/qresearch/ -  Q Research

>>24498048

https://x.com/EthicalApproach/status/2053857921583194577

ETHICAL APPROACH UK

@EthicalApproach

UK Policing

20th March 2025 - The Day The Veil Was Lifted

For years, many still believed that controversial policing decisions during the Covid period were likely isolated, reactive, or simply the product of institutional confusion under pressure.

Then came 20th March 2025 - The date upon which official disclosure material revealed that a national policing directive had existed instructing officers not to accept certain categories of public report connected to Covid-19 vaccination concerns.

That disclosure changed the constitutional landscape entirely.

From that moment onward, the issue ceased being merely about:

• Covid;

• vaccines;

• or one operational decision.

Instead, a far more serious picture began to emerge.

A picture involving:

• nationally coordinated operational posture;

• harmonised policing response;

• reporting-pathway control;

• guidance dissemination;

• command structures;

• strategic “steers”;

• and the operational management of institutionally difficult matters.

What many had previously dismissed as fragmented inconsistency increasingly began to resemble something structurally coherent.

The significance of 20th March 2025 therefore lies not merely in what was disclosed. It lies in what the disclosure revealed about modern policing architecture itself.

Once operational systems become capable of:

• filtering allegations;

• redirecting reports;

• harmonising institutional response;

• and administratively containing difficult matters,

the constitutional issue extends far beyond any one historical event.

That is why our investigation no longer fundamentally concerns Covid.

Covid was merely the environment in which the architecture became visible and once seen, it can no longer be unseen.

A downloadable briefing:

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/from_allegation_to_institutional_analysis.pdf

From Allegation to Institutional Analysis

How an Investigation into Specific Reports Evolved into Wider Questions About Modern Policing Methods

Author: Ian Clayton

Date: 11 May 2026

Introduction

This paper is intended to explain, in simple and accessible terms, how an investigation which originally began with the examination of specific policing decisions gradually evolved into a broader analysis of modern policing structures, operational coordination and institutional

methodology.

The investigation did not broaden by ideological intention, political motivation or predetermined theory.

It broadened because the evidence itself progressively required wider examination.

What initially appeared to concern the handling of particular allegations, increasingly began to reveal patterns of operational behaviour, coordination and institutional alignment which raised broader public- interest and constitutional questions extending well beyond any single category of allegation. This paper explains that progression.

Pages 1-3 of 7

>>24498048

>>24597071

https://x.com/EthicalApproach/status/2053857921583194577

ETHICAL APPROACH UK

@EthicalApproach

UK Policing

20th March 2025 - The Day The Veil Was Lifted

For years, many still believed that controversial policing decisions during the Covid period were likely isolated, reactive, or simply the product of institutional confusion under pressure.

Then came 20th March 2025 - The date upon which official disclosure material revealed that a national policing directive had existed instructing officers not to accept certain categories of public report connected to Covid-19 vaccination concerns.

That disclosure changed the constitutional landscape entirely.

From that moment onward, the issue ceased being merely about:

• Covid;

• vaccines;

• or one operational decision.

Instead, a far more serious picture began to emerge.

A picture involving:

• nationally coordinated operational posture;

• harmonised policing response;

• reporting-pathway control;

• guidance dissemination;

• command structures;

• strategic “steers”;

• and the operational management of institutionally difficult matters.

What many had previously dismissed as fragmented inconsistency increasingly began to resemble something structurally coherent.

The significance of 20th March 2025 therefore lies not merely in what was disclosed. It lies in what the disclosure revealed about modern policing architecture itself.

Once operational systems become capable of:

• filtering allegations;

• redirecting reports;

• harmonising institutional response;

• and administratively containing difficult matters,

the constitutional issue extends far beyond any one historical event.

That is why our investigation no longer fundamentally concerns Covid.

Covid was merely the environment in which the architecture became visible and once seen, it can no longer be unseen.

A downloadable briefing:

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/from_allegation_to_institutional_analysis.pdf

From Allegation to Institutional Analysis

How an Investigation into Specific Reports Evolved into Wider Questions About Modern Policing Methods

Author: Ian Clayton

Date: 11 May 2026

Introduction

This paper is intended to explain, in simple and accessible terms, how an investigation which originally began with the examination of specific policing decisions gradually evolved into a broader analysis of modern policing structures, operational coordination and institutional

methodology.

The investigation did not broaden by ideological intention, political motivation or predetermined theory.

It broadened because the evidence itself progressively required wider examination.

What initially appeared to concern the handling of particular allegations, increasingly began to reveal patterns of operational behaviour, coordination and institutional alignment which raised broader public- interest and constitutional questions extending well beyond any single category of allegation. This paper explains that progression.

Pages 4-7 of 7

>>24594111

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/snp-law-change-blame-scottish-37144606

Ian Blackford ignites Green row as he calls for visa-scandal MSP to step down

The nationalist government spearheaded legislation which allows anyone legally living in the country the right to stand for office - even if they are only here temporarily.

David Walker

12 May 2026

A SNP grandee has called on the Scottish Greens to sack one of its new MSPs who may be deported before serving his full stint in the Scottish Parliament. Ian Blackford broke ranks to demand the far-left party withdraw Q Manivannan amid speculation about his immigration status.

But it is the SNP Government that can be blamed for the lax rules surrounding who can become Holyrood candidates as it passed through legislation last year to ensure anyone with the right to live in Scotland can become a parliamentarian. Even those on temporary visas can still get into elected office.

The Scottish Parliament passed the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Bill in 2025 which scrapped a previous rule in which only those who had indefinite leave to remain could serve in Holyrood. Now, anyone in the country legally can stand for council or Holyrood elections.

Manivannan, who was born in India, has a student visa which expires later this year. The trans migrant has applied for a graduate visa, which would last three more years, but won't cover his entire reign as an MSP. He hopes to secure a longer-term residency under a “Global Talent Visa”.

But if any of his applications are unsuccessful, he would lose the right to live in Scotland and would be deported. According to the Scotland Act, he would also forfeit his right to become an MSP, meaning the next up on the Scottish Greens Edinburgh list would be called up to replace him.

All parties voted through this legislation, with it initially being spearheaded by the SNP. Former parliamentary business minister George Adam admitted at the time it could "open up elections to foreign players who might wish to undermine Scotland’s electoral system”.

>>24598330

………………………………………………………………………………….continued………………………………………………………………………………………

But it was fully supported by the Scottish Greens, with Gillian Mackay praising this aspect of the legislation during a debate, stating: "A right to vote for refugees was first brought to the chamber in a Green amendment that was lodged in 2018 by my colleague Ross Greer and was supported by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Scottish National Party MSPs.

"We firmly believe that those who reside in Scotland must be afforded the right to vote and decide how best they would like to be represented, and it is logical to give those who have the right to vote the right to stand at such elections."

Then-Scottish Tory MSP and now Reform representative Graham Simpson did raise concerns about this at the time, saying: "The new proposal could mean that someone could be elected with no guarantee that they will be able to stay for their full term. That must be an issue."

Now, Mr Blackford, who is a former SNP Westminster leader, has also slated the new rules now that they have proven problematic. Speaking to the Times in a personal capacity, and as a member of the recently formed ethics and integrity commission, he said: “Quite frankly this should be an automatic vetting fail as a candidate on a student visa does not satisfy the ability to enter into full-time work.

"Selecting such a candidate undermines trust in politics and how on earth some can expect to be sworn in as an MSP without establishing the right to work is beyond me. The Greens are treating the electorate with contempt and given that Q Manivannan cannot satisfy the right-to-work requirements he should not be permitted to take his seat. The Greens ought to propose their next-placed candidate in their place.”

Manivannan moved to Scotland in 2021 to undertake a PhD in international relations at the University of St Andrews. He admitted in a statement that his visa is running out, stating: "I am in the process of transitioning to a graduate visa, which will allow me to stay in the UK for a further three years.

“At the same time, I am applying for a Global Talent Visa, recognising my contributions to the country, which will allow me to stay in the UK for my parliamentary term and beyond.”

But the Home Office warned that there is a real chance his application may be rejected. A spokesman said that these visas are normally dished out to “talented and promising individuals in the fields of science, digital technology, and arts and culture”. He added: “Successful applicants are leaders, or have the potential to be leaders, in their field. It is impossible to indicate whether an individual may qualify before an application.”

>>24594111

>>24598330

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/how-many-foreign-students-could-37144065

How many foreign students could vote in the 2026 Scottish Parliament election?

Q Manivannan is one of nearly 70,000 foreign students eligible to vote in Holyrood elections – and even become an MSP. The total includes around 18k from China, 10k from India and 6k from the USA

Ben Borland

12 May 2026

The election of an Indian national on a student visa to the Scottish Parliament has raised eyebrows around the UK. On his current visa, Q Manivannan is only entitled to work 20 hours a week and cannot take on a full-time job.

The candidacy rules were changed just last year, under the Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Act 2025. When it was passed, the big news was that MSPs were banned from 'double jobbing' at Holyrood and Westminster.

But the SNP Government's changes also allowed foreign nationals, with any form of leave to remain in the United Kingdom, the right to stand as candidates at Scottish Parliament and Scottish council elections.

This isn't the case for UK General Elections, and the rules for voting are different in Scotland as well. Anyone who lives in Scotland can vote for the Holyrood government, including all foreign nationals "who are permitted to enter or stay in the UK".

This includes thousands of people who are here on a student visa, such as Q Manivannan – a non-binary Tamil who moved to Scotland in 2021 to study for a PhD at St Andrews University. He is one of nearly 10,000 Indian nationals who were studying at a Scottish university last year.

According to the Higher Education Statistics Agency, there were 69,935 students with a permanent address outside the UK at the end of the 2024/25. All of them would have the right to vote in Holyrood elections AND the right to stand as a candidate to become an MSP.

Asia: 41,415 students

This total includes:

China 17,785

India 9,575

Pakistan 5,850

Nepal 1,550

Malaysia 1,125

Hong Kong 965

Africa: 6,425 students

This total includes:

Nigeria 3,925

Ghana 830

Kenya 325

South Africa 305

Middle East: 3,210 students

This total includes:

Saudi Arabia: 720

United Arab Emirates: 715

Kuwait: 575

North America: 7,850 students

This total includes:

United States 6,160

Canada 1,235

European Union: 8,140 students

This total includes:

Ireland 1,270

Germany 1,090

France 1,035

Spain 785

Italy 655

Other Europe: 2,030 students

This total includes:

Norway: 395

Switzerland: 395

Turkey: 375

Ukraine: 340

Russia: 205

South America: 495 students

Australasia: 370 students

>>24598392

European Union: 8,140 students

This total includes:

Ireland 1,270

Germany 1,090

France 1,035

Spain 785

Italy 655

Other Europe: 2,030 students

This total includes:

Norway: 395

Switzerland: 395

Turkey: 375

Ukraine: 340

Russia: 205

South America: 495 students

Australasia: 370 students

>>24498044

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeons-confident-good-looking-37145792

Nicola Sturgeon's 'confident and good-looking' first boyfriend the new SNP leader in Glasgow

Nicola Sturgeon and new Glasgow SNP group leader Ricky Bell were 'an item' before she was being 'talked about as a possible future leader'

Ben Borland

12 May 2026

The new leader of the SNP group on Glasgow City Council is one of Nicola Sturgeon's oldest friends – and one of only two men she dated before marrying Peter Murrell.

Ricky Bell replaced the outgoing Susan Aitken with immediate effect during a dramatic day at the City Chambers on Monday, although she will stay on as leader of the council until the autumn.

The Govan ward councillor, who is also the local authority's deputy leader and the city treasurer, was first elected to the council in 2017 when the Nats seized control of the city from Labour for the first time.

In her autobiography, Frankly, Sturgeon describes how she met Cllr Bell while they were young SNP activists in the 1987 general election campaign in Cunninghame South. She recalls wearing "jeans, Dr Martens and a donkey jacket with a carefully positioned CND badge on the lapel: the uniform of the 1980s student activist."

Sturgeon – who was then aged 16 – says she was blown away by this "very confident and good looking" young accountant who "had his own house and car". She writes: "He would often pick me up from school to go to party meetings and events. Being in a political party, which had made me appear weird to my friends and classmates at school, suddenly seemed cool and interesting when it involved being picked up by an older boy in his car."

In September 1987, the group from Ayrshire attended a three-day SNP conference in Dundee and Sturgeon realised "I had feelings for Ricky, and started to think that he might also have feelings for me".

She writes: "Nothing actually happened between us in Dundee but, naive and inexperienced though I was, I felt then that it was only a matter of time before it did. By early 1988, we were an item. And we stayed that way until the early 1990s. The relationship was serious for a while. He took me on my first ever trip abroad, to Paris for my twenty-first birthday. My mum and dad, Mum especially, came to adore him."

However, the young couple started to drift apart as their roles reversed. "Whereas at the start of our relationship he was a young rising star in the party, with me his acolyte, by the early 1990s I was suddenly being tipped for great things and talked about as a possible future leader."

This started to "cause some tension" but Sturgeon says she only came to understand "much later" that "Ricky is gay.(who'd have thunk it?)He now lives in Glasgow with his husband. I danced at their wedding and could not have been happier for them. We are still the best of friends today."

In 2014, the then-deputy first minister was on hand to cut the ribbon at Cllr Bell's new bistro in Shawlands, called Bell & Felix. It was sold in 2019, and is now the Dapper Mongoose.

Although Cllr Ross was her first "serious" boyfriend, the former SNP leader also writes about an "on/off boyfriend" at school called Colin, nicknamed Sparky, who was "beautiful in a very classical sense". Elsewhere in Frankly, she states that she has never considered her sexuality to be "binary" and admits she could fall for a man or a woman.

Meanwhile, Sturgeon's other great friend from her early days campaigning for the late Kay Ulrich was Marie Burns, who also became a leading figure in local politics and stepped down as leader of North Ayrshire Council in January.

>>24598502

………………………………………………………………………………….continued……………………………………………………………………………………….

Although Cllr Ross was her first "serious" boyfriend, the former SNP leader also writes about an "on/off boyfriend" at school called Colin, nicknamed Sparky, who was "beautiful in a very classical sense". Elsewhere in Frankly, she states that she has never considered her sexuality to be "binary" and admits she could fall for a man or a woman.

Meanwhile, Sturgeon's other great friend from her early days campaigning for the late Kay Ulrich was Marie Burns, who also became a leading figure in local politics and stepped down as leader of North Ayrshire Council in January.

>>24598502

………………………………………………………………………………….continued……………………………………………………………………………………….

Although Cllr Ross was her first "serious" boyfriend, the former SNP leader also writes about an "on/off boyfriend" at school called Colin, nicknamed Sparky, who was "beautiful in a very classical sense". Elsewhere in Frankly, she states that she has never considered her sexuality to be "binary" and admits she could fall for a man or a woman.

Meanwhile, Sturgeon's other great friend from her early days campaigning for the late Kay Ulrich was Marie Burns, who also became a leading figure in local politics and stepped down as leader of North Ayrshire Council in January.

>>24498048

https://x.com/EthicalApproach/status/2038279840055415047

ETHICAL APPROACH UK reposted

ETHICAL APPROACH UK

@EthicalApproach

When a Regulator Steps Over the Threshold of Criminality

There is a boundary in law which cannot be crossed. It is the boundary between regulation and the administration of criminal justice.

Our new paper examines what ought properly to occur when that boundary is tested.

A regulator which operates in a manner that suppresses evidence, discourages reporting, or precludes investigation risks exceeding its statutory remit and entering the domain of criminal liability.

This is not a question of tone or disagreement. It is a question of threshold.

The analysis draws upon the December 2024 multi-agency MoU framework, established principles of evidence preservation and disclosure and the constitutional requirement that criminal matters remain capable of independent scrutiny.

The conclusion is unavoidable - Where evidence is not preserved, concerns are discouraged, or investigative pathways are closed, the issue is no longer regulatory. It is legal.

Once a regulator acts in a way which prevents a matter from reaching the criminal courts, it does not merely regulate,but determines what the law is permitted to see.

Find the full paper here:

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/regulation_and_the_threshold_of_criminality.pdf

WHEN A REGULATOR STEPS OVER THE THRESHOLD OF CRIMINALITY

Pages 1-4 of 9

A Constitutional and Legal Examination of Regulatory Conduct at the Boundary of Criminal Law

Author: Ian Clayton

Date: 29 March 2026

Executive Summary

This paper examines the legal and constitutional implications arising where a statutory regulator, acting within its professional disciplinary remit, engages in conduct which has the effect of suppressing, discouraging, or failing to preserve evidence, pre-empting or foreclosing potential criminal investigation, or interfering, directly or indirectly, with the proper administration of justice.

The analysis is grounded in formal multi-agency Memoranda of Understanding (including the December 2024 MoU involving the General Medical Council (GMC), police, and other bodies), as well as established principles of criminal law, evidence handling and disclosure. In addition, it looks at constitutional doctrines governing the separation and integrity of investigative and adjudicative processes.

The central conclusion is clear - A regulator which operates in a manner that prevents, distorts, or precludes the investigation of potential criminal conduct risks exceeding its statutory remit and entering the domain of criminal liability.

This is not a matter of policy disagreement. It is actually a question of legal threshold.

1. Introduction

Regulators exist to uphold standards within defined statutory frameworks. Their proper role is essential to public protection, professional integrity and systemic trust.

However, that role is not unlimited.

There exists a jurisdictional boundary between:

(a) regulatory oversight (fitness to practise, professional

standards), and

(b) criminal investigation (evidence, offences, prosecution)

This boundary is not theoretical. It is operational, legal and constitutional.

Where conduct crosses that boundary, the character of the act changes.

This paper addresses the question:

At what point does regulatory action cease to be lawful oversight and become interference with the administration of criminal justice?

>>24498048

https://x.com/EthicalApproach/status/2038279840055415047

ETHICAL APPROACH UK reposted

ETHICAL APPROACH UK

@EthicalApproach

When a Regulator Steps Over the Threshold of Criminality

>>24598847

There is a boundary in law which cannot be crossed. It is the boundary between regulation and the administration of criminal justice.

Our new paper examines what ought properly to occur when that boundary is tested.

A regulator which operates in a manner that suppresses evidence, discourages reporting, or precludes investigation risks exceeding its statutory remit and entering the domain of criminal liability.

This is not a question of tone or disagreement. It is a question of threshold.

The analysis draws upon the December 2024 multi-agency MoU framework, established principles of evidence preservation and disclosure and the constitutional requirement that criminal matters remain capable of independent scrutiny.

The conclusion is unavoidable - Where evidence is not preserved, concerns are discouraged, or investigative pathways are closed, the issue is no longer regulatory. It is legal.

Once a regulator acts in a way which prevents a matter from reaching the criminal courts, it does not merely regulate,but determines what the law is permitted to see.

Find the full paper here:

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/regulation_and_the_threshold_of_criminality.pdf

WHEN A REGULATOR STEPS OVER THE THRESHOLD OF CRIMINALITY

Pages 5-9 of 9

A Constitutional and Legal Examination of Regulatory Conduct at the Boundary of Criminal Law

Author: Ian Clayton

Date: 29 March 2026

Executive Summary

This paper examines the legal and constitutional implications arising where a statutory regulator, acting within its professional disciplinary remit, engages in conduct which has the effect of suppressing, discouraging, or failing to preserve evidence, pre-empting or foreclosing potential criminal investigation, or interfering, directly or indirectly, with the proper administration of justice.

The analysis is grounded in formal multi-agency Memoranda of Understanding (including the December 2024 MoU involving the General Medical Council (GMC), police, and other bodies), as well as established principles of criminal law, evidence handling and disclosure. In addition, it looks at constitutional doctrines governing the separation and integrity of investigative and adjudicative processes.

The central conclusion is clear - A regulator which operates in a manner that prevents, distorts, or precludes the investigation of potential criminal conduct risks exceeding its statutory remit and entering the domain of criminal liability.

This is not a matter of policy disagreement. It is actually a question of legal threshold.

1. Introduction

Regulators exist to uphold standards within defined statutory frameworks. Their proper role is essential to public protection, professional integrity and systemic trust.

However, that role is not unlimited.

There exists a jurisdictional boundary between:

(a) regulatory oversight (fitness to practise, professional

standards), and

(b) criminal investigation (evidence, offences, prosecution)

This boundary is not theoretical. It is operational, legal and constitutional.

Where conduct crosses that boundary, the character of the act changes.

This paper addresses the question:

At what point does regulatory action cease to be lawful oversight and become interference with the administration of criminal justice?

https://news.stv.tv/politics/donald-trump-congratulates-john-swinney-on-big-election-victory

Donald Trump congratulates John Swinney on 'Big Election Victory'

The SNP has won a fifth victory in Scotland

STV News

May 9th, 2026

Donald Trump has congratulated John Swinney on his “Big Election Victory”.

The SNP has won a fifth victory in Scotland, but fell short of a majority.

But with the SNP once again the largest party at the Scottish Parliament, Swinney is set to be reappointed as First Minister.

Posting on his social media platform Truth Social, the US President said Swinney was a “good man”.

“Congratulations to John Swinney on winning his Re-Election for First Minister of Scotland,” he said.

“He is a good man, who worked very hard, along with the King and Queen of the United Kingdom, with respect to Tariff relief for Great Scottish Whiskey — and deserves this Big Electoral Victory!”

When all the results were declared – after more than 16 hours of counting – the SNP had 58 MSPs – seven short of a majority and down from the 64 the party won in 2021.

Reform UK, who only had one MSP before the election, were tied with Labour for second place, with 17 MSPs each – though this was down from the 22 seats Anas Sarwar’s party won five years ago.

The Scottish Greens, meanwhile, returned 15 MSPs, a record high.

The Tories returned 12 MSPs to the Scottish Parliament – down from 31 at the last election and their worst ever result at Holyrood – with the Scottish Liberal Democrats seeing their total increase to 10.

While Reform UK ended the campaign in joint second, all its MSPs were elected via the regional list system, with Scottish leader Lord Malcolm Offord voted in as an MSP for the West of Scotland after losing out in the Inverclyde constituency.

Sometimes it feels like you are trying to swim upstream in a flash-flood

>>24498031

https://news.stv.tv/scotland/former-bay-city-rollers-manager-involved-in-paedophile-ring-inquiry-told

Former Bay City Rollers manager involved in paedophile ring, inquiry told

A former care home resident told the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry boys were ‘groomed’ at parties at Tam Paton’s house in the early 1980s

PA Media

May 1st, 2026

Ex-Bay City Rollers manager Tam Paton was “100%” involved in a paedophile ring, a former children’s home resident has told an inquiry.

The witness, giving evidence using the pseudonym Murphy, told how young boys were “groomed” at parties at Paton’s house in Edinburgh in the early 1980s.

Murphy, at the time aged in his early teens, was a resident at Ponton House in the city and said he went to parties at Paton’s house because others were going.

Paton, who managed the Rollers through their most successful period, was jailed for three years in 1982 for sex offences involving teenage boys. He died in 2009.

Murphy told the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry (SCAI) in Edinburgh on Friday that drugs and alcohol were available and indecent films would be shown at the parties, where older men would take underage boys off to rooms.

The witness said two people he thought were judges attended the parties, as well as professional people “with their suits and fancy cars”.

Describing one of his experiences, he said: “I was fed drugs in Tam’s living room and a guy came and took me to a room.

“I took a knife with me. I took the knife out and the guy jumped up and told me he was a judge.”

He said he then felt a pain in his head, fell unconscious and was later taken to a car and away from the scene.

Inquiry judge Lady Smith asked whether attending the parties was at first a “what’s not to like” situation.

Murphy replied: “Yes, till it got sexual. At first, it was drugs, then later, it was like we were groomed.

“It was not like you were taken in and there were guys touching you, it was lots of times through the day and you got something to drink, then later on it would be at night.”

He told the inquiry he also encountered convicted sex offender John Wilson, now in his 80s.

Wilson was jailed for more than 12 years in December 2022 after he was convicted of sexual offences spanning 56 years, including sexually assaulting three teenage boys.

Murphy told the inquiry he saw Wilson inside Ponton House but Paton would sit outside in his car waiting to pick boys up and take them to his parties.

The witness said when he was older he became an “enforcer” for Paton and would find boys for him, as he had been threatened with violence if he did not comply and told compromising pictures of him may be shared.

James Peoples KC, lead senior counsel to the inquiry, asked: “Are you in any doubt that what was happening was a paedophile ring?”

Murphy replied: “100%.”

The witness said he was not proud of having procured boys for Paton but said that on one occasion he was threatened with a knife by someone acting for Paton and was afraid about what would happen if he did not do what he was told.

Lady Smith asked how Paton made him feel, to which Murphy replied: “Terrified.”

Murphy also suggested Paton was a man who used his connections with high-profile figures to get what he wanted.

He said: “Tam was a man who liked to tell you what power he had. He didn’t hide who he knew.”

The witness said he did not understand why he had been placed in Ponton House, where he was one of the youngest, as it was more of a hostel for older boys.

Mr Peoples asked whether staff at Ponton House knew what was going on and turned a “blind eye”, and the witness replied: “Yes, as far as I’m concerned.”

The Ponton Trust in 2023 succeeded the Ponton House Trust, which took over the sale proceeds of the house after it was sold in the early 1980s.

A statement on behalf of the Ponton Trust was given at the opening of the latest phase of the inquiry in January and said: “The trustees of the Ponton Trust unequivocally condemn and abhor any such abuse and offer an apology to any young person who was subjected to abuse while residing at the Ponton House Boys’ Residence.”

The current phase of the inquiry is considering the provision of residential care for children and young people in establishments run by local authorities and establishments run by voluntary providers used by local authorities and others to place children in care.

The inquiry continues.

>>24498044

>>24498043

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/dorothy-bain-stand-down-lord-37159199

Dorothy Bain to stand down as Lord Advocate after Peter Murrell briefing row

Dorothy Bain KC has been Lord Advocate since 2021 and she briefed John Swinney on the case against the SNP's former chief executive 10 months before the public knew

Ben Borland

15 May 2026

Scotland's Lord Advocate has informed the First Minister that she plans to step down from the role. Dorothy Bain KC was appointed Lord Advocate in June 2021 after she was "hand-picked" for the post by Nicola Sturgeon.

The Scottish Government said that Ms Bain has now told John Swinney that she "intends to leave office". Mr Swinney is currently mulling over his ministerial appointments, including the Lord Advocate, following last week's Holyrood election.

The news that Ms Bain intends to stand down comes after controversy over the dual role of the Lord Advocate who is both Scotland's chief prosecutor and the Scottish Government's principal legal adviser as a Cabinet minister.

Ms Bain was criticised by opposition MSPs earlier this year after it emerged she informed Mr Swinney of the charges against former SNP chief executive Peter Murrell around 10 months before they were made public. Mr Swinney then said it was "entirely appropriate" for Scotland's top law officer to brief him on "sensitive" court cases.

The Scottish Government said at the time that it considers the current position is appropriate, and that it would be for the next administration formed after the Holyrood election to consider any changes.

Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay said: “Nicola Sturgeon’s hand-picked Lord Advocate pushed contentious SNP policies such as scrapping jury trials and decriminalising possession of heroin and crack cocaine at the stoke of a pen.

“She then went on to share secret information with John Swinney about the criminal case involving Sturgeon’s estranged husband. These are just some of the reasons why the Lord Advocate’s cosy dual role as Scotland’s most senior prosecutor and member of the government must end.

“To rebuild public confidence, Swinney must heed our demands that the post of Lord Advocate is completely separated from government.”

Ms Bain was hauled in front of MSPs twice to answer questions about the Murrell briefing row. Ms Sturgeon's estranged husband has been charged with embezzling party funds and was due in court in March.

>>24498044

>>24498043

>>24610053

…………………………………………………………………………continued……………………………………………………………………….

However, after a tabloid newspaper broke reporting restrictions to publish extensive details of the charges, the hearing was delayed until after voters went to the polls. Mr Murrell is now due in court on Monday, May 25.

Ms Bain's tenure has also seen her announce that possession of drugs would no longer be prosecuted in every case, including class A drugs such as crack cocaine and heroin. She also indicated that heroin users would not be prosecuted for injecting at Glasgow's controversial 'safe consumption room'.

The Lord Advocate also argued at the Supreme Court for Ms Sturgeon's plan to hold an independence referendum without the UK Government's consent – and suffered a bruising loss at Britain's highest court, costing the taxpayer around £250,000 in what many viewed as a pointless exercise.

The SNP has committed to splitting the Lord Advocate's role into two new positions – one as the Scottish Government's legal adviser and the other as the head of the independent prosecution service. However, the party has done nothing to actually make this happen.

Ms Bain succeeded James Wolffe KC as Lord Advocate, taking up the post in June 2021. She served as an Advocate Depute in the Crown Office from 2002 to 2011, securing the first murder conviction against serial killer the late Peter Tobin during that time. In 2009 she was appointed the Principal Advocate Depute, becoming the first woman to be appointed to this post.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "The Lord Advocate has indicated to the First Minister that she intends to leave office.

"A new Lord Advocate will be appointed as part of the process of the formation of the new Government. The First Minister has extended his thanks to the Lord Advocate for her dedication and public service. As is normal following the election, the First Minister is in the process of considering ministerial appointments, including the Lord Advocate."

>>24498044

>>24498043

>>24610053

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/final-straw-dorothy-bain-new-37159755

Was this the final straw for Dorothy Bain? New twist in 'tawdry' Peter Murrell tip-off scandal

Giving secret briefings to the First Minister is the 'proper administration of the legal system' – so why didn't her predecessor do the same for Nicola Sturgeon in the Alex Salmond case?

Ben Borland

15 May 2026

A damning new development in the row over Dorothy Bain's 'tip off' to John Swinney has emerged – on the same day the Lord Advocate announced she intends to stand down.

The country's top law officer told the First Minister about the embezzlement case against Peter Murrell almost a year before details of the charges against the former SNP chief executive were made public.

Ms Bain insisted this was established practice – but it has now been revealed that her predecessor, James Wolffe, did not inform Nicola Sturgeon about the indictment against Alex Salmond when she was First Minister.

The bombshell exclusive was published by the Scottish Daily Mail on Friday morning, just as the Scottish Government was announcing Ms Bain's intention to quit her controversial dual role.

Scottish Conservative MSP for Mid-Scotland and Fife Murdo Fraser told the paper: "This revelation raises serious questions over the Lord Advocate's judgment. There was clearly no precedent for her tipping off John Swinney about a sensitive, high-profile case involving a fellow Nationalist – but she chose to do so anyway.

"By passing on information that was not in the public domain, the Lord Advocate gave Swinney a clear political advantage. This tawdry affair highlights the need to split the dual roles of the Lord Advocate."

Mr Fraser added that there was "a clear conflict in the same person being both Scotland's impartial chief law officer and a member of the government".

In response to a freedom of information request, the Crown Office said "no correspondence was sent between the Crown Office and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon regarding the indictment of Alex Salmond". Mr Salmond was acquitted of a series of sex charges following a trial in 2020.

The prosecution service said it "does not hold a record explaining why no notification was sent [to Ms Sturgeon]", adding: "Processes for identifying and sharing material with Government are now being strengthened."

'Scotland deserves better'

After a tabloid newspaper revealed extensive details of the indictment against Murrell in February, a hearing at which he was due to enter a plea was postponed until May 25 – after the Holyrood election. It then emerged that Ms Bain had briefed the First Minister in January.

She was hauled before MSPs to answer urgent questions amid claims of political bias – but failed to mention that she had in fact given Mr Swinney a much earlier briefing about the case, in March 2025.

In her first Holyrood appearance, she said: "As I have explained the lord advocate of the day may provide the first minister of the day, or indeed prime minister or other minister, with appropriate information on case work or investigations. This is done irrespective of the political party of the recipient of the information. It is done in the proper administration of the legal system."

Her comments came after Mr Swinney also said it was "entirely appropriate" for her to give information to him on the "sensitive" case.

In a tone deaf tweet on Friday morning, former SNP spin doctor Murray Foote wrote: "If Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain's decision to stand down was influenced at all by the unfounded barrage of attacks on her integrity levelled during the election by Anas Sarwar and Russell Findlay, it's further confirmation voters were correct to reject them as unfit to govern.

"Exploiting the unimpeachable reputation of a public servant as collateral damage in pursuit of political gain is shameful politics which has a deeply corrosive effect. It discourages others, particularly women, from stepping into public life. Scotland deserves better."

>>24610053

>>24498043

>>24498044

>>24615702

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/failed-independence-court-battle-peter-37161398

Failed independence court battle to Peter Murrell tip-off: Dorothy Bain's five worst moments as Lord Advocate

Nicola Sturgeon's hand-picked Lord Advocate confirmed she was stepping down from the role after five years - and numerous court defeats.

David Walker

15 May 2026

Scotland's Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain is quitting the role ahead of a new Scottish Government being installed. She told John Swinney that she "intends to leave office" giving him the chance to bring in his own head of Crown Office as well as SNP Executive chief legal adviser.

She was appointed by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021 - and all her predecessors only served the five years of a parliamentary term. She will leave just a few days before Peter Murrell is scheduled to appear in court, charged with embezzling thousands from the party he used to run.

Her time in office was marred by a number of scandals and failed legal escapades, including Operation Branchform and spearheading legislation to legalise taking drugs.

John Swinney Peter Murrell tip-off

Probably the biggest scandal Ms Bain was embroiled in - and it led to her being hauled into parliament to answer questions from MSPs to insist she wasn't "corrupt." She sent private briefings to the First Minister about the upcoming court case involving the former SNP chief executive - and included details about the exact charge he faced.

This information was not publicly available, and the First Minister isn't usually kept up to date on every court case ongoing in Scotland. It led to accusations that she had given him and the SNP a political advantage, as the first briefing came almost 12 months before Murrell faced having to submit a plea in open court.

She also informed Mr Swinney that Nicola Sturgeon wouldn't be facing charges following Operation Branchform – even telling him before police told her. In her defence, she claimed that it wasn't unusual for the Lord Advocate to keep the First Minister informed about high-profile cases.

However, it has now emerged that her predecessor James Wolffe didn't send Ms Sturgeon any similar briefings about the prosecution of Alex Salmond, who was later cleared of a raft of sex charges by a jury.

Embarrassing independence court defeat

Ms Bain was dispatched to the Supreme Court in London to argue that the Scottish Parliament had the power to hold an independence referendum. This was found to be untrue, with the judges confirming that the constitution is reserved to the UK Government.

It was an embarrassing defeat for the Lord Advocate, especially as everyone knew beforehand that the constitution is a reserved matter. It didn't stop Ms Bain from making baseless arguments arguing that a vote could be held if it didn't have an impact on breaking up the UK.

In her concluding remarks, she made it clear that the case was all Ms Sturgeon's doing, blasting the UK Government's argument against her case as "so unfair" and saying: "The trigger is, the First Minister of Scotland, because she recognised the importance of the issue, and the importance of making sure that everything's done legally, asked that I as law officer of the day took the consideration as to whether or not a reference was appropriate."

Gender court defeat

Another brutal defeat for Ms Bain in the Supreme Court came when she tried to contest the UK Tory Government's block on the Gender Recognition Reform bill. Scottish Secretary Alister Jack used the rare Section 35 powers within the Scotland Act to veto it as it impacted the UK-wide Equality Act.

A very unpopular bill, it was forced through Holyrood by Ms Sturgeon and would have let trans people legally change gender without the need of a medical certificate if they lived that way for a minimum of three months. She ignored concerns from women about the safety of female-only spaces such as changing rooms and toilets.

>>24610053

>>24498043

>>24498044

>>24615702

>>24616784

…………………………………………………………………………..continued………………………………………………………………………….

Ms Bain once again battle the UK Government in court and came away with another loss. Her argument that the block was down to a “policy disagreement” between London and Edinburgh was completely dismantled by her rival, and the legislation remains blocked to this day.

Operation Branchform

Calls were made repeatedly for the SNP to seek the power to split the role of Lord Advocate into two roles, one as the government's chief legal adviser and the other as the head of the Crown Office. This became an issue as prosecutors probed Operation Branchform and Ms Sturgeon, while she sat with Ms Bain in Cabinet meetings.

The Crown Office repeatedly insisted that she was playing no role in the investigation - which ran for nearly four years, covered the tenures of three first ministers and two chief constables of Police Scotland, and ultimately cost almost £2.7million. It reached its conclusion with Murrell being charged.

It is the UK Government which ultimately holds the power to split the role, but there have been no attempts by the SNP to ask for this, despite promising to do so in its 2021 manifesto. There is a chance to do this now with a new Lord Advocate needing to be appointed.

Legalising drugs

It was under Ms Bain that Scotland launched the only UK-wide drugs consumption room in Glasgow. She ordered prosecutors and police not to arrest and charge those caught with illegal substances while in the vicinity of the facility in the east end of the city.

Part of the SNP's plans to bring down drug death figures, these have actually gotten worse since the room opened in January 2025. Despite this, proposals have been lodged to create a second facility in Edinburgh, despite the first one just being a pilot which has yet to be reviewed.

She said at the time: “I have concluded that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute people for simple possession offences when they are already in a place where help with their issues can be offered. This policy is an extension of the principles of diversion from prosecution. That is a process by which the procurator fiscal can refer a case to a local authority or other identified agency as a means of addressing underlying causes of offending. "

Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay said: “Nicola Sturgeon’s hand-picked Lord Advocate pushed contentious SNP policies such as scrapping jury trials and decriminalising possession of heroin and crack cocaine at the stoke of a pen. She then went on to share secret information with John Swinney about the criminal case involving Sturgeon’s estranged husband.

“These are just some of the reasons why the Lord Advocate’s cosy dual role as Scotland’s most senior prosecutor and member of the government must end. To rebuild public confidence, Swinney must heed our demands that the post of Lord Advocate is completely separated from government.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqlp9ep6q0zo

Church of Scotland apologises for role in slavery

17 May 2026, 10:55 BST

The Church of Scotland has issued a formal apology for its historical role in slavery.

The apology was adopted at the church's General Assembly in Edinburgh on Saturday.

Before the abolition of slavery in the British Empire in the 1830s, some members of the Church of Scotland offered a theological justification for chattel slavery.

The apology said that the Kirk is "grieved beyond telling by the extraordinary suffering we have inflicted – through our actions and our inaction – on our brothers and sisters".

It adds: "We repent, committing ourselves to changing course and bearing fruit worthy of repentance."

The Kirk has also recognised that historically some of its members would have benefited from direct and indirect participation in the slave trade.

The Very Rev Sally Foster-Fulton, who presented the apology to the General Assembly, said: "The history we consider today continues to shape our world in ways we cannot ignore."

She added: "Its consequences touch communities near and far, influencing the structures, attitudes and inequalities that persist around us.

"The legacy of slavery stretches like a shadow over our local, national and global landscape.

"Naming that is not about blame, but about faithfulness – about recognising that healing begins where truth is spoken."

Rose Wedderburn, general secretary of the United Church in Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, praised the apology.

She said: "While the process has understandably evoked deep emotions – the effort invested in truth-telling and honest engagement is worthwhile."

A number of institutions in Scotland have issued apologies for historical links with slavery, including Edinburgh and Glasgow councils, which did so in 2022.

Will any potential reparations be made also to the Scottish and Irish who were enslaved?

>>24498031

>>24578330

>>24578082

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2p01rzn7mo

Inquiry launched into Scottish Youth Parliament after former chairman jailed

Suzanne Allan

BBC Scotland

12 May 2026

The charity regulator has opened an inquiry into the Scottish Youth Parliament after its former chairman Jordan Linden was jailed for sexual offences against young men and boys.

Linden, who later became SNP leader of North Lanarkshire Council, carried out some of his crimes during his term as the parliament's chairman.

The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator said it would look into regulatory and governance procedures at the charity.

The Scottish Youth Parliament (SYP) said it was "fully committed to supporting that review in any way we can".

Linden was jailed for 18 months last week after being found guilty of sexually assaulting five young men and directing unwanted sexual communications towards seven teenagers, the youngest aged 14.

The 30-year-old denied the offences and has now lodged an intention to appeal his conviction and sentence.

Linden's offences took place between 2011 and 2021, and some of his victims were members of the youth parliament at the time.

He joined the SYP in 2011 at the age of 15 and was chairman between 2015 and 2016.

Members of the Scottish Youth Parliament (MSYPs) are aged between 14 and 25. They are elected every two years to represent Scottish Parliament constituencies and nine national voluntary organisations.

The organisation is led by young people while adults act as supporters, advisers and facilitators.

MSYPs consult young people in their constituency to find out about issues affecting them. Current campaigns include ending gender-based violence and calls for an increase in mental health education and training.

There is also a Welsh Youth Parliament, a Northern Ireland Youth Assembly and a UK Youth Parliament.

After leaving the SYP, Linden became an SNP councillor in 2017. He was appointed leader of North Lanarkshire Council in 2022, but resigned from the post a few weeks later and was arrested in 2024.

The Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator said it had opened an inquiry into the SYP following "an assessment of concerns received about the Scottish Youth Parliament".

"In line with our published policies, we are unable to provide further comment at this time," it said.

The Scottish Youth Parliament said it would fully comply with any investigation.

"We have received notification from OSCR that it has started a review into our regulatory and governance procedures and we are fully committed to supporting that review in any way we can," it said.

"Our safeguarding and child protection policies and procedures have been reviewed and strengthened on a regular basis, including in 2016, 2018, 2021 and 2024, with further updates planned this year.

"We remain committed to maintaining a safe environment for all young people and to continually improving our safeguarding practice."

>>24616856

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy2e59kqdqo

Jailed former council leader Jordan Linden to appeal conviction

Graeme Ogston

Tayside and Central reporter

Published

12 May 2026

A former SNP council leader who was jailed for sexually assaulting five young men is to appeal his conviction and sentence.

Jordan Linden was jailed for 18 months last week after being convicted following a seven-day trial at Falkirk Sheriff Court.

The 30-year-old was also found guilty of directing unwanted sexual communications towards seven teenagers, the youngest aged 14.

Linden stood down as leader of North Lanarkshire Council in 2022 after the allegations emerged.

Linden was also placed on the sex offenders register following his conviction.

The Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service has confirmed that an intention to appeal against Linden's conviction and sentence had been lodged.

In Scotland, an intimation of intention to appeal a conviction or sentence must be lodged within two weeks.

A note with the full grounds of appeal then has to be lodged within the subsequent eight weeks.

The trial was told Linden's offences took place over a 10-year period from 2011 until 2021.

Linden, who also chaired the Scottish Youth Parliament (SYP), had denied all the charges against him, claiming they either did not take place or were consensual.

He became a councillor for the SNP in 2017 and rose to become North Lanarkshire council leader in 2022.

He resigned from the post a few weeks later following the allegations and was arrested in 2024.

The court heard from an SNP party official who said Linden had locked him in a bathroom and tried to get him to urinate while he watched.

The man, who was 18 at the time, said the incident took place after a Dundee Pride parade when Linden was very drunk and being "very handsy" with people.

Another man recalled a "traumatic evening" in 2018 at Linden's flat in Bellshill drinking and said he "vomited in disgust" after waking up to find Linden performing a sex act on him.

>>24498032

>>24498043

>>24498044

>>24498048

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-watchdog-investigating-itself-over-37156037

Police watchdog investigating ITSELF over appointment of Nicola Sturgeon's chief nurse

Exclusive: Fiona McQueen, who sparked fury with a reported 'Disneyland' bribe to bereaved QEUH families, 'transitioned' from the NHS to the Scottish Police Authority

Ben Borland

14 May 2026

The Scottish Police Authority is investigating a complaint about former chair Fiona McQueen, who stepped down in a row over alleged 'Disneyland' comments.

Ms McQueen spent six years as the Scottish Government's chief nursing officer. She was in post during the first year of the Covid pandemic, before retiring in March 2021.

She was also involved in the long-running investigation into infections and deaths at the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QEUH) campus in Glasgow. At a meeting in December 2019, she is said to have asked why the health board didn't just award bereaved families £50,000, enough to pay for a holiday to Disneyland.

Ms McQueen joined the SPA – the public body which oversees Police Scotland – as a board member in February 2021 and was appointed chair by the Scottish Government four years later. But one campaigner says this "transition" should never have happened.

Lesley Roberts, a former nurse and Covid whistleblower, has spent years campaigning to highlight all the deadly errors made by those in power during the pandemic. Her allegation of corporate homicide against the Scottish Government was investigated by detectives, with the Crown Office currently considering the next move.

As we reported previously, the SPA is already looking into her complaint against Detective Chief Constable Alan Speirs, who directed officers not to accept criminal complaints relating to the Covid vaccine – the so-called 'Speirs Directive', which was adopted across the UK.

However, her complaint also encompasses the decision to appoint Ms McQueen. The campaigner says the repeated claim that surgical masks were sufficient to protect healthcare workers from an airborne virus was "disingenuous at best, and deadly at worse"

Her complaint letter states: "Ms McQueen was the Chief Nurse at the time and therefore she should have considered the legal duty of care towards her staff. That should have been first and foremost in her mind. By July 2020 she was still holding the disingenuous position with regards to [surgical] masks. (Which were also distributed to police officers and other public sector workers).

>>24617027

>>24498032

>>24498043

>>24498044

>>24498048

……………………………………………………………………..continued…………………………………………………………………………

"She knew of the evidence and knew that nurses would be injured and could have died of a deadly exposure. Despite knowing such her position and narrative remained and she held fast. "

Ms Roberts continues: "What is very, very worrying is that Scotland's First Minister has decided not to investigate any of this and there is little recourse to challenge his decision."

The SPA has now accepted three 'Heads of Complaint' from Ms Roberts. She has also complained about the "procrastination" from officers at Cowcaddens Police Station in Glasgow when she made her report of culpable homicide against the Scottish Government in March 2023.

Ms McQueen has said she did "not recall" making the comment about Disneyland in relation to bereaved families. Announcing her resignation from the SPA with immediate effect in March, she said: "It has been a privilege to serve on the Scottish Police Authority and to work alongside dedicated board colleagues and the leadership teams across policing in Scotland."

At the time, Justice Secretary Angela Constance thanked Ms McQueen for her "dedication, leadership and experience", adding: "Her commitment to good governance, openness, transparency, and ensuring that people are at the heart of decision making has been central to the SPA's progress."

An SPA spokesperson told the Scottish Daily Express: "The Authority does not comment on complaint and conduct issues."

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/outrage-snp-greens-block-freedom-37157186

Outrage as SNP and Greens block Freedom of Glasgow for Scots army regiment - and brand it 'problematic'

Edinburgh and Aberdeen have already granted the honour to the regiment to celebrate its 20th anniversary

John Glover

14 May 2026

SNP and Scottish Green councillors have been slammed after voting against a motion to give the freedom of Glasgow to the Royal Regiment of Scotland to celebrate its 20th anniversary.

Glasgow Labour councillor James Adams brought forward the motion to Glasgow City Council to recognise the regiment’s service and sacrifice, as well as Glasgow’s longstanding links with the Armed Forces.

More than twenty local authorities across Scotland, including Edinburgh and Aberdeen, have already granted the honour to the regiment, with Glasgow being the first to reject it. The SNP Glasgow Group said giving the regiment the freedom of the city was "inherently problematic".

Labour councillors said the decision leaves Glasgow “completely out of step” with the rest of the country and represents a break from generations of civic tradition in recognising military service. Cllr Adams said: “It is frankly shameful that the SNP and Greens chose to block this honour for the Royal Regiment of Scotland in its 20th anniversary year.

“This was a chance for Glasgow to stand united in recognising the courage, sacrifice and service of the men and women who have served our country, including many with deep links to this city. Instead, the SNP and Greens turned their backs on them. More than 20 councils across Scotland, including Edinburgh and Aberdeen, have already conferred this honour. Glasgow now stands out for all the wrong reasons.

“The Freedom of the City is one of the highest civic honours that can be granted. It has been used for generations to recognise exceptional service and sacrifice. There is no credible reason why the Royal Regiment of Scotland should have been denied that recognition today.

“At a time when servicemen and servicewomen continue to put themselves in harm’s way to protect our country and support communities at home and abroad, this decision sends entirely the wrong message. People across Glasgow will be asking why the SNP and Greens could not bring themselves to support what should have been a simple, respectful and unifying gesture.”

Labour MSP Paul Sweeney added: ”As a former member of the Royal Regiment of Scotland, I am ashamed by the crass refusal by Glasgow City Council to grant the Freedom of the City of Glasgow to the Regiment on its 20th anniversary.

” There are hundreds of serving and former members who are Glaswegian. We lost friends in Afghanistan and Iraq. Half of Scotland’s 32 local authorities have already granted Freedom status to the Royal Regiment of Scotland. Next month, the Regiment will receive the Freedom of Dundee. I hope Glasgow City Council will reflect on this tone deaf decision and reconsider it.”

The SNP and the Greens have been contacted for comment.

>>24498048

Introduction

Operation Talla was publicly described as the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s (NPCC) “flagship” response to the Covid-19 emergency. It was celebrated in awards ceremonies and press releases as an example of policing “excellence” in a time of crisis.

But beneath the slogans and ceremonies lies a far more disturbing truth. Disclosed directives now reveal that Talla instructed forces to treat entire categories of public complaint, notably those concerning vaccine harms, care-home deaths and other Covid policy consequences, as inadmissible.

This was not an operational mistake. It was a deliberate act of constitutional engineering.

Operation Talla became the Mastershield: a mechanism by which the police insulated the executive from legal accountability, suppressing evidence that would otherwise have reached coroners, prosecutors and ultimately the courts.

The Talla Directives - Closing the Evidence Pipeline

Evidence obtained through FOI confirms that under Talla: Police forces were directed not to log or investigate complaints relating to Covid-19 vaccine harms.

Reports of unlawful care-home discharges, midazolam misuse and DNR notices were effectively shut down at source.

Material that would have triggered coronial or prosecutorial duties under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA) was blocked from entry into the criminal justice system.

By closing the evidence pipeline, Operation Talla ensured that entire categories of potential criminality were never exposed to legal scrutiny.

Coroners and Prosecutors - Starved of Material

Under UK law, coroners must investigate deaths that are violent, unnatural, or where state involvement is alleged. Prosecutors must review evidence that may indicate criminality.

Yet under Talla:

Coroners were denied the evidential material they required to open inquests into vaccine-related or policy-related deaths.

Prosecutors were starved of cases because reports were never formally recorded.

Families who tried to raise concerns were told “no crime has been committed” when in fact their complaints had simply been erased from the record. This was not passive omission. It was systemic obstruction of justice.

The Narrative v The Evidence

The “Mastershield” operated in tandem with a narrative machine:

The public were told the NHS was “overwhelmed.” In reality, testimony and hospital data show wards were half-empty.

Families were told discharges into care homes were “safe.” In reality, untested Covid-positive (perhaps more likely, severe flu) patients were sent back into vulnerable populations.

Citizens were told vaccines were “safe and effective.” In reality, evidence of harm was silenced, dismissed, or never recorded.

The effect was to create a parallel reality in which the executive was always right and evidence to the contrary was filtered out by the very institutions meant to protect the people.

Constitutional Consequences

Operation Talla represents a profound constitutional breach.

Ultra Vires Action: The NPCC, a non-investigative body, issued directives that displaced statutory duties owed by investigative forces under the CPIA.

Induced Breach: Police forces, by following these directives, committed breaches of law themselves.

Obstruction of Justice: The systemic rejection of categories of complaint constitutes what may be the largest conspiracy to pervert the course of justice ever perpetrated in Britain.

The Mastershield did not just protect the executive. It transformed policing into a tool of executive power, shielding state policy from scrutiny and depriving the people of their constitutional right to justice. Conclusion

Operation Talla was not simply a policing response to Covid-19. It was the Mastershield - the structural device by which evidence of state wrongdoing was suppressed, accountability was evaded and justice was obstructed.

The result is a crisis not of public health, but of constitutional governance.

The people of Britain must now decide:

Do we accept that the largest conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in our history can be buried beneath awards ceremonies and official slogans?

Or, do we demand accountability and dismantle all of the shields which stand between the people and the truth?

Ethical Approach UK

10th October 2025

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/mastershield.pdf

>>24638392

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/mastershield.pdf

Operation Talla: The Mastershield Against Criminal Accountability

Introduction

Operation Talla was publicly described as the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s (NPCC) “flagship” response to the Covid-19 emergency. It was celebrated in awards ceremonies and press releases as an example of policing “excellence” in a time of crisis.

But beneath the slogans and ceremonies lies a far more disturbing truth. Disclosed directives now reveal that Talla instructed forces to treat entire categories of public complaint, notably those concerning vaccine harms, care-home deaths and other Covid policy consequences, as inadmissible.

This was not an operational mistake. It was a deliberate act of constitutional engineering.

Operation Talla became the Mastershield: a mechanism by which the police insulated the executive from legal accountability, suppressing evidence that would otherwise have reached coroners, prosecutors and ultimately the courts.

The Talla Directives - Closing the Evidence Pipeline

Evidence obtained through FOI confirms that under Talla: Police forces were directed not to log or investigate complaints relating to Covid-19 vaccine harms.

Reports of unlawful care-home discharges, midazolam misuse and DNR notices were effectively shut down at source.

Material that would have triggered coronial or prosecutorial duties under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA) was blocked from entry into the criminal justice system.

By closing the evidence pipeline, Operation Talla ensured that entire categories of potential criminality were never exposed to legal scrutiny.

Coroners and Prosecutors - Starved of Material

Under UK law, coroners must investigate deaths that are violent, unnatural, or where state involvement is alleged. Prosecutors must review evidence that may indicate criminality.

Yet under Talla:

Coroners were denied the evidential material they required to open inquests into vaccine-related or policy-related deaths.

Prosecutors were starved of cases because reports were never formally recorded.

Families who tried to raise concerns were told “no crime has been committed” when in fact their complaints had simply been erased from the record. This was not passive omission. It was systemic obstruction of justice.

The Narrative v The Evidence

The “Mastershield” operated in tandem with a narrative machine:

The public were told the NHS was “overwhelmed.” In reality, testimony and hospital data show wards were half-empty.

Families were told discharges into care homes were “safe.” In reality, untested Covid-positive (perhaps more likely, severe flu) patients were sent back into vulnerable populations.

Citizens were told vaccines were “safe and effective.” In reality, evidence of harm was silenced, dismissed, or never recorded.

The effect was to create a parallel reality in which the executive was always right and evidence to the contrary was filtered out by the very institutions meant to protect the people.

Constitutional Consequences

Operation Talla represents a profound constitutional breach.

Ultra Vires Action: The NPCC, a non-investigative body, issued directives that displaced statutory duties owed by investigative forces under the CPIA.

Induced Breach: Police forces, by following these directives, committed breaches of law themselves.

Obstruction of Justice: The systemic rejection of categories of complaint constitutes what may be the largest conspiracy to pervert the course of justice ever perpetrated in Britain.

The Mastershield did not just protect the executive. It transformed policing into a tool of executive power, shielding state policy from scrutiny and depriving the people of their constitutional right to justice. Conclusion

Operation Talla was not simply a policing response to Covid-19. It was the Mastershield - the structural device by which evidence of state wrongdoing was suppressed, accountability was evaded and justice was obstructed.

The result is a crisis not of public health, but of constitutional governance.

The people of Britain must now decide:

Do we accept that the largest conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in our history can be buried beneath awards ceremonies and official slogans?

Or, do we demand accountability and dismantle all of the shields which stand between the people and the truth?

Ethical Approach UK

10th October 2025

>>24498048

>>24638392

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/mastershield_part_2.pdf

Mastershield - Part 2

Regulation, Crime Recording and the Administrative Architecture of Evidential Suppression Introduction

In October 2025, Ethical Approach UK published “Operation Talla: The Mastershield Against Criminal Accountability”.

That paper examined the proposition that Operation Talla functioned not merely as a policing operation, but as a constitutional shield - a structure through which evidential pathways were obstructed before allegations could mature into criminal accountability.

This second paper extends that analysis.

It does so through examination of three highly significant public records:

• the 2014 House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee report “Caught Red-Handed: Why We Can’t Count on Police Recorded Crime Statistics”;

• HMIC’s 2014 national inspection report “Crime- recording: Making the Victim Count”;

• and oral evidence given to Parliament concerning systemic manipulation of police-recorded crime.

Taken together, these materials reveal something of profound constitutional importance:

Long before Covid-19 and Operation Talla, the British Statealready possessed detailed institutional knowledge that police-recording systems could be manipulated, filtered, downgraded and administratively controlled in ways capable of preventing allegations from ever entering the criminal justice system properly.

Operation Talla did not emerge within a vacuum. It emerged within an already documented environment of:

• evidential filtering;

• statistical manipulation;

• target-driven suppression;

• institutional downgrading;

• and systemic resistance to victim-focused recording.

The significance of this cannot be overstated because if the State already knew these vulnerabilities existed and official reports demonstrate beyond doubt that it did, then the later emergence of nationally coordinated “to not record” practices under Operation Talla takes on an entirely different constitutional character.

The issue ceases to be mere operational error.

Instead, it becomes the apparent deployment of pre- existing institutional weaknesses as instruments of administrative containment.

Part I

The Historical Record Was Already Clear “Caught Red-Handed”

In April 2014, the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee published one of the most remarkable condemnations of police-recorded crime practices ever issued by Parliament.

The report stated:

“There is an accumulation of substantial and credible evidence indicating that the PRC data do not represent a full and accurate account of crime in England and Wales.”

The Committee further concluded:

“We have strong evidence that PRC under-records crime.”

Most significantly of all, Parliament identified the underlying cultural mechanism:

“Numerical targets… drive perverse incentives to misrecord crime.”

This was not a minor administrative criticism.

It was a parliamentary finding that institutional pressures were capable of distorting the integrity of crime recording itself.

The implications were constitutional - because once crime-recording systems become susceptible to performance-driven manipulation, the State acquires the practical ability to influence:

• what enters the criminal justice system;

• what remains visible;

• what disappears;

• and ultimately, what becomes prosecutable.

Part II

“Cuffing” - Parliament Was Told Explicitly

The oral evidence presented to Parliament in November 2013 was even more extraordinary.

Retired Chief Inspector Dr Rodger Patrick described a long-standing police practice known colloquially as “cuffing”.

He explained:

“There are a number of techniques that come under what police officers would call the generic term of ‘cuffing’, which is making crime figures disappear up the sleeve.”

Parliament then heard descriptions of:

>>24498048

>>24638392

>>24638671

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/mastershield_part_2.pdf

Mastershield - Part 2

Regulation, Crime Recording and the Administrative Architecture of Evidential Suppression Introduction

In October 2025, Ethical Approach UK published “Operation Talla: The Mastershield Against Criminal Accountability”.

……………………………………………………………………….continued2…………………………………………………………………….

Pages 5-8 of 12

Parliament then heard descriptions of:

• crimes not being recorded at all;

• crimes being downgraded;

• burglaries reclassified;

• reports converted into non-crime incidents;

• and management interventions causing crimes to

“disappear”.

A serving Metropolitan Police officer, James Patrick, described allegations that crimes:

• vanished from systems;

• were strategically downgraded;

• or remained deliberately outside formal crime categories.

The language used before Parliament is striking.

James Patrick described:

• “management intervention”;

• “strategic investigation to justify the no-crime”;

• and attempts to avoid crimes entering official figures until positive outcomes could be achieved.

This is of enormous significance when viewed against later Operation Talla disclosures because by 2013 - 2014:

• Parliament knew;

• HMIC (now HMICFRS) knew;

• senior policing bodies knew;

• and the Home Office knew that administrative crime suppression was possible within British policing systems.

Part III

HMIC - “Making the Victim Count”

HMIC’s 2014 inspection report then delivered perhaps the most devastating institutional finding of all.

It concluded:

“Victims of crime are being let down.”

HMIC found “Over 800,000 crimes reported to the police have gone unrecorded each year.”

The report further concluded:

“This failure to record such a significant proportion of reported crime is wholly unacceptable.”

Importantly, HMIC did not describe crime-recording rules as optional.

It stated explicitly:

“They are not especially complicated; nor are theyoptional.”

This is critical because Operation Talla disclosures later revealed apparent national guidance structures directing forces away from recording whole categories of Covid- related complaint.

That immediately raises a constitutional question:

How can nationally coordinated “to not record” operational practices coexist with HMIC’s own prior position that crime-recording obligations are mandatory and non-optional?

The contradiction is obvious.

Part IV

The Administrative State and Evidential Containment

The significance of Operation Talla lies not merely in Covid policing itself.

Its deeper significance lies in what it reveals about themodern administrative State.

The historical materials now demonstrate three things simultaneously:

1. The State knew crime-recording systems were vulnerable to manipulation.

This was formally identified by:

• Parliament;

• HMIC;

• whistleblowers;

• and official statistical authorities.

2. The State understood that institutional pressures could suppress crime visibility. Parliament itself warned that target culture distorted recording behaviour.

3. Operation Talla later introduced nationally coordinated operational filtering.

The later disclosures concerning:

• vaccine complaints;

• care-home deaths;

• and Covid-related evidential rejection must therefore be viewed against a backdrop where the vulnerability of police recording systems was already well understood institutionally.

That changes the constitutional analysis fundamentally, because the issue ceases to be, “Could such suppression occur?”

Instead, the question becomes:

“Why were systems known to be vulnerable later aligned with nationally coordinated evidential filtering practices?”

Part V

The Mastershield Evolves

>>24498048

>>24638392

>>24638671

>>24638700

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/mastershield_part_2.pdf

Mastershield - Part 2

Regulation, Crime Recording and the Administrative Architecture of Evidential Suppression Introduction

In October 2025, Ethical Approach UK published “Operation Talla: The Mastershield Against Criminal Accountability”.

……………………………………………………………………….continued3…………………………………………………………………….

Pages 9-12 of 12

Part V

The Mastershield Evolves

The first Mastershield paper argued that Operation Talla functioned as a protective structure shielding the executive from legal exposure.

This second analysis suggests something even more serious.

The Mastershield may not have begun with Covid.

Covid may instead have revealed the mature operational use of a pre-existing administrative capability - the ability to regulate evidential visibility itself. Not through overt censorship. Not through formal abolition of legal process.

But, rather, through upstream administrative control:

• classification;

• recording;

• downgrading;

• “no-criming”;

• statistical filtering;

• and institutional non-entry.

This form of control is exceptionally powerful because it operates before courts become involved.

If allegations never properly enter systems:

• prosecutors cannot review them;

• coroners cannot examine them;

• courts cannot adjudicate them;

• and the public cannot measure them accurately.

In constitutional terms, this is not merely information management. It is evidential sovereignty.

Part VI

The HMICFRS Problem

A particularly striking feature of the present situation is the apparent resistance by HMICFRS to engage substantively with Operation Talla-related concerns.

This itself is remarkable, simply because the historical HMIC material now forms one of the strongest evidential foundations demonstrating:

• the importance of accurate crime recording;

• the dangers of evidential suppression;

• and the constitutional consequences of non-recording practices.

Nonetheless, despite this historical position, Operation Talla-related concerns regarding:

• non-recording;

• rejection policies;

• and evidential filtering appear to have generated institutional reluctance rather than rigorous inspection.

That tension is impossible to ignore, particularly given HMIC’s own previous conclusions that:

• crime-recording rules are mandatory;

• victims are harmed by non-recording;

• and systemic under-recording undermines public trust.

Conclusion

Operation Talla did not emerge into an unsuspecting constitutional environment.

The historical record demonstrates that British institutions already knew:

• crime-recording systems were vulnerable;

• manipulation could occur;

• institutional pressures distorted outcomes;

• and victims could disappear administratively from the record.

Parliament knew this.

HMIC knew this.

Senior policing leadership knew this.

That is what makes Operation Talla constitutionally significant - the disclosures associated with Talla appear not as isolated anomalies, but as manifestations of a deeper administrative capability already long understood within the architecture of British governance itself.

The modern constitutional danger is therefore no longer simply unlawful policy. It is actually the emergence of systems capable of regulating what may formally exist as evidence at all and once the State acquires the practical ability to determine which allegations become institutionally visible, the distinction between administration and accountability collapses.

Ian Clayton

23 May 2026

>>24498048

https://ethicalapproach.co.uk/email_and_memo_to_NPCC_24052026.pdf

Notice of Public Record Memorandum - Crime Recording Integrity and Operation Talla

To: National Police Chiefs’ Council

Cc:

(1) House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs

Committee;

(2) His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services

Date: 24 May 2026 at 10:44

Dear Sir/Madam

Notice of Public Record Memorandum - Crime Recording Integrity and Operation Talla

Please accept this email as formal notice that the attached memorandum has now been placed upon the public record.

The memorandum concerns matters relating to:

• crime-recording integrity;

• historical parliamentary findings;

• HMIC/HMICFRS observations;

• Operation Talla-related evidential visibility;

• and the constitutional significance of the February 2022 NPCC internal communication referring to the “success” of “guidance to not record”.

The memorandum has been prepared in the interests of constitutional transparency, evidential clarity and public accountability.

Given the historic involvement and interventions of both the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) and HMIC/HMICFRS in matters relating to police crime-recording practices and evidential integrity, copies of this notice and memorandum are also being provided to those bodies.

The memorandum does not seek to advance sensationalism or unsupported allegation. Rather, it identifies a plainly arising constitutional issue concerning the interaction between:

• historical evidence of crime-recording failures;

• subsequent institutional reform narratives;

• and later operational communications emerging within the context of nationally coordinated Covid-19 policing structures.

In particular, the memorandum addresses the constitutional implications arising where:

• prior parliamentary and inspectorate warnings concerning evidential suppression already existed;

• and subsequent internal policing communications later referred to the “success” of guidance “to not record”.

The memorandum further records concern regarding the characterisation of constitutional correspondence raising such issues as “vexatious”.

For the avoidance of doubt, this communication is sent in the interests of:

• procedural fairness;

• institutional transparency;

• and accurate public record preservation.

The attached memorandum is now publicly available and forms part of the continuing public-interest examination of these matters.

Yours faithfully

Ian Clayton

Lead Investigator

Ethical Approach UK

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

To: National Police Chiefs’ Council

Copy to: House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC)

Copy to: His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS)

RE: Crime recording integrity, historical parliamentary findings and the constitutional significance of the February 2022 NPCC internal policing communication referring to the “success” of “guidance to not record”

This memorandum is placed on the public record in the interests of constitutional transparency, evidential clarity and public accountability.

It concerns the increasingly serious constitutional implications arising from the interaction between:

(1) historical evidence concerning police crime-recording practices within the United Kingdom;

(2) the subsequent findings and observations of Parliament and HMIC/HMICFRS;

(3) evidence emerging in relation to Operation Talla and associated Covid-19 policing structures; and

(4) the present institutional response to questions raised in respect of those matters.

>>24498048

>>24642427

……………………………………………………………………continued2……………………………………………………………………

The purpose of this memorandum is not to advance sensationalism, nor to allege criminal liability absent due process, but rather to identify a profound and plainly identifiable issue of constitutional concern.

Historical Context

In 2013, parliamentary proceedings relating to police crime statistics heard evidence from whistleblowers, including a former member of Metropolitan Police personnel, James Patrick (and others), concerning the alleged manipulation and suppression of crime recording practices.

The matters described before Parliament included allegations that offences were being administratively downgraded, reclassified, or otherwise prevented from entering formal crime-recording pathways.

The term “cuffing” entered public discussion within this context, referring to practices by which crimes were allegedly made to “disappear up the sleeve”.

The significance of those proceedings is not merely historical.

Rather, they established publicly and institutionally that concerns relating to evidential visibility and crime-recording integrity were both real and serious enough to warrant parliamentary scrutiny.

Subsequently, HMIC undertook extensive examination of crime-recording practices throughout policing. Its findings were grave.

HMIC concluded that substantial volumes of crime were not being properly recorded and stated publicly that victims of crime were being failed by the existing position.

The constitutional importance of those findings cannot be overstated.

They demonstrate conclusively that concerns relating to institutional under- recording or evidential suppression are neither fanciful nor unprecedented within British policing history.

The February 2022 NPCC Communication

Against that established historical backdrop, the emergence of an internal National Police Chiefs’ Council communication dated February 2022 assumes exceptional constitutional significance.

The communication records that:

“…guidance to not record has been a success”.

The seriousness of this wording does not arise merely from semantics. Its significance arises because the statement now exists within a documented historical continuum already marked by:

• whistleblower evidence;

• parliamentary scrutiny;

• HMIC/HMICFRS findings;

and prior institutional assurances that lessons had been learned regarding crime-recording integrity.

Accordingly, the issue presented is not simply whether particular wording was unfortunate.

Rather, the issue is whether a policing culture already historically criticised for evidential suppression subsequently developed operational approaches capable of producing materially similar outcomes under a different national context.

That constitutional poinyt now plainly exists.

Operation Talla and Evidential Visibility

Publicly available primary evidence now demonstrates the existence of nationally coordinated policing structures operating under Operation Talla during the Covid-19 period.

Pages 5-6 of 8

>>24498048

>>24642427

>>24642448

……………………………………………………………………continued3…………………………………………………………………….

Material already disclosed includes:

• nationally circulated directives;

• operational guidance;

• and evidence suggestive of coordinated approaches to the handling, filtering, or redirection of certain categories of public allegation.

Whether such measures were lawful, proportionate, constitutionally appropriate, or evidentially compliant is a matter requiring transparent scrutiny rather than institutional avoidance.

The constitutional concern is straightforward:

If policing institutions are entrusted with the duty of faithfully recording allegations and preserving evidential visibility, then any guidance, policy, or operational culture tending toward the suppression, filtering, or institutional non-existence of allegations engages matters of the utmost constitutional gravity.

The “Vexatious” Issue

Particularly concerning is the subsequent response adopted by the NPCC in relation to constitutional correspondence raising these issues.

Questions directed toward matters of:

• crime-recording integrity;

• Operation Talla;

• evidential visibility;

• and constitutional accountability, have been characterised in writing by NPCC as “vexatious”.

That position gives rise to a serious additional constitutional difficulty.

Where historical evidence already demonstrates prior institutional failings in relation to crime recording and where further evidence later emerges touching related themes, it is plainly insufficient for scrutiny itself to become procedurally dismissed or institutionally marginalised.

To categorise constitutional questioning as “vexatious” in such circumstances risks creating the appearance that institutional self-protection is being prioritised over transparent public accountability.

That perception is profoundly damaging to public confidence.

Conclusion

The issue now arising extends well beyond any individual allegation or isolated operational decision.

The matter concerns whether the systems entrusted to preserve evidential integrity have, at any stage, participated in practices tending toward the institutional management of what allegations are permitted formal existence.

That question strikes directly at the constitutional legitimacy of policing itself.

For that reason, these matters cannot responsibly be treated as peripheral, inconvenient, or procedurally disposable.

They require calm, transparent and evidence-led examination consistent with the constitutional obligations owed by public institutions to the population they serve.

Ian Clayton - Lead Investigator, Ethical Approach UK

24 May 2026

Pages 7-8 of 8

>>24498044

>>24475896

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/nicola-sturgeon-breaks-silence-after-37202334

Nicola Sturgeon breaks silence after Peter Murrell pleads guilty to £400k embezzlement spree

The former SNP leader said she had suffered 'acute pain' by being 'deceived and let down by a husband I loved and trusted'

Ben Borland

25 May 2026

Former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon insisted she had "no knowledge or suspicion whatsoever" that Peter Murrell, her estranged husband, was "using SNP funds for personal purposes".

She said she was "utterly appalled" he had done so, adding that she "could not begin to understand why". The former SNP leader said her reaction to her former partner's guilty plea was "difficult to put into words".

Posting on Instagram, Ms Sturgeon said she was "angry, hurt, sad and very distressed about the impact of his actions on family, friends and the SNP".

The former party leader, who stepped down as an MSP at May's Holyrood election said: "To be deceived and let down by a husband I loved and trusted has caused me acute pain. Why he acted as he did is, and always will be, beyond my comprehension."

Ms Sturgeon also said after her estranged Peter Murrell pleaded guilty in court: "To be clear, I had no knowledge or suspicion whatsoever that he was using SNP funds for personal purposes. I am utterly appalled that he did so and con not begin to understand why."

She continued: "That I was fully cleared after a through investigation underlines that these are not my crimes. I was misled, just as others were." She accepted there would be a "political discussion in the light of what has happened" but added that for her this "has also been a profound personal trauma".

Ms Sturgeon said: "I need to remain focused on recovering from that and building a new phase of life. I will be making no further comment."

It is understood that she moved out of the couple's home in Uddingston, after Murrell was arrested and later charged over the large-scale embezzlement of donations to the SNP.

She announced their separation with a post on Instagram in January 2025, writing: "With a heavy heart I am confirming that Peter and I have decided to end our marriage. To all intents and purposes we have been separated for some time now and feel it is time to bring others up to speed with where we are. It goes without saying that we still care deeply for each other, and always will. We will be making no further comment."

Murrell had been chief executive from 2001 and they became a couple in 2003. They married in 2010, while Ms Sturgeon was Alex Salmond's deputy. In an interview with the FT last year, she said their relationship had been "all-consuming for a long, long time".

>>24643742

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/details-peter-murrells-original-indictment-36715704

All the details from Peter Murrell's original indictment that we couldn't publish… until now

Among the charges is allegations that Mr Murrell used party sums to buy a motorhome he later 'stored' at his mother's house, and used SNP credit cards to fund the purchase of other vehicles

Ben Borland & Douglas Dickie

25 May 2026

Peter Murrell was due to face eight charges relating to embezzlement of SNP funds when he was originally due to appear at the High Court in Glasgow in February.

However, after the Scottish Sun tabloid broke reporting guidelines to reveal extensive details from the indictment – with the BBC later doing the same – his court appearance was delayed until May 25, after the Holyrood elections.

Now that he has pled guilty to embezzling more than £400,000, we CAN reveal details from that indictment. Peter Tierney Murrell, 61, the former partner of Nat leader Nicola Sturgeon, was originally accused of embezzling £459,046.49 between August 12, 2010 and January 13, 2023.

The addresses listed on the indictment included the couple's home in Uddingston; SNP headquarters in Edinburgh; Western Volkswagen at Edinburgh's Luxury Car Village; Pentland Jaguar, Edinburgh; John Lewis, Glasgow; Boots, Glasgow; B&Q stores in Glasgow and Edinburgh; Homebase, Dunfermline; Caulders Garden Centre, Cumbernauld; and Shetland Jewellery, Shetland.

Purchased a VW Golf from Western Volkswagen, at a cost of £32,989, between January-March 2016, using £16,489 of SNP funds.

Purchased a Jaguar I-Pace from Pentland Jaguar, at a cost of £81,277, between September-November 2019, using £57,500 of SNP funds. Murrell later sold the car to a branch of We Buy Any Car in Glasgow in August 2021, with over £47,000 being paid into his personal bank account.

Purchased a Niesmann and Bischoff Smove motorhome, at a cost of £124,550, between October-December 2020, using SNP funds.

Embezzled £18,408.91 from the SNP between January 2019-December 2022, through business expenses he was not entitled to, including £12,042 to part fund the purchase of the Jaguar I-Pace. Murrell was further accused of making false invoices for a payment to Apple retail of £12,042, and to German company Manufactum for £2,478 for "purported business Parking ticket related" purchases.

Embezzled £81,610.19 from the the SNP, between August 2010-January 2023, by purchasing items on Amazon "for your own personal use or the personal use of others", using party credit and charge cards.

Embezzled £157,757.39 from the the SNP, between December 2014-June 2022, by purchasing items from a long list of retailers "for your own personal use or the personal use of others", using party credit and charge cards.

Used a party credit card to pay a £30 parking ticket at Kirkcaldy's Victoria Hospital in October 2019.

Sold an iPad registered to the party for £701 in June 2021

Sold an iPad registered to the party for £701 in June 2021

The retailers listed on the indictment were: Frank Smythson, Herring Shoes, A Fine Pair of Shoes, Church & Co (Footwear), Richemont (UK) and its subsidiary Montblanc (UK), G. Ettinger, Estee Lauder Cosmetics, MAC Online, Jo Malone, Dyson Ltd, John Lewis PLC, Arredatutto, Utility Design, Hamilton & Inches, Wheelers Luxury Gifts, Speciality Drinks and its subsidiary The Whisky Exchange, Neville Johnson, The Conran Shop, Richmond Cookshop, AO Retail, The Royal Mint, Kato Group and its subsidiary Knives & Tools, Boots Opticians, Jura Luxury Watches, B&Q, Eden Springs, Jura Products, Fortnum and Mason, Davek Accessories, QS Supplies, Expert Electrical Supplies trading as Davek Accessories, QS Supplies, Expert Electrical Supplies trading as Downlights.co.uk, Le Creuset UK, Lubkowski Saunders and Associates tradinig as LSA International, Let's Shop Airbus, Park Cameras, RE Dawson, Wayfair, Robert Welch Designs, Coggles.com, Welland Cane & Garden Furniture, Maufactum, Norah George Yarns, Tumi, a subsidiary of Samonsite,

>>24643878

………………………………………………………………………………continued…………………………………………………………………………………………

Binopolis, Simplehuman (UK), Ligo Electronics, Isle of Harris Distillers, Paint Direct, Lark and Larks, Peugeot Saveurs, Touch of DIY, Wood by Post, Victorinox, SPC Marketing, Sam Turner & Sons, Alex McDougall (Mowers), Caulders, Shetland Jewellery, Molton Brown, Naken Interiors, Ironmongery Direct, Helly Hansen, PerfectDraft UK, Homebase, Argos, Lalique, Prime Tools, Sensio, Selfridges, Leatherman, Getpotted.com, Amara Living, Coir Mats, Toolshack UK, A. Fulton Company, Waterford, Made in Design, The Folio Society, All Car Parts, EV Cable shop, Harrods, Imperial Yard trading as Yard O Led and others.

Charges 5 and 6 were amended in court on Monday before Murrell's guilty plea, to reduce the sums embezzled from Amazon and the retailers listed above by around £50,000.

Murrell was chief executive of the SNP for 22 years between 2001 and 2023. He and Ms Sturgeon married in 2010, but the pair split and in January 2025, Ms Sturgeon said they were divorcing.

Murrell was arrested in April 2023 as part of a police investigation named Operation Branchform, with the home he shared with Ms Sturgeon raided by police. He was charged a year later and made no plea when he first appeared in court last year.

Ms Sturgeon was also arrested and quizzed by officers, in June 2023, but it was confirmed in April 2024 that no further action was being taken against her. The police probe was said to centre on around £660,000 of donations.

>>24643742

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/peter-murrell-appointed-john-swinney-37202355

Peter Murrell was appointed by John Swinney, helped the SNP win elections and almost sparked its downfall

The shamed former SNP Chief Executive pled guilty at court to embezzling £400,000 from the party - putting an end to the long-running scandal which blew up the career of his estranged wife Nicola Sturgeon.

David Walker

25 May 2026

The success of the SNP as a party is often attributed to the popularity of Alex Salmond - but there was also a huge deal of work undertaken behind the scenes and led by Peter Murrell. And while his rise to Chief Executive coincided with the rise of the nationalist party as a political force, his downfall almost destroyed the SNP.

Initially serving as an election agent to candidates in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, he enjoyed a steady rise up the ranks thanks to a close relationship with the late Alex Salmond, serving as his constituency researcher, as well as running his Banff and Buchan office as his assistant.

But it was under the first leadership of John Swinney that he was promoted to a top role within the SNP, becoming the Chief Executive in 2001, replacing Mike Russell. At the time, the leader said: I will now be setting him some demanding targets to build SNP HQ into the campaigning and fund-raising centre we require to win the 2003 elections.

He initially had a torrid time under the leadership of the current First Minister, who had three disastrous election results and resigned following internal pressure.

Murrell's organisational skills have been credited with revamping the party and modernising it, with many experts hailing this as one of the key aspects behind Mr Salmond's victory in 2007 which brought the SNP into power for the first time. He was also pivotal behind the scenes in the majority win in 2011, which led to an independence referendum.

But according to Police Scotland, a year before this (2010) he took advantage of his position as Chief Executive and began to embezzle cash from the party, money which was donated by members. It came to the police and public's attention in 2021 when £600k of ring-fenced funds for a second referendum went "missing" from the accounts, and cops began to investigate.

Murrell made a number of key internal changes to transform the SNP, including attending the infamous Craigellachie Hotel summit in 2005 where senior party figures resolved to ensure the party won the 2007 Scottish election. It saw them devise a strategy to finally defeat Scottish Labour.

He is also credited with delivering the "Activate" system, which allowed party activists on the ground to relay voter information back to party HQ. It was a smartphone application which helped to target voters, and he convened focus groups to know what Scots wanted.

It worked well after the 2010 General Election when the Lib Dems went into power with the Conservatives, allowing the SNP to swoop in and target its disaffected voters, with 800,000 switching to them in the final week ahead of the 2011 election, according to YouGov.

Their manifesto was launched one week after their rivals’ and partly rewritten in order to adapt to the climate of the campaign. It also focused on individuals like Mr Salmond, leading a presidential-style campaign with his name appearing on ballot papers and focusing on personal achievements, with the manifesto containing memories of MPs who had won by-elections, famous party campaigns (oil, the poll tax) as well as glossy photographs of marriages (Murrell and Sturgeon), newly-born babies (such as Swinney’s) and deaths since 2007.

Sturgeon as First Minister

But it all started to go wrong within the SNP when Murrell's wife took over as First Minister in 2014. Concerns were raised internally about the power being shared between husband and wife, but these were rejected by Ms Sturgeon. During this timeframe, Murrell continued to embezzle cash.

>>24643992

……………………………………………………………………………….continued………………………………………………………………………………………

She told the Herald at the time: “I’ve been deputy leader for years while Peter’s been chief executive for 10 years. That’s not been an issue that’s given rise to any concern internally. In the constitution of the SNP, the oversight of the administrative side of the party lies with the business convener, not with the leader. So I’m comfortable there are no issues that arise.”

But while the SNP did continue to enjoy electoral success - winning in 2016 and 2021 - it failed to achieve a majority once again. It also suffered a brutal General Election 2017 campaign, losing 21 MPs.

It all came tumbling down when Ms Sturgeon quit as First Minister in 2023, citing exhaustion. It led to a bitter election contest where Murrell was accused of lying to the press and members about membership figures, claiming they hadn't fallen 30,000 from the high of more than 100,000.

He was forced to publish them following a public outcry, and then quit his role after a backlash within the party. Just a week after Humza Yousaf became First Minister, police raided Murrell and Sturgeon's marital home and arrested him. It led to a cash crisis within the SNP as members and donors abandoned the party.

With Operation Branchform hanging over the SNP's head, support for the party plummeted and it was on track to lose the 2026 Holyrood Election - and suffered huge losses at the 2024 General Election. Murrell was charged with embezzlement on April 18 2024, with the case taking two years to come to a conclusion.

He was meant to enter a plea on February 20, 2026, but the case was delayed after the indictment was leaked and reported in the press. It meant that the case was delayed until May 25, two weeks after the Holyrood election. He pled guilty to stealing £400,310.65 from the party to fund his lavish lifestyle and was remanded in custody.

Assistant Chief Constable Stuart Houston, the officer in charge of Operation Branchform, said: “He abused his privileged position with access to Scottish National Party funds to divert cash into his own accounts and bankroll the lavish lifestyle he craved but could not afford.

“From 2010 to 2022 he spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on luxury goods while carefully trying to hide his criminality with false receipts and accounting. He must now face the consequences of his actions.”

What did Swinney know

Mr Swinney was an old friend of Murrell from the days when SNP support was limited. He was also Ms Sturgeon's closest colleague in government for years, but the wisdom of him originally appointing him as Chief Executive will now be questioned.

He has tried to distance himself from Murrell - and has presented the SNP as victims of crime committed by the man he put in charge of the party originally. He has claimed to tighten the financial controls of the SNP and may seek to recover the money stolen from them.

>>24648950

>>24643992

Bain appointed by Sturgeon, Murrell appointed by Swinney. It's all very cosy isn't it?

>>24617027

Chief nurse appointed by Sturgeon.

>>24616784

>>24615702

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/dorothy-bain-urged-set-out-37211775

Dorothy Bain urged to set out why Nicola Sturgeon wasn't charged after hiding behind loophole

The former First Minister is relying on the defence of Police Scotland clearing her of any wrongdoing but the secretive Crown Office won't reveal its reasons behind why she didn't stand trial.

David Walker

27 May 2026

Dorothy Bain has been urged to ignore her boss John Swinney and publish the reasoning behind the Crown Office not charging Nicola Sturgeon in relation to Operation Branchform. The former First Minister has repeatedly proclaimed that she had no idea her estranged husband was embezzling £400k of party funds.

She is relying on the fact that she was never charged in relation to this - with her lawyer Aamer Anwar pointing to this in a hastily drafted statement on Tuesday night. He said: "Had there been any evidence whatsoever of criminality against Ms Sturgeon, there can be no doubt that this gold-plated investigation would have led to Ms Sturgeon being charged and prosecuted."

But the public have been kept in the dark about the reasoning behind her being arrested but then not charged following the conclusion of the investigation. Police Scotland did compile a dossier of evidence and asked the Crown Office for advice before deciding to take no further action.

At the Scottish Parliament on Tuesday, John Swinney refused requests for this to be published, pointing out the police probe had now concluded. The Crown Office previously refused to explain its reasoning, following a freedom of information request, on the grounds that a criminal case is ongoing.

It can no longer rely on this loophole following Murrell's guilty plea, so the Lord Advocate is facing calls to publish this information, before she steps down from the role. Ms Sturgeon benefited from her husband's lavish spending spree on cars, luxury household goods and jewellery but has claimed that she never suspected him of any wrongdoing.

Mr Swinney has attempted to move on from the scandal by blocking inquiries and pressing questions about the SNP's governance, but his rivals have refused to let him. Now, Scottish Tory leader Russell Findlay has demanded full transparency from the Crown Office.

He said: “Faith in the integrity of Scotland’s justice system has been shattered by this epic SNP scandal which reaches into the heart of government. Senior SNP figures publicly tried to exert undue influence on Police Scotland so was there any other meddling behind the scenes?

“And the Lord Advocate, appointed by Nicola Sturgeon, was passing sensitive information to John Swinney while the public was kept in the dark. The Lord Advocate has a duty to publish the reasons why only one person was prosecuted and whether Police Scotland agreed with that decision.

>>24652644

…………………………………………………………………………..continued……………………………………………………………………………

“An explanation should also be provided about the timing of this case which spanned five years yet ended with a guilty plea just after the election, to the SNP’s clear advantage. The reason given for blocking Scottish Conservative efforts to disclose this information a year ago no longer apply. To repair public confidence in Scottish justice, it’s time for full transparency.”

The Scottish Tories asked for "the direction that was provided by the Crown Office that was referred to in Police Scotland’s statement on 20 March 2025 which read: ‘Following direction from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, criminal inquiries into two people arrested as part of the investigation [Operation Branchform] into the funding and finances of the Scottish National Party have now concluded. The 73-year-old man arrested on 18 April 2023 and the 54-year-old woman arrested on 11 June 2023, have not been charged and are no longer under investigation.’"

But this was not provided as "it is held for the purposes of an investigation which the authority has a duty to conduct to ascertain whether a person should be prosecuted for an offence."

A Crown Office spokesman said: "A request from Police Scotland for advice and guidance in an investigation into a 73-year-old man and a 54-year-old woman was responded to by COPFS. The request was handled as part of a large-scale wider inquiry and without delay on the part of the prosecution service who recognised its significance.

“Professional prosecutors from COPFS and independent counsel dealt with this without involving the Lord Advocate or Solicitor General. All Scotland's prosecutors operate independently of political influence. Where allegations are made against people or institutions in which the public have placed trust, it is the responsibility of the authorities to conduct a thorough investigation to determine if there is evidence that criminal conduct has occurred.

“We understand public curiosity about this investigation. However, the Crown does not publicly share details of confidential inquiries where there are no proceedings in court. This protects the rights of the individuals concerned who are entitled to a presumption of innocence.”

>>24652657

……………………………………………………………………………..continued…………………………………………………………………………….

“An explanation should also be provided about the timing of this case which spanned five years yet ended with a guilty plea just after the election, to the SNP’s clear advantage. The reason given for blocking Scottish Conservative efforts to disclose this information a year ago no longer apply. To repair public confidence in Scottish justice, it’s time for full transparency.”

The Scottish Tories asked for "the direction that was provided by the Crown Office that was referred to in Police Scotland’s statement on 20 March 2025 which read: ‘Following direction from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, criminal inquiries into two people arrested as part of the investigation [Operation Branchform] into the funding and finances of the Scottish National Party have now concluded. The 73-year-old man arrested on 18 April 2023 and the 54-year-old woman arrested on 11 June 2023, have not been charged and are no longer under investigation.’"

But this was not provided as "it is held for the purposes of an investigation which the authority has a duty to conduct to ascertain whether a person should be prosecuted for an offence."

A Crown Office spokesman said: "A request from Police Scotland for advice and guidance in an investigation into a 73-year-old man and a 54-year-old woman was responded to by COPFS. The request was handled as part of a large-scale wider inquiry and without delay on the part of the prosecution service who recognised its significance.

“Professional prosecutors from COPFS and independent counsel dealt with this without involving the Lord Advocate or Solicitor General. All Scotland's prosecutors operate independently of political influence. Where allegations are made against people or institutions in which the public have placed trust, it is the responsibility of the authorities to conduct a thorough investigation to determine if there is evidence that criminal conduct has occurred.

“We understand public curiosity about this investigation. However, the Crown does not publicly share details of confidential inquiries where there are no proceedings in court. This protects the rights of the individuals concerned who are entitled to a presumption of innocence.”