The case against Peter Murrell and why Sturgeon wasn't charged
How economic crime detectives and prosecutors brought former SNP chief executive to justice
The beginning of what would become Operation Branchform came in March 2021, when Sean Clerkin, a prominent independence activist, walked into a police station and made a formal complaint concerning the SNP’s finances.
Soon afterwards, police began to receive a trickle of similar complaints via email and contactless forms from party donors, with statements taken from more than a dozen individuals in total. The allegations, prosecutors believed, could amount to fraud, a view shared by Crown counsel.
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) knew that if it was to bring fraud charges, it required evidence of a false representation, that the person making that representation knew it was false, and fundamentally, that any statements made caused money to be handed over to the SNP.
Mr Clerkin had accused the party of misusing a so-called ‘ring-fenced’ independence fighting fund of £667,000 on “general” campaigning. The money had been raised via two online fundraisers after Nicola Sturgeon announced plans for a second referendum in March 2017.
However, determining what funds were ringfenced, and whether any fraud was committed, was problematic. Although the SNP had Salesforce data which allowed it to determine how much money was donated to the independence campaign, any money from donors went into the one central bank account, with no separate account for any referendum financing. There was also doubt over exactly what was meant by ‘ring-fenced’, beyond political rhetoric.
Having waded through a mountain of evidence - there were 516 witness statements in total - including statements made by the party, and statements from complainers, prosecutors decided by early spring 2023 that there was insufficient evidence that a fraud had been committed, having been unable to prove there were any false statements which led to money being handed over.
Police Scotland submitted an advice and guidance report to the procurator fiscal, but the COPFS decided there was insufficient admissible evidence against Ms Sturgeon and Colin Beattie, the former SNP treasurer.
But at the same time, the investigation had shifted course. By autumn 2022, various financial irregularities had come to light via the SNP’s accounts - an early red flag was the identification of purchases made with Le Creuset at a time when the party’s finances were at a relatively low ebb - and a specialist team of economic crime detectives and prosecutors at the Scottish Crime Campus at Gartcosh in North Lanarkshire were running an embezzlement investigation in parallel to the fraud probe.
At first glance, the embezzlement issue seemed relatively straightforward, given it was Peter Murrell who controlled the SNP bank account, and was able to operate it as he saw fit. But as time passed, the scale of his transactions grew, and a picture began to emerge of how they had been falsely coded in the party’s financial accounting system, with false invoices also used.
The case grew in complexity, with some evidence obtained from overseas jurisdictions, depending on where Murrell bought items from. The key material for the investigation was banking information, with financial records detailing purchases stretching back to 2010. The SNP co-operated with prosecutors via its solicitor, but information was also obtained from other sources, such as financial institutions directly, allowing investigators to get hold of certain information the party itself could not provide, such as customer notes, IP information, and other back entry information.
Matters came to a head on 5 April 2023 when there was a ‘day of action’ which saw Police Scotland carry out searches at a number of addresses, including the Glasgow home shared by Murrell and Ms Sturgeon, as well as the SNP’s headquarters.
The subsequent operation made headlines around the world, and also saw Police Scotland face criticism over what some felt was a spectacle-cum-circus. However, the force took the view that the plans - and the size of the tent in particular - were necessary, in part to accommodate the sheer number of items recovered from the property and ensure they were kept out of sight.
That day had been planned for four weeks in advance, with warrant requests created on 3 April to allow time for them to be checked and passed to police. The timing, it was decided, also bolstered the chances of keeping the planned searches secret, with only a tight group in the know.
Such a decision was indicative of the careful steps taken during one of the highest profile investigations in Police Scotland’s history. At one point, it consulted the UK National Crime Agency (NCA) as part of a peer-review style process of its work, and the COPFS also took steps to safeguard the integrity of its work; a convention, whereby any decisions relating to politicians are kept away from law officers, immediately came into effect, and all significant decisions were taken by an advocate depute, who was a KC, with those decisions reviewed by another KC.
Senior officers may believe their decision was vindicated, but even in the aftermath of Murrell’s sentencing, questions undoubtedly remain.
The Scotsman understands the team behind Operation Branchform had further questions for Ms Sturgeon even after she was interviewed by police under caution and submitted a written statement. However, her lawyer, Aamer Anwar, has hit out at “anonymous sources” who who accused of “desperately” trying to insinuate her guilt, and stressed that following a two year “gold-played and robust investigation, Ms Sturgeon was neither charged nor prosecuted.
Although the sprawling 126 page court indictment against the 61 year-old detailed more than 1,000 individual purchases, not all of them have been recovered, such as the now notorious £2,618 Lalique salt and pepper grinders he purchased in January 2020.
Some of the items were consumables, while others are believed to have been given by Murrell to others as gifts. Some of those people were approached by police, and some items have been handed over to the police. At least some of those items have come from the SNP, which made the force aware of a number of items it had recovered. It is understood the items in question - around 20 or so - were smaller gifts, such as pens, that had been given out by Murrell.
Amid ongoing calls for a public inquiry into the Murrell scandal, there is also a chance that an investigation around the SNP’s finances could be reopened if new information comes to light.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.