AS an SNP member of many years, I am deeply saddened and angered by the actions of Peter Murrell. What he did was an egregious violation of the trust that the members of our party afforded him in good faith.
Not only is it a matter of trust, but a matter of unforgivable political ramifications for a movement so fiercely dedicated to the bettering of our nation and the securing of our independence.
The strength of the SNP has never relied solely on leadership. It depends on the hard-working activists who carry the party on their backs. It is a grassroots operation run by ordinary people from communities across the length and breadth of Scotland. Ordinary people who donate their hard-earned money – and time – because they believe wholeheartedly in its purpose. Those people are the victims of this crime, and deserve to be the centre of the discussion.
Unfortunately, political allegiances have once again laid bare the deep-seated ugliness that exists within Scottish politics.
In any other criminal investigation, where the perpetrator is identified and brought to justice, the system is regarded as having done its job. In this case, the hard work of those who brought him to justice has been, remarkably, undermined. Murrell’s admission of guilt this week should have served as some measure of accountability for his victims. Instead, the moment has been hijacked by a palpably political and desperate effort to implicate his ex-wife in crimes for which there is no evidence she committed.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon hits out at 'armchair detectives' after Murrell speculation
I have seldom, in my lifetime, witnessed a witch hunt quite like it. The reaction from certain corners of our politics has not been one of principle like they might pretend, but of disappointment.
Disappointment that Nicola Sturgeon has not been charged and is not guilty. Disappointment that there is in fact no dramatic conspiracy at the heart of the SNP for them to exploit. In fact – astonishingly – the victims seem to be of little interest at all.
The crime and its real-life impact are inconsequential – the real focus is about taking down a woman that they could never beat on merit, despite their best efforts.
I will be, and have already been, crucified online for using the word “misogyny” – but if what I have witnessed in the last few days does not amount to misogyny in its plainest and most identifiable form, I don’t know what would qualify. Women are so often denied the individuality that is routinely afforded to men.
A man has admitted to this crime – yet the majority of the discourse surrounds the insistence that his now ex-wife must share the moral and criminal responsibility – regardless of the evidence.
Murrell’s admission of guilt follows one of the most extensive, high-profile investigations of our time. In their own statement, Police Scotland praised the officers involved and their “commitment to gathering such detailed and compelling evidence.” The same investigation that ruled out Sturgeon’s involvement. But it doesn’t seem to be enough. Though, granted, nothing less than her being led away in handcuffs to serve a lengthy prison sentence was ever going to be enough for those salivating over the possibility of her downfall.
The absence of evidence against her, instead of being accepted as proof of her innocence – like it would in any other criminal investigation – has been treated as proof that something must have been missed. That she simply must be guilty of wrongdoing and the four-year investigation that spanned multiple countries to the tune of £2 million must have skimmed over whatever it is that they are certain she did.
Our robust criminal justice system has been replaced by the court of opposing political affiliations.
The last few days have been mind-numbing for those of us with a legal education of any kind. For many reasons, not least the doubt cast over the independent decisions of our judicial bodies – but the latest development might just be the most transparently odious in nature. It is difficult to overstate how disingenuous it is to portray a “no comment” police interview as suspicious or non-co-operative.
Anyone with even a minor familiarity with criminal justice procedure understands that exercising your right to silence is neither extraordinary or uncommon. It is a basic legal protection afforded to every citizen. Police interviews are not informal chats with your pals. Everything you say can be used against you – and it is not outwith the realm of possibility for any person that there is a risk of self-incrimination before taking the advice of a solicitor. It is standard therefore – and strongly advised – to take proper legal advice before answering police questions.
Which is, precisely, what Sturgeon did. Conveniently, the part where she provided a written and detailed answer to every question they had after taking said advice is being left out of the Twitter/X fuelled outrage.
READ MORE: John Swinney to seek Section 30 order for indyref2 in talks with Keir Starmer
Justice as we understand it cannot operate on the basis of political demand. We cannot claim to believe in the rule of law only when it produces the outcomes that suit us.
Either evidence matters or it does not. Either due process matters or it does not. Either people are innocent until proven guilty or they are not. Ordinary legal standards cannot cease to apply just because the person in question is Nicola Sturgeon. Criminal defence solicitors all over Scotland are reading this legal commentary through their fingers and wincing in pain.
What has underpinned the response to Murrell’s guilty plea on Monday isn’t in the spirit of justice at all – it’s in the spirit of vengeance. It’s political tribalism parading as a wider concern for the country.
And that’s not to say that criticism of the SNP’s internal processes is illegitimate – Murrell should never have had the power to do what he did. Criticism even of Sturgeon in her capacity as party leader is legitimate – but scrutiny loses all credibility the moment it becomes untethered from the facts – and no political will in the world can change what the truth actually is.
Sturgeon’s fiercest opposers are people who could never diminish her influence electorally and despite being three years on from her resignation as first minister – have never truly reconciled with the fact that she dominated Scottish politics in the way that she did.
The reality, if they were to be truly honest with themselves, is that they thought this was their opportunity to take her down, and it’s a betrayal of unfathomable proportions that her own husband handed them the opportunity. But his stupidity and criminality do not – and will never – make her guilty of something that she simply did not do.
Share