label anyone he disagrees with as “Unionist” or “Yoon”. A bit like Confused’s rantings when its necked the turps again and is smearing excrement on the walls. Bizarre behaviour.
The only thing worse than being talked about, is NOT being talked about …
I seem to have the WORST GROUPIES ON EARTH
main humping all the legs as usual (he’s out on early release because of that gubmint scheme since he did that thing)
link to bbc.co.uk
sparky, sparky – tell us more about the TOTALITARIAN INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FABIANS … are any in the room with us right now?
caveman, our own colonel blimp, smelling of pish and scaring the kids with his werthers (un)-originals(banter)
england and the english : how can I put it ? …
“from hell’s heart I stab at thee; for hate’s sake I spit my last breath at thee”
– that’s one of mine, you can use it.
You are right Confused! Your unhinged idiocy is truly legendary., even here. Very conversation-worthy, personally I find it incredible. Always brightens my day, no matter how dark. I am always, without fail, glad to not be you.
Congratulations. 🙂
“uses the quotes of others”
This is nothing new for academics who logically base their research first on the available scientific evidence.
If we refuse to learn from the past then we are surely destined to make the same mistakes over and over again, much like the SNP leadership, or anyone who believes there may be some justice in a colonial society.
“He who loves practice without theory is like the sailor who boards ship without a rudder and compass and never knows where he may cast.” Leonardo da Vinci
Now there’s a quote that helps explain the importance of postcolonial theory to a colonized people. Only the colonialist would reject such theory.
In fact “the colonizer hates theory” according to Memmi, and for good reason, because “theory helps unveil to the people the reality of their oppression” (Freire).
I’m assuming “sparky” refers to “Spartan”, if I can read correctly through your blurry alcohol-fuelled stupor, 8 Ace.
“tell (sic – no capital) us more about the TOTALITARIAN INTERNATIONAL COMMUNIST FABIANS (sic, Caps Lock got jammed in the wrong place)… are any in the room with us right now?” – funnily enough, yes, there’s one in the picture at the top of the page in the Rev’s article.
Easy to misuse the Caps Lock when you’re trying to type when pished as a fart, which also explains the hateful ranting diatribes at passers-by (the English, HomerSecksuals, Jooz, etc etc etc).
James appears to be a fanboi, to the rest of us you’re just a drunken lout of sub-100 IQ – *very* sub-100 – posting endless rambling diatribes full of primal sub-human hatred and intolerance. You’re an embarrassment to the independence movement, to yourself and to our nation. You have the deepest pity at the state you are in.
Who had Freire on their Bingo card?
Keep ’em coming, ‘Confused’.
Larry, curly and Moe bite every time.
Speaking of stooges I wonder when the fragrant ‘Adrian’ starts his shift…
@Alf – No, those of us who learn read the theory then use it to put it into practice and form our own conclusions.
Ohm’s Law, Bernoulli’s Principle, Newton’s Laws… All observable facts with practical uses.
Theory and quotes without any practical applications… Meaningless. A clanging cymbal, an empty vessel. All noise and no substance. Or, to put it more crudely, All Fart And No Shit.
Those of us with an open, questioning and independent mind read the ideas, quotes and studies of others and use it to form our *own* opinions. We then argue from that point.
Regurgitation of the same small set of quotations from the same small set of referees to support a single point of view that is unwilling to be challenged or changed according to facts is the very antithesis of science and truth and what academia claims to stand for, however I do realise that academia is increasingly politicised these days and has fallen to dogmatic narrow thinking, hence the sheer state these isles find themselves in.
“Those of us with an open, questioning and independent mind”
That’s perhaps a rather theoretical assumption, Spartan, especially for a people who have long been colonised, and the associated pathology that aye comes with colonialism:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
How come you’re immune to the pathology then, Alf?
The vaccinations aren’t available on the SNHS. Did you pay to go private?
Yes Hatey, dealing effectively with the colonial ‘condition’ requires difficult treatment; liberation is the only remedy and takes effect through decolonization (i.e. independence).
In order to ensure the colonized’s complete cure “his alienation must completely cease” (Memmi), for which the total disappearance of colonization, including the ending of cultural assimilation procedures (i.e. colonial education, media, institutional etc.) is necessary.
Sure, Alf. It’s not enough just to be independent.
Year Zero has to be enacted too.
Mass re-education for those not ideologically sound. Maybe take their kids off them too. Can’t have them exposed to the suspect reactionary viewpoints of their parents.
Stick close to Lavrov. He’ll keep you right.
Not so sure about this claim, Alf. There were many armed uprisings in colonial Ireland against English rule. The 1715 and 1745 Jacobite rebellions were, in part, against the Union and it was the clansmen and their chiefs who went to war.
While Henry Joy McCracken, Wolfe Tone and others were the middle class leaders of the United Irishmen it was grass-root supporters who went to battle.
There were secret society groups such as the Whiteboys (their cloaks) in agrarian Ireland who took “justice” into their own hands by destroying property, crops and other actions against landlordism and rack renting.
In the Scottish potato famine it was fishermen, shoemakers who led the insurrection against grain export using what weapons they could get to hand.
BS, sam.
1715 and 1745 were dynastic and sectarian uprisings.
Attempts to depose the Protestant Hanoverian royal line and replace them with the Catholic Stuarts.
This is elementary stuff, sam. If you don’t know it look it up. Don’t make it up.
Tried to depose German Geordie and replace him with the rightful heir to the throne.
There, fixed that for ye.
Can ye no get onything right?
Bullshit from you. As usual you never check anything, you just say whatever shit comes into the brain cell.
This is from the UK parliament.
link to parliament.uk
“The 1715 rebellion
In the next few years, discontent with the Union rankled at all levels of Scottish society. Mainly because of its adverse political and economic effects on Scotland.
Although Jacobitism was never a national movement, the unpopularity of the Union meant that Jacobites across Scotland were able to present themselves as defenders of Scottish liberties, pledged to repealing the Union and restoring Scotland’s parliament.
The outbreak of rebellion in 1715 saw the largest-ever massing of Scottish Jacobite forces against the government.”
Donated Stu.
I have donated. Good luck to you.
Donated. Hope the fund is ring-fenced…
I doubt if Mr Murrell is a trustee of the fund.
Contribution made and more if required. We need justice to hold these lying corrupt sleazebags to account. If the prosecution services and police, whom they control, won’t act then we have to go down this path and hope there is at least one honest member of the judiciary who will ultimately sit in judgement of the case and bring down the whole rotten house of cards.
KC is free and sol reduced, but it’s still an ‘initial’ £30k!?!
Nope.
For the reasons explained in last week’s post about it. Does anyone bother reading past the fucking headline?
Done. Put a few quid extra in as I have a horrible feeling I still owe you from the Kezia thing.
The fighting pot mounting up quite nicely. The SNP needs stopping and removing how anyone can talk about working for this stinking party needs their head read.
Reverend Campbell.
Whatever you do, do not give up in your continuing efforts to expose all those behind this latest, and other scandals, which have made
Scotland a laughing stock under the control of the secretive and corrupt SNP scheisters.
Donated-keep up the good work Stu.
Why no paypal option ?
Sorry I do not feel safe having to give my card details to all, paypal is there for folks like me who feel only having my bank details in one place is more secure for my own peace of mind .
Why it is considered secure
• Direct Lawyer Payouts: Funds do not go to the individual starting the page. Money is securely processed through Stripe and transferred directly into a regulated lawyer’s client account or a registered charity’s account.
• Strict Verification: Before any campaign can go live, CrowdJustice directly verifies that a qualified lawyer or regulated NGO has actually been instructed to handle the case.
• All-or-Nothing Model: If a campaign fails to hit its initial minimum target, your credit or debit card will not be charged.
• Compliance Checks: The platform runs anti-money laundering (AML) and sanctions checks on processing donations.
£100 donated – go get ’em Rev!
I might be a filthy Yoon, but this is a matter of such critical importance to Scotland and the wider UK. Need to remind cunts like this who they actually work for.
Well done Stu! They are rattled! Only those with integrity should be allowed power.
happy to contribute, not happy with crowdjustice. Imposing an extra 20% and calling it a tip is taking the p. make the charge more reasonable and call it what it is,
@ douglas – you can reduce the tip, even to zero.
Wow, the fund is filling up fast, excellent news! I, for one, cannot wait to see the miscreants sweating on the skillet.
50 in with pleasure and appreciation.
Donated and keep ’em worried!
Great support for this absolutely essential court action.
It is an outrage that £700k can be solicited to be ring fenced for a second referendum campaign and then for it to be advised in response to concern, that it was on demand, was woven through the accounts before it was admitted that the cash had gone, had been spent.
And then Plod and the Prosecutor take no action. It absolutely wild. A rotten and corrupt politically partisan police and prosecutor. An invitation to commit fraud for those protected by the rotten and corrupt that control our so called rule of law.
And then you look at the proposals to reduce elected representatives by half in the forthcoming council consolidation into only five regions.
Or you reflect on the absolute scandal of the Standards Commission who have been silencing elected representatives free speech by illegally dragging them through kangaroo courts. And now with the outer house of Scotland’s Supreme Court ruling that the SCS acted illegally with apparent pre determination of outcome, the very same SCS destroy all the case records.
What country in the world allows it courts and tribunals to destroy its records. Its absolutely wild and absolutely reflects a tribunal and a government desperate to stymie the correction of miscarriages of justice and cover up malfeasant and criminal behaviours. There can be no other reasonable reason and it is just another example of the thoroughly rotten governance that pervades our Scottish government.
Good stuff Rev for you and the others who are doing so much to help try to clean our filthy pigsty. Dig deep folks, get involved, lets do the right things.
“It is an outrage that £700k can be solicited”
Small beer when we consider that ScotGov civil servants and its ferry agency officials are still buying a fleet of ferries costing £50 million each when there are perfectly good alternatives costing just £14.5 million:
link to calmac.co.uk
Excellent post.
Has a basis in fact.
Please keep it up.
Roddy Dunlop KC is very highly respected for his legal acumen, intellect and professional integrity.
So, if Roddy Dunlop KC sees so much merit in the case that he’s doing it pro bono, for those that can afford to do so, it is worth supporting this case.
Judicial review is often misunderstood and I think it’s important that folk understand what it can actually do so they can manage their expectations of possible outcomes.
It doesn’t revisit evidence, reopen investigations, or direct prosecutors. It only examines whether a specific public-law decision was made lawfully.
That creates predictable limits.
JR can’t do what people often assume it can do:
– it can’t force Police Scotland to investigate
– it can’t compel COPFS to act
– it can’t reopen a case
– it can’t supervise prosecutorial discretion
– it can’t order disclosure of evidence
– it can’t re-examine factual disputes
JR is about process, not outcome.
JR also requires things that are easy to overlook:
– a specific reviewable decision
– a timely challenge (normally within 3 months)
– a direct personal interest
– a remedy the court is actually able to grant
General grievances, political concerns, or dissatisfaction with an investigation don’t meet these criteria.
And JR avoids things people often want it to address:
– factual disagreements
– historical complaints
– broad allegations of failure
– discretionary decisions made by the proper authority
If a decision falls within lawful discretion, the court will not intervene.
Also, if the petition relies on “failure to investigate”, “failure to act”, or “failure to reopen”, the court may find there is no reviewable decision at all.
Judicial review is a precise legal tool. It isn’t designed to pursue political outcomes, revisit evidence, or compel action. Understanding its limits helps set realistic expectations.
That Northcode is why we want a Judicial Review.
It is as you say a precise legal tool. It will not decide who is guilty of embezzlement. But it will establish the legality or illegality of Police Scotland and the COPFS not pursuing a crime.
And that is absolutely why this judicial review is needed.
In case it wasn’t clear in my last post, a judicial review can only look at whether the decision-making process was lawful — it can’t rule on the merits of the decision itself or require a different outcome.
Also, in case this point wasn’t clear either, judicial review requires what’s called ‘personal standing’ — it means the petitioner must show they were directly affected, which in donation cases normally means proving they personally contributed to the fund.
At 12.30 lunchtime today after two days the appeal has broken £30,000.
Great, great stuff folks, lets keep it up. Together we can all play our part. Let the message go out.
There is work to be done!
Just attempted to donate vis a via bank app twice. Failed. Would be happy to donate by paypal. Wont be donating by providing card details. Frustrating.
Many thanks to Stuart, and to the legal team, for pursuing this. Betraying the trust of innocent people of goodwill, for totally selfish gain, is totally despicable. But it is exactly what you would expect from the criminal cabal currently in charge of the SNP. Justice matters. Victory to WOS.
English, but strangely still committed to Fair Play. So I contributed. Good luck.