Scottish Borders Council ‘covered up’ MASSIVE PAYOUT for departing Chief Executive David Hume to avoid impact on Local Government elections in May

WHO PUSHED WHO ? Council Leader David Parker & Chief Executive David Hume before murky exit. THE controversy surrounding the departure of David Hume from his post as Chief Executive at Scottish Borders Council, reported earlier in the month by Scottish Law Reporter HERE continues unabated, after the member of the public who had been investigating the strange case of Mr Hume’s alleged ‘retirement’, which has now been revealed through the usage of Freedom of Information legislation as an apparently secret voluntary redundancy, has now approached the Local Government Minister for help in uncovering the true nature of Mr Hume’s exit from Scottish Borders Council, along with details of what is reckoned to be a massive financial payoff.

The individual who has continued his investigations on the strange case of Mr Hume’s sudden exit from Scottish Borders Council has told Scottish Law Reporter of ongoing correspondence between himself, the Information Commissioner and the Scottish Government regarding the murky situation of SBC’s Chief Executive exit last August 2011 and a continuing unwillingness by the Council to reveal any further facts.

Meanwhile the Southern Reporter, a weekly newspaper from the Scottish Borders, now reports the Council will finally announce Mr Hume’s payoff, sometime in July.

The FOUR MONTH delay, according to an SBC insider speaking to Scottish Law Reporter, is so that the release of the information including how much Mr Hume was paid out does not impact on the local authority elections coming up on 3 May 2012, in which the ruling Conservative & Liberal Democrat parties at SBC are expected to take a battering from the voters.

A Scottish Government insider told SLR “It would be a grave matter if Scottish Borders Council delayed publishing the information on Mr Hume’s exit to avoid an impact on the ruling parties chances in the upcoming Local Government elections.”

The Southern Reporter reports :

Ex-SBC chief’s pay-off will be revealed – in July

Published on Sunday 25 March 2012 18:47

DETAILS of the financial settlement which former Scottish Borders Council chief executive David Hume received when he unexpectedly left his post last year will be made public.

A spokesman at Newtown St Boswells confirmed this week that the local authority was required to publish the 59-year-old’s pay, severance and pension benefits in its annual accounts for 2011/12 which will be open for inspection in July.

But the council is still refusing to publish these details in advance and this week’s announcement has failed to placate the Borderer who, as reported last week, has twice unsuccessfully attempted to use Freedom of Information (FoI) legislation to get to the truth.

And the man, who does not wish to be named, has this week taken his complaint to the Scottish Information Commissioner, claiming there has been a “cover-up” about the true nature of Mr Hume’s departure.

He has also written to Scottish local government minister Derek Mackay asking for an independent inquiry to be launched into the way his requests were dealt with, alleging the council had “lied” by stating in July last year that Mr Hume had retired from his £123,000-a-year post.

In his letter to the commissioner, the complainer alludes to a council press release, issued on July 1 last year, which stated: “After nine very successful years at SBC and following a change in his personal circumstances, David Hume will be retiring from his post as chief executive with effect from Monday, August 15, 2011.”

The complainer goes on: “On February 3, 2012, SBC replied to my [FoI] request, refusing to publish any information ... and refused to confirm my enquiry on whether Mr Hume retired or whether he took voluntary redundancy. On February 6, I asked SBC for a review of this decision and on March 7, following the review, I was told again the information would not be published.

“They did, however, confirm that Mr Hume did not retire as per the announcement in the original press release and that Mr Hume had taken voluntary redundancy.

“This is clearly a cover-up and the council has lied to the public and media.”

In his letter to Mr Mackay, the member of the public states: “I knew the SBC press release was full of false information and I knew Mr Hume had not retired.

“It cannot be acceptable for a Scottish council to lie to constituents, taxpayers and the media about the retirement of senior officials and cover up payouts of public money. The financial arrangements of voluntary redundancy are very different to those applied to retirement.

“We all deserve a full explanation about why SBC felt they needed to lie in a press release and cover up Mr Hume’s voluntary redundancy.”

Mr Hume has, as reported last week, been informed of The Southern’s request for a comment, but has still not contacted us.

An SBC spokesman said yesterday: “The decision of the council’s Freedom of Information advice group still stands. The council will be required to publish Mr Hume’s 2011/12 pay, severance and pension benefits in its annual accounts. The accounts will be open for public inspection in July 2012.

“Until then, it would not be appropriate for this information to be released for the reasons already stated.”

Crown Office ‘misled court’ : SCCRC statement on Lockerbie Trial reveals possible miscarriage of justice over conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi

SCCRC Statement of Reasons casts doubt over conviction of Lockerbie bomber. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission’s ‘Statement of Reasons’ in the case of the conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi over the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in December 1988 has been published by the Sunday Herald newspaper been published by the Sunday Herald newspaper, beating all ‘official’ moves by the Scottish Government, Crown Office & even the SCCRC itself to publish the report in full, which indicates there may well have been a miscarriage of justice in the conviction of Mr Al Megrahi in 2001 at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. The SCCRC’s report can be read here : SCCRC Statement of Reasons - Lockerbie Trial & Conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi

The Sunday Herald’s publication of the SCCRC report follows a media release from the Crown Office on Friday, indicating the SCCRC would not face criminal prosecution if they chose to publish the report. The Crown Office move only came about as a result of being told the Sunday Herald would be publishing the report in it’s next edition.

The Crown Office statement on Friday : SCCRC WILL NOT BE PROSECUTED FOR PUBLISHING MEGRAHI STATEMENT OF REASONS said : The Crown Office today confirmed that no current member or employee of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) would be prosecuted if its Statement of Reasons in the case of Abdelbaset al Megrahi is formally published. Whilst it is currently an offence for the Commission to disclose information obtained in its investigations, the Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland QC, considers it would not be in the public interest to prosecute, given the selective publication of the Statement of Reasons in the media. The Crown Office has today written to the SCCRC to clarify the position.

A Crown Office spokesperson said : “The Crown has repeatedly made it clear that it has no objection in principle to the publication of the SCCRC Statement of Reasons in the Megrahi case. Following the recent selective and misleading reporting of the Statement of Reasons - which would have been properly argued in Court had Megrahi not chosen to abandon his second appeal - the Lord Advocate wishes to ensure that there are no perceived barriers to publication, beyond the proper legal requirements which the Commission must take into account in publishing the document.

“Accordingly, the Lord Advocate has today confirmed that it would not be in the public interest for current members and employees of the Commission to be prosecuted in terms of the offence of disclosure in section 194J of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 in relation to any official publication of the Statement of Reasons.”

However, after the Sunday Herald’s publication of the SCCRC statement of reasons, the Crown Office issued a further statement (not yet published on the Crown Office website), attacking the media’s ‘intrusion’ into the debate and the Sunday Herald’s publication of the SCCRC report, stating : "The Commission was working to facilitate the publication with appropriate protection for all of the persons named in it taking account of their human rights [articles 2 and 8] and issues of confidentiality. The unauthorised publication by the Sunday Herald today does not deal with any of these issues which rightly constrain all public authorities by law.

"We have become very concerned at the drip feeding of selective leaks and partial reporting from parts of the statement of reasons over the last few weeks in an attempt to sensationalise aspects of the contents out of context.

"Persons referred to in the statement of reasons have been asked to respond to these reports without having access to the statement of reasons and this is to be deplored. Further allegations of serious misconduct have been made in the media against a number of individuals for which the Commission found no evidence. This is also to be deplored. In fact the Commission found no basis for concluding that evidence in the case was fabricated by the police, the Crown, forensic scientists or any other representatives of official bodies or government agencies."

Meanwhile First Minister Alex Salmond welcomed the Sunday Herald’s publication on 25 March of the SCCRC statement of reasons, releasing the following statement yesterday (Sunday) : Lockerbie case

Commenting following the online publication by the Sunday Herald of the full statement of reasons by the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission in the Megrahi case, First minister Alex Salmond said: "I welcome the publication in full of this report, which is something that the Scottish Government has been doing everything in our powers to facilitate. I especially welcome the fact that it offers a full account of the SCCRC’s deliberations rather than the partial accounts which have appeared in the media in recent weeks.”

Mr Salmond continued : "While the report shows that there were six grounds on which it believed a miscarriage of justice may have occurred, it also rejected 45 of the 48 grounds submitted by Megrahi, and in particular it upheld the forensic basis of the case leading to Malta and to Libyan involvement. This report provides valuable information, from an independent body acting without fear or favour, and while we can not expect it to resolve all the issues in the Lockerbie case, it does however lay the basis for narrowing the areas of dispute and in many ways is far more comprehensive than any inquiry could ever hope to be. The Lockerbie case of course remains an open criminal investigation, and while the only place to determine guilt or innocence is in a court of law, the SCCRC is a valuable body which is itself part of the Scottish criminal justice system."

Christine Grahame MSP, the Chair of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee has now called for an inquiry into the Crown Office, amid allegations a former Lord Advocate misled the court which convicted Abdelbaset Al Megrahi.

More analysis of the Lockerbie case and recent developments can be found on Professor Robert Black’s blog The Lockerbie Case

Scottish Govt 'Powerskills' project aims to take Criminals cash to create youth job opportunities

POWERSKILLS, a programme launched by the Scottish Government aims to use cash & assets seized from crooks to help young people access apprenticeships. (Hopefully some of them will be sent to learn at the Crown Office – Ed)

Criminals’ cash creating job opportunities

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has launched a unique scheme which uses crooks’ cash to help young people access apprenticeships. The PowerSkills programme offers opportunities for youths coming through the CashBack programme get off the streets, gain an engineering qualification and the chance to progress towards an apprenticeship with ScottishPower. It’s the first time the Scottish Government’s CashBack for Communities Programme has worked with business to give young people the opportunity to get into employment.

Twelve teenagers are already enrolled in a six-month training programme at Cardonald College in Glasgow. The resulting qualification offers eligibility to the ScottishPower Foundation Engineering Programme. CashBack PowerSkills also offers youngsters two day energy sector taster sessions at Scottish Power’s training centre.

Young people from challenging backgrounds [judged to be of use to the Scottish Government’s press team for later publicity] are selected for the scheme through CashBack’s Personal Development Partnership, which is run by Venture Trust, The Prince’s Trust Scotland / Fairbridge and Venture Scotland.

Mr MacAskill said: “We want our young people to have as many positive opportunities as possible. Jobs and economic growth are this Government’s top priorities and youth employment is one of the most critical. This link up with ScottishPower is an exciting collaboration between business and CashBack to help young people access free training, develop their skills and get jobs. The programme is already working extremely well and the first intake of twelve youngsters are on their way to accessing apprenticeships. This is another exciting strand of our CashBack for Communities Programme which uses bad money for good purposes. Cash seized from the proceeds of crime is used to get kids off the streets, away from trouble and into positive activities, giving them the chance to reach their full potential. We have invested over £45m to benefit over 600,000 young people since CashBack began offering young people positive opportunities and investing back into communities.”

Youth Employment Minister Angela Constance added: “This is an innovative and exciting use of Cashback funding and will help improve the employability of the young people who take up the course. The Scottish Government is committed to 25,000 Modern Apprenticeship opportunities this year, and in every year of this Parliament. Earlier this year we delivered a Youth Employment Strategy, and through Opportunities for All, we have guaranteed a place in training or education for every 16-19-year-old.”

Sheila Duncan, Human Resources Director at ScottishPower, said: “ScottishPower is committed to supporting young people to develop their skills and confidence in order to help them prepare for their future. We were very pleased to get involved in the CashBack for Communities programme and build upon the great work that has already been done in supporting young people with other CashBack partners. The Power Skills Programme is unique in that it is the first Cashback programme that aims to support young people in gaining qualifications that can lead directly to potential employment opportunities. We also continue to support their personal development by including the Duke of Edinburgh’s Bronze Award as part of the programme, which will help to develop life skills. The team at Cardonald College have been fantastic to work with, and we are very encouraged by the reports we have had so far on the progress of the students. We hope that this programme will help us to find the engineers and technicians of the future.”

Elish McPhilomy Angiolini’s Magic Circle : Crown Office ‘ruined’ Operation Planet to avoid jailing judges & prosecutors in Scots 'gay justice' scandal

Former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini’s role in Magic Circle report now under spotlight THE role of Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC (born McPhilomy) in OPERATION PLANET, the 1990’s drive by Lothian & Borders Police to investigate, capture & convict some of the top personalities in Scotland’s legal world who were involved in conspiracies to commit sexual offences with other men and under age boys has resurfaced in the media amid scrutiny over the failure of the Crown Office to prosecute anyone in connection with abuse claims made by vulnerable children in the Aberdeen area, and claims some of Scotland’s current judges along with high profile members of the Faculty of Advocates & solicitors are concerned they are about to be exposed all over again in revelations over the arrest of a seedy lawyer alleged to be smuggling drugs into Scottish prisons who was also a central character in the original Magic Circle gay sex for judges scandal in the late 1980’s & early 1990’s.

Legal insiders, now aware of the recurring media interest in the scandal aim to lift the lid on just why several of Scotland’s most senior judges & law officers escaped prosecution for a series of activities which included “drugging young males”, “kidnapping young male residents of care homes for sexual activity” and “perverting the course of justice”.

Senior judges, prosecutors and solicitors, some of whom are still serving in Scotland’s legal establishment today were accused by Police of running a child sex ring for their own pleasure. However, no one from the legal world ever faced justice for their activities, partly because attempts at prosecuting many of those involved failed, after what Police insiders claimed at the time was a deliberate policy by the Crown Office to throw the cases. Only one high profile resignation was ever reported, that of the then Lord Dervaird, who is now a high profile member of the Scottish Government backed Scottish Arbitration Centre.

A recent closer inspection of some of those working at the Crown Office at the time of the Magic Circle affair, reveals some well known celebrities of Scotland’s legal world, revealed in reports in the UK Column : “Towards the end of March 1991 – and as a direct consequence of ‘Operation Planet’, and prosecutions relating to acts of sodomy upon teenage boys – an internal study paper was produced by The Crown Office that sought to establish a rationale for, and the extent to which, the protections offered by Common Law could be circumvented, and statute law ignored. The author of that paper was the (then) Senior Legal Assistant at The Crown Office, Elish McPhilomy (now Elish Angiolini).”

Nimmo Smith QC’s REPORT ON MAGIC CIRCLE GAY JUSTICE SCANDAL, widely regarded by many as a whitewash of the corruption in the Scottish judiciary, identifies Dame Elish Angiolini who worked at the Crown Office at the time as a Senior Legal Assistant, under her maiden mane of Elish McPhilomy. It was clear from subsequent discussions, the report played a heavy part in formulating Crown Office policy on the prosecution of judges, lawyers & other members of the legal profession who were engaging in the illegal sex acts with other men & under age boys.

Nimmo Smith’s report (pages 16 & 17 ) states : “At about the end of March 1991 Elish McPhilomy, the then Senior Legal Assistant at the Crown Office, was asked to prepare a background paper on the prosecution of consensual homosexual offences. Her paper concluded that if a policy direction was considered to be appropriate and necessary with regard to homosexual offences, some consideration might be given to the following aspects:

1) The minimum age for homosexual relations. 2) The need for preventive prosecution directed at the male trade in prostitution with use of section 46 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Ac t 1982. 3) The restriction of prosecution of the client or older man to those situations demonstrating in particular a clear breach of trust, or the overcoming of will by drugs, threats etc. 4) The treatment of homosexual and heterosexual acts of indecency on an equivalent basis. 5) The use of statutory provisions rather than common law charges wherever possible.”

Given Dame Elish Angiolini’s role in the online debate over the Crown Office refusal to prosecute senior members of the legal establishment who are alleged to be implicated in the abuse of vulnerable children across Scotland, and particularly in the long running case of downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig , the UK Column have published an excellent report on Operation Planet and its recurring effect today in what must be one of Scotland’s most shocking uses of the justice system against an abuse victim, her family and their campaigner Robert Green, who was recently jailed for a year, simply for handing out leaflets on the case.

Scottish Law Reporter recently published an investigation into the knighthood of Angiolini, apparently recommended by the Scottish Government. Dame Elish Angiolini was also appointed Ministerial complaints adviser to Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond. More recently, Dame Elish Angiolini was also appointed to the post of Principal of St Hugh’s College, Oxford.

It should be noted “Operation Planet” was initially opened as “Operation Uranus” by Lothian & Borders Police although the name was changed to the former, more discreet title than the latter, apparently after complaints from … the Crown Office.

The UK Column’s report : Operation Planet, Abuse of Justice & The Crown Office Of Scotland

On the 29th April 1991 a meeting was held between Lord Fraser (the Lord Advocate), Lord Roger (the Solicitor General), Duncan Lowe (the Crown Agent), Alfred Vannet (the Deputy Crown Agent) and persons unknown, to discuss a report written by Elish McPhilomy (now Dame Elish Angiolini), that sought to establish a rationale for, and the extent to which, the protections offered by Common Law could be circumvented, and statute law ignored.

Article | March 13, 2012 - 1:47pm | By Tony Shell

‘Operation Planet’, Edinburgh

On the 24th March 1990 the Edinburgh Police launched ‘Operation Planet’. That police initiative followed the discovery of a 16-year-old boy in a house in the city centre who, over a period of 10 days, had been plied with cannabis and repeatedly sodomised by a number of men. The boy had been on weekend leave from a local children’s home. Evidence uncovered in subsequent police enquiries indicated the men were also engaged in homosexual ‘rent boy’ activities, and were linked to a ‘network’ of older men.

The ‘Operation Planet’ Court Case and Judgments

By the time the ‘Operation Planet’ case was brought before court, a total of 10 men had been arrested, on a total of 57 charges. Those charges related to the taking part in, and the procuring of, acts of sodomy upon the boy contrary to Common Law and the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980, the supplying of cannabis to the boy contrary to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and harbouring and concealment of a boy under supervision care contrary to the Social Work Scotland Act 1968.

The pre-trial hearings took place between the 9th and the 11th January 1991. During those hearings it was agreed between the Crown and defence counsels to reduce the 57 indictments to just 10 – allowing five defendants to walk free, and with pleas arranged for the remaining five. Police officers involved in “Operation Planet’ were totally confounded, and extremely angered, by this extraordinary turn of events.

On the 15th and 16th January 1991 the trial was held, before Lord Clyde (the Senator of The College of Justice), of the one defendant who had pleaded not guilty (an Edinburgh-based solicitor). The jury found the charges to be ‘not proven’. On the 12th February 1991 the remaining five accused persons (who had pleaded guilty) appeared before Lord Clyde for sentencing. One of the accused was sentenced to four years imprisonment. Sentencing of the remaining 4 accused was deferred to the 8th October 1991 when they appeared before the Lord Justice Clerk and were admonished.

Breaking The Law

Towards the end of March 1991 – and as a direct consequence of ‘Operation Planet’, and prosecutions relating to acts of sodomy upon teenage boys – an internal study paper was produced by The Crown Office that sought to establish a rationale for, and the extent to which, the protections offered by Common Law could be circumvented, and statute law ignored. The author of that paper was the (then) Senior Legal Assistant at The Crown Office, Elish McPhilomy (now Elish Angiolini).

The justification given by The Crown Office for this extraordinary action was that “some public concern about the appropriateness of basing charges on Common Law rather than statute” had been expressed. However the only “public concern” cited in The Crown Office report was of an opinion proffered by one of the defence counsels in the ‘Operation Planet’ trial, the Advocate Derek Ogg – and as quoted in The Glasgow Herald on the 20th February 1991.

On the 29th April 1991 a meeting was held between Lord Fraser (the Lord Advocate), Lord Roger (the Solicitor General), Duncan Lowe (the Crown Agent), Alfred Vannet (the Deputy Crown Agent) and persons unknown, to discuss the Elish McPhilomy report.

As a result of that meeting, directions were issued by the Crown Office to the Procurators Fiscal (directive No 2025 on the 28th November 1991) in which the Crown Office effectively sanctioned particular criminal acts, contrary to Law – of teenage boys being sodomised by older men. That directive provided the means by which such activities were to be ‘legitimised’ by The Crown.

In response to what the Crown Office described as “public misapprehension”, an amended set of directions was issued (directive No 2025/1 on the 20th December 1991). However those directions amounted to little more than an adjustment of detail – and with an additional Crown Office directive stating that it saw little justification in pursuing cases involving the clients of ‘rent boys’.

The concern is not simply that of officers of the Crown being in breach of their oath (and of ‘malfeasance in public office’). There is also the matter of the introduction of political activism into the Criminal Justice System – for the purpose of introducing extreme, and un-consented social change.

One such issue, of considerable importance, is that of the activities of paedophiles and of organised paedophile rings. The abhorrence of such behaviour is a natural human reaction against those who indulge in such hideously cruel and selfish acts against vulnerable children. However the danger is that the politically motivated misrepresentations of those who attempt to confront paedophilia as ‘homophobic’ (as espoused, for example, in a 1997 article in ‘ScotsGay’ magazine, by Advocate Derek Ogg) can also be seized upon by those with evil intentions to close down any effective response to the serious problem of organised child abuse.

Moving On

On the 28th November 2001 Elish Angiolini was appointed Solicitor General for Scotland. On the 12th October 2006 she was elevated to Lord Advocate, and on the 17th July 2007 it was announced that she had appointed Derek Ogg QC to be her Advocate Depute.

On the 6th March 2009 Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini announced that she had appointed Derek Ogg QC as the head of the new National Sexual Crime Unit who, on accepting that appointment, promised: “For prosecutors, sexual offences are often the most challenging and sensitive cases to bring before a court. However, I am determined that we will continue to do our utmost to bring compelling prosecutions and treat victims with dignity and respect.”

Later that same year Mr. Robert Green sent two letters to Derek Ogg pleading for the Crown Office to instruct Grampian Police to investigate serious and substantiated allegations of the paedophile abuse of a young downs syndrome victim, Hollie Greig. In particular Mr. Green asked that Grampian Police should be instructed to interview those named as Hollie’s abusers (including a serving police officer, and a local Sheriff).

Both letters were ignored.

PUSHED OUT : Calls for inquiry over SBC Council Chief David Hume ‘departure’ after FOI documents reveal ‘retirement’ actually voluntary redundancy

Pushed to go? SBC Council Chief Executive David Hume receives a ‘retirement’ gift from Tory SBC Convener Alisdair Hutton AMID accusations over a Council leader’s “issuing of false statements to the media” concerning the ‘retirement’ of Chief Executive David Hume from Scottish Borders Council after a rampage of expenses charged up to taxpayer funded credit cards were revealed, reported by Scottish Law Reporter HERE, a member of the public who has been investigating the increasingly murky circumstances surrounding the departure of the SBC Council Chief last August, has now called for the Information Commissioner & Audit Scotland to investigate the local authority’s refusal to disclose exact details surrounding the exit of David Hume, who held the Chief Executive position at Scottish Borders Council for nine years.

The member of the public, who does not wish to be identified, had been using Freedom of Information legislation to find out exactly why the leader of the Council, David Parker, had claimed Mr Hume had ‘retired’, when references in documents the investigative member of the public had obtained from Audit Scotland appear to show Mr Hume actually took voluntary redundancy.

Speaking to Scottish Law Reporter, the individual claimed the local authority had refused to comply with Freedom of Information requests, and upon a call for a review, had responded with a blunt letter from the head of Scottish Borders Council’s legal team, Ian Wilkie. Mr Wilkie refused to release any further information on the matter although he grudgingly admitted Mr Hume had in fact taken voluntary redundancy instead of retiring, as had been announced by the Council leader David Parker and put out in Press Releases.

The letter from Mr Wilkie responding to FOI requests can be viewed online HERE

The Southern Reporter, a weekly paper in the Scottish Borders reports on the case :

Watchdogs set to get teeth into row over ex-SBC chief’s departure

Published on Monday 19 March 2012 13:34

TWO national watchdogs are to be asked to investigate why senior officers at Scottish Borders Council have refused to divulge information regarding the shock departure last year of chief executive David Hume.

A member of the public who sought details using freedom of information (FoI) legislation believes the Borders public has a right to know why Mr Hume left his £116,000-a-year job, the discussions relating to his leaving and, crucially, the cash and pension deal which the 59-year-old received when he quit after nine years at the helm.

And after drawing a blank through FoI channels at the local authority’s Newtown St Boswells headquarters, the man, who does not wish to be named, says he will lodge an appeal with the Scottish Information Commissioner.

He will also submit a complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman alleging maladministration by the council for claiming Mr Hume had retired when he had, claims the requester, taken voluntary redundancy.

In early July last year, SBC revealed that Mr Hume was retiring due to “a change in his personal circumstances” with effect from August 15. It was also revealed that he was on sick leave and, in the event, he did not return to his office at Newtown.

Using FoI legislation, the member of the public submitted at the end of January a formal request to SBC for information “including any discussions relating to the retirement or voluntary severance of Mr Hume from his post, including information on any payments or benefits given to Mr Hume upon his leaving the council, and clarification whether Mr Hume did, in fact, retire from SBC or left the council under a voluntary severance arrangement or package”.

The questioner received the following response: “Unfortunately, I am unable to provide you with any of the information requested as this is all personal information relating to the former chief executive and is therefore exempt under section 38 (1) (b) of Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act.”

The man then sought a review of that decision and last week received a response from Ian Wilkie, head of legal and democratic services, who said the request had now been considered by the council’s freedom of information advice group – a panel comprising Mr Wilkie and two other non-elected departmental heads from a pool of six.

Mr Wilkie said the group had agreed no response would be provided relating to discussions held with Mr Hume “on the grounds that the authority does not hold this information”.

And he explained that the group had also advised that no response would be given relating to information on any payments or benefits awarded to Mr Hume “on the grounds that this was personal information”.

Mr Wilkie did, however, add that Mr Hume “retired ... under the council’s voluntary severance arrangements”.

TheSouthern this week sought clarification of why the council did not hold information on the discussions with Mr Hume and was told by a spokesman: “The council does not minute meetings with staff regarding retirement arrangements.”

The spokesman conceded that retirement and voluntary severance were not the same thing and offered a modified reason why Mr Hume had departed.

He stated: “Mr Hume left the council under a voluntary early retirement arrangement.”

And with regard to payments made to Mr Hume, the spokesman added: “All staff are entitled to have personal information treated confidentially.”

The complainer said it beggared belief that there was no record of discussions with Mr Hume who was, after all, the highest paid employee of the council.

He said: “Voluntary redundancy and retirement are two very different events and this, I’m sure, would have huge implications for the amount of money handed over to Mr Hume on his departure. It is worrying that when some simple questions are asked about this, you get nothing but obfuscation.

“The simple fact is the people of the Borders have a right to know.”

A council spokesman, while declining to disclose Mr Hume’s contact details, said he had been in touch with the former chief executive regarding this article.

At the time of going to press, Mr Hume had not contacted us.

Crown Office ‘BLOCKED’ Strathclyde Police demands for search warrants to investigate Glasgow Council leader Steven Purcell & City Building quango

Claims made Crown Office refused Police the power to raid Glasgow City Council buildings & ex Council leader Purcell. Credible claims backed up by leaked documents have been made to investigative journalists showing the most senior officials & prosecutors at the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) under former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC, (born McPhilomy) BLOCKED a series of applications for search warrants made by Strathclyde Police to raid premises connected with shamed ex Glasgow City Council boss Steven Purcell & the Council’s arms length organisation City Building, an organisation which was set up under Mr Purcell prior to his shamed exit as leader of Glasgow City Council after revelations in the media of cocaine addiction and other irregularities at the City Council which caused the former Council leader to flee the country in 2010.

A “key player” in moves at the time to investigate Steven Purcell and the many arms length organisations (ALEOs) of Glasgow City Council which faced serious allegations of corruption & political favouritism involving Scottish Labour figures has now disclosed at least FOUR applications for search warrants made by Strathclyde Police to raid private premises and even City Council buildings were REFUSED by the Crown Office under the then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini. Dame Angiolini as she is now known, was appointed to the position of Lord Advocate in 2006 by the then First Minister, Jack McConnell, now Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale.

On top of the suspicious string of search warrant refusals, a series of written exchanges & accounts of meetings between Police & prosecutors which cannot be published for legal reasons show Police Officers growing frustration over a lack of cooperation from the Crown Office, with one officer claiming “… it appeared the Crown Office did not want the Police to investigate Mr Purcell or any kind of wrongdoing at Glasgow City Council.”

One now retired insider told an investigating journalist earlier this week : “I often wondered if the Crown Office itself had been infiltrated by organised crime to the same extent some of the organisations we were investigating at the time appeared to be”.

Further, more serious allegations have also been made against some of Glasgow’s ‘long time’ party political figures, where it is alleged several councillors & members of one particular political party (guess which one ? – Ed) have “financial & social links to organised crime families” which have been well known to Police for years, yet all attempts by Strathclyde Police to pursue these allegations have allegedly failed due to what one insider referred to as “political based interference from the Crown Office”.

The unnamed “key player” has also disclosed a series of what can only be described as “threatening letters” sent from an UNNAMED Glasgow based private law firm which has also been linked back to its representing of senior figures at the Crown Office and in Scotland’s judiciary. It has been alleged the contents of the letters and notes of telephone conversations which are now known to journalists, formed part of a plan to thwart any substantive investigation into Mr Purcell and Glasgow City Council.

Concern was expressed in some of the meetings that it appeared the law firm involved “.. had been well briefed from the inside on the ongoing Police investigations of Purcell & City Building to the point the lawyer appeared to know every move Strathclyde Police officers made on the case.” Commenting on the changing patterns of suspects who appeared to “be aware of“ the Police investigation, one insider alleged “the inside knowledge some appeared to have of the investigation was probably used to warn suspects they were under observation.”

It is now of course widely known, the same law firm, LEVY MCRAE, who represented the shamed Glasgow City Council leader Steven Purcell, ALSO represented the then serving Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in connection with allegations made in the Hollie Greig abuse case, which recently saw Robert Green, the Greig family’s legal adviser & campaigner jailed for ONE YEAR after he was arrested in February 2010 for handing out leaflets calling for an inquiry into allegations of abuse against downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig.

No explanations have ever been offered as to why Scotland's top law officer used the same law firm who attempted to block media coverage of the Purcell Cocaine scandal and who operate for clients based in the notorious offshore tax haven of the Cayman Islands.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill worked at, has ties to same law firm used by then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in interdict case. As details of the Hollie Greig case began to be reported in the wider press, it emerged the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill has personal links to LEVY MCRAE, the law firm employed by the then Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in legal action over the abuse case allegations. Mr MacAskill has made no comment on the fact he served his apprenticeship at Levy McRae and also worked at the firm for a considerable time during his years as a solicitor before he entered politics. The revelations of MacAskill’s links to Levy McRae, the same law firm who represented Steven Purcell, were reported by Scottish Law Reporter at the time, HERE

Former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini employed Cayman Islands hopping lawyers from Glasgow. Previously reported, the then Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini had employed private law firm Levy McRae to serve interdicts on Mr Green in connection with his campaign to ‘out’ alleged abusers of downs syndrome victim Hollie Greig. Glasgow law firm Levy McRae who later represented shamed former Glasgow City Council Boss & Cocaine addict Steven Purcell, proceeded to threaten several media outlets & journalists over their reporting of the case, covered by Scottish Law Reporter HERE & HERE. The Purcell scandal caused some newspapers to ‘evaluate’ their relationship with Levy McRae, details of which were featured in a report here : HERE

Scottish Law Reporter recently published an investigation into the knighthood of Angiolini, apparently recommended by the Scottish Government. Dame Elish Angiolini was also appointed Ministerial complaints adviser to Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond. More recently, Dame Elish Angiolini was also appointed to the post of Principal of St Hugh’s College, Oxford.

Law Society President Cameron Ritchie on Esto Law debacle : We met Legal Aid Board twelve times, secret meeting notes are not for publishing

THE Law Society of Scotland’s current President, former Procurator Fiscal Cameron Ritchie has confirmed to the Glasgow Bar Association that Society staff & the Criminal Legal Aid Negotiating Team, whose members all resigned to form Esto Law Ltd, a venture accused by some in the legal profession of being an attempt to siphon off legal aid funds from many law firms, met with the Scottish Legal Aid Board on the police station duty scheme on no less than TWELVE occasions, in which “It was not the practice at these meetings to take a formal record which is then approved by those who attended”.

In what appears to have become an engrained culture of secrecy & fear at the Law Society of Scotland, who fear differing versions of the Esto Law saga reaching the rest of the Society's membership, Mr Ritchie went on in his letter to say : “My Vice-President and I did review the staff notes that were taken of these meetings but such notes are not taken with a view to publication.”

When a member’s society starts holding meetings behind its own members back, with few, none or only secret notes taken, surely that society has lost all credibility to claims it looks after its members interests (and incidentally, those of the public! – Ed)

A recent report from Scottish Law Reporter on the Esto Law Ltd saga in which the Scottish Legal Aid Board admitted to meetings between its top staff & Esto Law representatives, also drew responses from QC John Scott, offering explanations over events which some may find useful to read. That report and Mr Scott’s comments are located HERE

The letter from Mr Ritchie to the Glasgow Bar Association, which is now circulating on the internet is reprinted below in the interests of transparency :

Dear Ms Baxter

RE:ESTO LAW LTD

In my earlier responses to your letters of 13 December 2011 and 11 January 2012, I explained that the Council of the Law Society of Scotland had agreed that my Vice-President Austin Lafferty and I should carry out a review into the concerns that you and other members raised with respect to Esto Law Ltd and the Society’s criminal legal aid negotiating team (CLANT). I also explained that I would respond more fully once that process had been completed.

We provided our final report to Council earlier today. I enclose a copy of this report for your information and we have made the report available on the Society’s website.

As you will see from the conclusions within our report, we have found no evidence– none whatsoever – to substantiate the suggestions that the solicitors involved in Esto misused their positions on the criminal legal aid negotiating team, withheld information or misled their fellow solicitors.

In particular, we have noted that the negotiations between CLANT and the Scottish Legal Aid Board were concluded before any suggestion was made by the individuals concerned to establish a new firm offering out of hours police station duty cover. We have concluded that there was neither a conflict of interest nor a potential conflict of interest for the Esto directors for the period on which they were members of CLANT.

In your letter of 13 December, you posed a number of specific questions which I will answer in the order they were posed.

1. We are aware that the Society’s Registrar’s team and the Professional Practice team were both approached formally by the directors of Esto for technical advice on the incorporation of the firm as an LLP. Such advice is routinely given by both teams to firms on a strictly confidential basis and all such information is bound by data protection laws. We believe the assistance and advice provided by these teams to the Esto directors was therefore entirely appropriate in the circumstances and consistent with the role of the Society in assisting members.

I, along with a number of members of the Society’s executive, including the Chief Executive and Director of Communications, were also given advanced notification by the directors of Esto to establish a new firm. This information, which included some detailsof the services the new business would offer, was again provided on a strictly confidential basis. It is common practice for office bearers and senior members of the Society’s staff to be provided with advance confidential information with respect to changes in firms, whether they be new business ventures or, has been seen more recently, mergers and takeovers. It is crucial that the Society is alive to upcoming changes in the profession and that member firms feel they can trust the Society with such confidential information. It is also worth emphasising that, whilst any member of staff can offer advice or guidance in such circumstances, those staff have no power to either approve or prevent such business changes. To even attempt to do so would be wrong in principle and stray beyond the powers of the Society. I am therefore comfortable that the way this advance and confidential information was handled by the Society was appropriate.

2. As we have concluded in our report, we have found no evidence that the Esto directors in any way misused their positions whilst members of the criminal legal aid negotiating team. The information on which they based their decision to establish a new firm was information already in the public domain and openly available to members.

3. Given my answer to the previous question, I do not believe this question is relevant.

4. I cannot agree with the premise of this question. There is no evidence to suggest that the individuals concerned used their positions on the criminal legal aid negotiating team for a commercial advantage. We have considered all the available evidence and have been reminded of the considerable commitment and professionalism with which CLANT members have acted. I believe they have acted with the utmost integrity and have worked with the sole intention of assisting and supporting their fellow solicitors.

5. The police station duty scheme requires registration by firms, rather than solicitors, to provide additional flexibility in the provision of advice.My understanding is that there is no requirement for referral of the case to the alternate duty, as with the court duty scheme. However, there is the requirement that any solicitor providing advice under the police scheme also be registered for duty purposes and that the delegation to another solicitor must be authorised by SLAB. The application forms for the new court duty plans have also been changed for 2012-13 to allow for registration of firms rather than individuals, though it is specified for the court scheme, unlike the police scheme, that advice from the alternate duty first be sought. We are not aware of any future changes proposed to the police duty scheme regarding delegation of responsibility.

6. Again, I cannot agree with the premise of this question. It is important to note that the CLANT had originally promoted a duty scheme that would have been operated by the Society. This was not taken forward by the Scottish Government and Scottish Legal Aid Board. As you will know, the original police station duty scheme as proposed by SLAB was met with stiff opposition from the CLANT who, at the time, described it as ‘unnecessary, unworkable and unacceptable’. Following open consultation with and agreement from the profession, the CLANT successfully negotiated a number of positive changes to the scheme which I believe were in the interests of all legal aid practitioners.

7. An application for Esto Law Ltd to be recognised as an incorporated practice was received on 18 November 2011. The required regulatory information to progress and complete that recognition process has not yet been finalised. Although the application was granted on 7 December 2011, the agents for the applicants were advised that the certificate of recognition of incorporation allowing the practice to commence would not be issued until a certificate of master policy insurance had been received. To date that certificate has not been received by the Society. Accordingly Esto Law Ltd has not been recognised by the Society as an incorporated practice and no certificate of recognition has been issued.

You also wrote to me on 11 January and asked a number of additional questions. Again, I will seek to answer these in the same order.

1. I would refer you to my earlier answer where I confirmed hat the Society’s Registrar’s team and the Professional Practice team were both approached formally by the directors of Esto for technical advice on the incorporation of the firm as an LLP. Such advice is always given on the strictly confidential basis and is bound by data protection laws. It would be wrong for me to provide you with the kind of information you have requested here.

2. The Society, whether the criminal legal aid negotiating team or staff, met with Scottish Legal Aid Board on the police station duty scheme on the following occasions:

• 21 December 2011, • 26 October 2011, • 3 August 2011, • 26 July 2011, • 15 June 2011, • 2 June 2011, • 19 May 2011, • 4 May 2011, • 20 April 2011, • 3 February 2011, • 17 January 2011, • 14 January 2011

It was not the practice at these meetings to take a formal record which is then approved by those who attended. My Vice-President and I did review the staff notes that were taken of these meetings but such notes are not taken with a view to publication. I am however happy to provide you with the details of what was discussed at these meetings with the agreed outcomes and actions if such information would be useful.

3. We do not believe that there have been any changes to the operation of the duty plans with respect to delegation of obligations to a third party. The duty obligation rests with the firm and can be delegated, subject to the individual solicitor also being registered for duty purposes and the delegation to another solicitor being authorised by SLAB (the same provision being found in the court duty scheme application). As mentioned at the faculty representatives’ meeting on 26 January, SLAB has further indicated that there are no significant changes to the scheme planned, at least until it is clear which recommendations from the Carloway Review will be taken forward into legislation.

4. I would refer you to my earlier answer to your first question.

5. The information ingathered by the CLANT during meetings with the Law Society of England and Wales, the Legal Services Commission and the Ministry of Justice has been incorporated into the in-house research being carried out by our legal aid and access to justice team. This research is likely to be completed by April and will be publicly available.

The paper will cover a range of topics including: the experience of legal aid contracting in the United States; quality contracting and Best Value Tendering proposals in England and Wales and elsewhere; the experience of tendering for public services more generally, through Compulsory Competitive Tendering and Best Value; general considerations for quality contracting and price bidding;current price and quality provision of legal aid; compliance with competition and procurement law; economic theory on auction structures and monopsonic markets; case studies of successful and unsuccessful tendering exercises; and a forecast of the likely impact on criminal defence work in Scotland, on practitioners and their clients. We aim to ensure that the criminal bar isprovided with the most accurate, comprehensive but yet accessible information on how contracting has operated elsewhere and how it may operate here.

In you letter of 11 January, you also made comments with respect to our legal aid convener Oliver Adair. We have considered the role of Mr Adair who was given some advanced notification of the decision by some members to establish Esto. However, as we have already explained, we have found no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part ofthe solicitors concerned.

Weare aware that Mr Adair advised Stuart Munro that there was no conflict of interest in him being a member of the CLANT. Given that we, through our review, have come to the same conclusion, we believe that the advice given by Mr Adair was entirely appropriate in thecircumstances.

Finally and with respect to the current structure for legal aid negotiations, we discussed during our recent meeting how the Society is currently considering alternative models although it will of course be a matter for Council to decide in terms of any changes to the existing committee arrangements. We will of course keep you and other faculties and bar associations fully aware of any changes in this regard.

Yourssincerely

Cameron Ritchie

President

A respected voice & court presence is lost to the Scots legal world & wider community as leading Scottish QC Paul McBride dies at 46

It has been announced the well known Scots QC Paul McBride, 46, died in his sleep today. PAUL McBRIDE QC, a well known figure in Scots legal, political & media circles was found dead earlier today by solicitor Ameer Anwar with whom he was travelling on a business trip in Pakistan, according to news reports. Mr McBride, who was 46 and is thought too have died in his sleep, was discovered in his hotel room by his colleague & hotel staff after failing to respond to phone calls from his colleague. It has been reported Mr McBride was complaining of feeling ill for a few days prior to the sad news of his death today. Mr McBride was Scotland’s youngest QC at the age of 35. He was called to the Scottish Bar in 1988 and has been involved in many high profile criminal cases, legal & political debates in Scotland over the years.

Mr McBride, who was to have appeared a witness to give evidence in the trial of two men accused of plotting to murder Celtic Manager Neil Lennon, former msp Trish Godman and Mr McBride himself, was often seen as a controversial figure and frequently changed his political viewpoint from Scottish Labour to Scottish Conservative and more recently switched to the Scottish National Party.

However, on many issues, from the Lockerbie Trial debate of the conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, to the recent, much debated anti sectarian legislation pushed through by the Scottish Government, Paul brought a significant contribution to debate on law & justice in Scotland, often acting as a much needed counterbalance to some within the legal & political establishment who are well known for frequently sounding off without thinking through their plans thoroughly. Unlike many in the Faculty of Advocates, Mr McBride usually came across as a credible figure in public debates & the media. His presence will be sorely missed.

First Minister Alex Salmond paid tribute to Mr McBride, saying : "This is sad and shocking news. Paul McBride was an outstanding Advocate, and a very substantial public figure in Scotland. "Paul’s genius lay not just in applying his first-class mind to the complex procedures of Scots Law, but also his unrivalled ability to explain and promote the laws of Scotland to a wider public.”

Mr Salmond continued : “His reservoir of talent was great indeed, and I believe he had so much more to contribute to the law, and to the great debate on Scotland's future. Paul will be sorely missed across Scotland’s legal system, political parties, sport and journalism. It is typical of Paul that his last public comment was a newspaper column expressing the belief that the anti-sectarian legislation, of which he was such an eloquent advocate, would herald a historic change for the better in Scotland. My thoughts today are with Paul’s partner, parents, family and very many friends. Hopefully the knowledge that he was held in such high regard by so many will be of some comfort at this desperately sad time.”

Peter Lawwell, Chief Executive of Celtic Football Club issued a statement saying : "This is tragic news. Paul was a very good friend of Celtic and someone who cared passionately about the club. His passing is clearly a great loss and he will be sadly missed. The thoughts and prayers of everyone at Celtic are with Paul's family at this very difficult time."

Scottish Labour Johann Lamont commented : "Paul McBride was one of the finest legal minds of his generation. While we didn't always agree, I always thought of him as a thoroughly decent man. When he entered the political debate he was always challenging and his intellect greatly enriched it. He will be missed."

Willie Rennie, Scottish Liberal Democrats leader said: "Cutting short Paul McBride's full and colourful life is so sad. Scotland will be a lesser place without him."

Scottish Conservative Party chairman David Mundell MP said: “It was with great sadness that I heard of the passing of Paul McBride QC. He was a fiercely intelligent individual who was as passionate about politics as he was the law. Paul was a towering presence in Scottish public life, who was never afraid to speak out on the issues he cared about. Our thoughts at this time are with his family.”

Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland and Solicitor General Lesley Thomson, who were also key figures at the Crown Office when orders were given to destroy key data showing the scale of sectarian crimes against Catholics in Scotland, an issue central to the recent debate on the Scottish Government’s anti sectarian legislation, made a joint statement on the news of Mr McBride’s death, saying : "We are very saddened by the awful news that Paul has died in his sleep overnight in Pakistan. This is devastating news for his partner Gary, family and his friends. We offer our sincere and deepest sympathies to them."

Brian McConnachie QC, Vice-Chair of the Faculty of Advocates Criminal Bar Association, said: "Everyone is absolutely stunned and deeply saddened by his death.Paul was very young and had achieved a tremendous amount in such a short space of time and undoubtedly had a great deal more to achieve both legally and no doubt in other fields."

Scottish Law Reporter would like to join those in expressing their sorrow at Mr McBride’s death. The Scottish legal profession and the wider community at large has without doubt lost a capable figure who represented widely held opinions, and his clients from all sides of the fence with dedication & professionalism.

The curious case of the Magic Circle ‘gay justice scandal’, Scots judges on their way to Thailand, the Rangers FC inquiry & a dropped fraud case

AS SENIOR FIGURES in Scotland’s legal establishment quake at the thought of new revelations of a continuing Magic Circle of gay Scottish judges who have perverted the course of justice in Scotland’s courts for sexual favours involving young males, both in Scotland & abroad in Thailand, the spotlight has shifted to the current prominent positions, some very close even to the First Minister Alex Salmond himself and other sideline business ventures of political allies (funded by taxpayers money) of many of those involved in the original Magic Circle gay judges sex scandal affair of the early 1990’s which saw the downfall of several senior Scottish legal figures & judges.

Scottish Sun branded Nimmo Smith “Nimmo the Dimmo” over Magic Circle gay sex for justice investigation.The Magic Circle scandal saw allegations Scots judges were alleged to have used gay sex favours to pervert the course of justice lasted through the late 1980’s well into the 1990’s during which at least one High Court judge resigned his position under a cloud of suspicion, retirements of other legal figures who were quietly put out to grass, and ultimately, Lord Nimmo Smith’s report on the Magic Circle affair, branded a whitewash of a very serious gay sex for justice scandal which appears to have continued to this day. The report by Lord Nimmo Smith is here : REPORT ON MAGIC CIRCLE GAY JUSTICE SCANDAL (pdf) In spite of the cover up, which led to lurid headlines yet no prosecutions, the very same Lord Nimmo Smith, who was branded “Nimmo the Dimmo” by the Sun newspaper, & sought psychiatric treatment after his exposure in the media over the Magic Circle events, has been appointed by the Scottish Football Association to investigate the problems at Rangers FC, as reported earlier HERE

One of the figures interviewed during the Magic Circle scandal, was Lord Fraser of Carmyllie who was Solicitor General for Scotland from 1982-1989 and went onto be Lord Advocate from 1989-1992, the period of time covering most of the major events & allegations surrounding the Magic Circle affair, taking in everything from break ins at Lothian & Borders Police HQ at Fettes (dubbed Fettesgate) and also a somewhat forgotten trial of two individuals accused of fraud, Gordon Michael May (who went on to be involved in the Thai Gay sex industry) & Arthur Colin Tucker, where Lord Fraser after consultation with the Advocate Depute in charge of the trial, agreed to drop proceedings in a case which was reported in Lord Nimmo Smith’s Magic Circle report.

In the case of HMA v GORDON MICHAEL MAY AND ARTHUR COLIN TUCKER :

On 8 May 1991 the trial of May and Tucker began at the High Court in Dunfermline on an indictment containing two charges. The first charge libelled that between 1 January and 31 December 1987 May, while employed as a director of a company known as Teague Homes (Scotland) Limited and Tucker, while employed as a partner in the firm of Burnett Walker, WS, and while acting as solicitor for that Company, having formed a criminal purpose to obtain money due to the Company in respect of the sale of properties in a building development by the Company, in pursuance of said criminal purpose did certain acts and did thus embezzle £213,679. The second charge libelled that between 1 June and 31 July 1987 May, while employed as a director of the company, did certain acts and thus obtained £6,753.38 by fraud. On 15 May 1991 the trial came to an end when the Crown withdrew the libel against both accused, thus dropping the charges against them, and the jury, on the direction of the Judge, returned unanimous verdicts of not guilty.

As the case against May & Tucker buckled, the advocate depute contacted the then Lord Advocate, Lord Peter Fraser, now Ministerial Complaints adviser to Alex Salmond, who concurred the case should be dropped, even though it was by then clear to many onlookers, there was a gay Scottish judges connection with Thailand’s gay boy industry.

Buried on Page 85 of Lord Nimmo Smith’s report, it states : “The Advocate Depute telephoned the Lord Advocate, Lord Fraser, who was in London. Although it would have been open to him to withdraw the libel without reference to the Lord Advocate he was aware of the rumours which had followed Tucker's previous acquittal and he was concerned about the risk that a decision not to proceed further against May and Tucker might be misinterpreted.”

“He explained to the Lord Advocate his view of the evidence and referred also to what he had heard from the Judge's clerk. He and the Lord Advocate agreed that the only reason for continuing with the trial would have been to avoid possible criticism and that was nota proper reason.The Lord Advocate accordingly agreed with the Advocate Depute's decision on the basis of the evidence that it would not be in the public interest to continue with the prosecution. When counsel returned to court for the resumption of the trial after lunch that day the Advocate Depute told defence Counsel of his decision. They had no prior knowledge of it and were accordingly somewhat surprised. When the court sat the Advocate Depute withdrew the libel and Lord Milligan instructed the jury to return a formal verdict of not guilty.”

Clearly, in the light of more recent investigations by the Scottish media, reprinted below, the decision to withdraw the prosecution’s case as it hung in court, may have been premature… and, what was not generally known at the time was that several Scottish judges had chosen to invest some of their accumulated wealth in gay clubs in Thailand, where they frequently flew out to visit, seeking sexual relations with the youngest of males.

In one account made to an enquiring journalist, “On one not so fine sunny day, a commercial flight en route to Thailand which, among the passengers was carrying several of Scotland’s first division judges was forced to divert to a Military airbase in Thailand due to the aircraft suffering an lightning strike during a storm. Sitting in the seats were several sweaty Scottish judges worried the incident would become a photo opportunity for journalists who might have rumbled their little boy hunt.”

Its easy to remember why these judges were on their way to Thailand, via a detailed investigation from the Sunday Herald newspaper, reprinted below. However, its not so easy to come to the same conclusions as Lord Nimmo Smith, that nothing untoward happened in the Scottish justice system and there was no grounds to the Magic Circle affair whatsoever, leaving those who are looking for answers over the Rangers FC affair, a little worried the answers may not be forthcoming in this 'independent inquiry' kicked off by the SFA...

The Sunday Herald reports :

THE STRANGE TALE OF TRANSVESTITES, CROOKED COPS, A MUTILATED BODY AND TWO SCOTS KNOWN AS THE GAY McMAFIA

By Neil Mackay
Investigations Editor Sunday Herald 5 October 2003

IT'S got it all: transvestites, Thai gay clubs, crooked cops, drug-dealing, a burned and butchered body in a hotel room, allegations of con-tricks on a massive scale, a campaigning Scots journalist hounded by the law and slap bang in the middle of the whole tawdry affair is a pair of Scots businessmen known in Thailand as the Gay McMafia.

The story begins in 1987 with the misappropriation of almost a quarter of a million pounds from a property company in Edinburgh called Teague Homes Ltd. The two men now at the centre of the so-called Gay McMafia story in Thailand were then senior figures in the company. Gordon May, from Edinburgh, was a director and James Lumsden, from Falkirk, was the company secretary. Both are now big players in Thailand's gay sex tourism industry and Lumsden is often seen cutting a swathe in a stunning array of frocks and blonde wigs.

After the pair left Teague Homes, the firm's annual report noted: "The directors discovered that Mr G May had misappropriated £243,438 from the company fund in collusion with one of the company's legal advisors [sic] in contraven­tion of the Companies Act 1985."

May was subsequently charged with fraud but later acquitted. May and Lumsden later cropped up in a report ordered by Sir William Sutherland, a former chief constable of Lothian and Borders Police, which investigated claims that senior members of the Scottish judiciary and prosecutors had been blackmailed into dropping criminal cases because of links to the gay community.

May and Lumsden then moved to Thailand. A check on the records of the company they set up there, Bodishorn Ltd, shows they bought the firm for around 11 million Thai baht, around £240,000, during the same period that the funds went missing from Teague Homes.

Business boomed in Thailand for the pair. They set up a gay club called "Boyz, Boyz, Boyz" in the resort of Pattaya some 100 miles from Bangkok. Pattaya is one of those resorts with an anything-goes reputation. Like Tijuana in Mexico, or Falaraki in the Med, its claim to fame is sex, drink, drugs and porn. While Pattaya is liberal and free-and-easy on the surface, it has, like Tijuana and Falaraki, a dangerous and violent flipside that tourists seldom see.

In 1990, Ian MacDonald, a 28-year-old from a wealthy Inverness family and a major investor in "Boyz, Boyz, Boyz", was found burned to death in the Ambiance Hotel in Pattaya, which is co-owned by Lumsden and May. The blaze was confined to the room MacDonald died in and the fingers of both his hands had been hacked off.

MacDonald's mother, Eileen has called on Thai police to re-open the inquiry into her son’s death. MacDonald paid May and Lumsden £250,000 to go into partnership with them. Before he died he wrote a will leaving all his shares to the Bodishorn company to a Thai man called Supan Kampanya. May and Lumsden witnessed the will. In an afadavit from Eileen signed on August 24, 2003 she says that Supan Kampanya was also a witness to the will. As Kampanya was the major beneficiary of MacDonald's estate, she says, his role as witness makes the will invalid. Eileen also states in her affidavit: "I am told also that Kampanya is or was the boyfriend of Gordon May ... I believe that Kampanya received no proceeds of the estate and that my son's investment of £250,000 was kept by the principal persons in a company known as Bodishorn."

Eileen said: "It's about time the truth was known about how Ian died. I'm traumatised every time the case is mentioned. The Thai police have been told by my lawyers to investigate the case thoroughly because I believe Ian was the victim of foul play. I want justice for my son, then I can get on with my life once and for all." Her partner, Graeme MacBean, said: "Thai­land has a notoriously corrupt police force and there may have been a cover-up." He said that he did not believe that Ian's death was a cover-up: "Someone tortured and killed him in that fire. We want to know who."

Lumsden and May were arrested and quizzed, but both were released after several days. The police later filed a report on the fatal fire stamping the case "accidental".

Then in April 1996, Thaveepan Wuthisri, a 21-year-old male go-go dancer at "Boyz, Boyz, Boyz" was charged with the murder of a Swedish tourist called Erik Bohman. The Swede had arrived in Pattaya to invest in property and gay nightclubs. Police said Wuthisri was in the pay of foreign businessmen and Wuthisri claimed they were Danish and German.

The biggest controversy surrounding Lumsden and May began around the same time as the death of Erik Bohman. In 1996, a successful Halifax businessman called Kevin Quill met Lumsden and May and decided to leave England, where he had three bars, two discos and a hotel, in order to shift his hospitality business to Pattaya, leaving his two teenage children behind in the UK.

Quill was more than flash with his cash. He bought a house with a pool and two apartments, which he rented out, and a penthouse for himself. Quill entered into a 50-50 partnership with Lumsden and May, spending around £500,000 on premises and refurbishment.

When Quill says that "I must have left my brains behind in England", he isn't far from the truth. He readily agreed when May suggested that he fork out hefty bribes to a Pattaya police sergeant "to take care of all future problems". He even went along with Lumsden and May when they said he should put his Mercedes in their names as he didn't have a work permit.

Quill even gave Lumsden an interest-free loan of around £20,000 to buy a house, arid paid the police sergeant he had already bribed another lump sum for the funeral of his wife, a mobile phone and a gold Rolex.

Things started to go awry when Quill suggested an overhaul of the company, saying he was concerned about the number of Thai friends of Lumsden and May working for the firm. Not long after, he was beaten up in the street by market traders, and then in September 2000, his penthouse was raided by police from the Foreign Crime Reporting Co-operation Centre searching for bank books and financial documents.

The police sergeant who'd already been bribed by Quill then returned saying another lump sum would smooth things over, but Quill refused. In October that year he was about to return to the UK for a brief visit, and he foolishly decided to take 170 cartons of cigarettes back to Britain with him. He ordered them from May.

May arrived at the Ambiance with an immigration police officer from Bangkok and delivered the goods. Five minutes after leaving the hotel, Quill's car was stopped. In one packet officers found 100 amphetamine tablets, or "yaa baa" tablets as they are known in Thai.

Quill was soon in the notorious Chon Buri Prison on remand. Drugs charges don't usually come with a slap on the wrist in Thai courts. Smugglers can find themselves facing a firing squad or, at the very least, a lengthy stretch in a jail like Bangkwang Prison - the so-called Bangkok Hilton. A number of foreign nationals have been executed in recent years in Thailand for drug offences.

Documents signed by Deryck Fisher of the British Embassy in Bangkok show that the highest levels of both British and Thai officialdom believed Quill was set up. One letter from Fisher reads: "I accompanied Mr Kevin Quill ... to a meeting with Lt Gen Nopadoi Somboonsub, police assistant commissioner-general ... Nopadoi was in possession of the case documents and video of Kevin Quill's arrest. He said that having reviewed the evidence he believed that Kevin Quill had been framed and that there was no substance to the allegations against him. He offered an apology on behalf of the police, he further instructed the head of Chonburi Police Division to urgently investigate the matter."

One of the arresting officers was even caught on tape saying: "No more. Once I have enough money I will not do this again." Nevertheless, Quill served six months on remand and was then sentenced to six years in prison on the drug charges. He is now on bail pending appeal. Quill cannot leave Thailand. While he was in prison, his computer containing all his business ownership records was wiped clean, and around £50,000 entrusted by Quill to Lumsden and May for defence costs vanished.

It is now that Andrew Drummond comes on the scene. He is an ex-pat investigative reporter originally from East Craigs in Edinburgh who began looking into the Quill case. His investigations, carried in the Bangkok Post, revealed that Lumsden and May began stripping Quill's assets almost as soon as their one-time friend was swallowed up in the prison system.

As Drummond wrote: "First went his luxury penthouse apartment ... then his Mercedes. Finally went his company which owned two bars and a mini-hotel. Lumsden removed him as director and appointed May." Drummond also wrote that when police stopped Quill and searched him for drugs "no other packets of cigarettes were opened, suggesting police knew immediately where to look". He discovered that the tip-off which led to Quill's arrest "came from within the Ambiance Hotel".

While on bail pending appeal, Quill com­plained to the police and Lumsden and May were charged but the charges were dropped. At a meeting brokered by police Quill was told that if he dropped the charges he would get his property back. Quill said he had no alternative but to agree, even though he was at least £100,000 in cash out of pocket. Quill told the Sunday Herald: "Lumsden and May were very plausible, but I was very wrong about them. The time I served in jail was exactly like what you'd imagine it to be like in a Thai jail. It was very violent, there were gangs and the cell I was in was just 10 metres square but it held 94 men.

"The violence was brutal. You'd see one guy on the floor being attacked by 30 other men. There was no fresh water and a few people died in the prison while I was there."

Drummond filed a copy of his investigation into the bizarre saga, which was headlined "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Boyz", to the English language newspaper The Bangkok Post. He was then hit with a defamation writ for alleging that Quill had been set up and then asset stripped by Lumsden and May. Last week after a court battle, he was given a suspended jail sentence for libel. After the judgment, Drummond was threatened with deportation, but his lawyers managed to put in a bid for an appeal. Drummond says: "I have been here for 15 years but now I may be deported from a country which I have enjoyed, not least because of its light-hearted and gentle people. If this happens I lose my home, girlfriend and partner of 15 years and, of course, my job."

The finding against Drummond has rocked Quill. "Andrew reported the facts," Quill said. "He provided evidence to back up what he was saying and I'm at a loss to understand the judge's decision. I gave evidence for him as well and produced documents to corroborate what I was saying. I'm just astonished. It beggars belief. I was sure that my appeal would be successful until I saw what happened to Andrew in court, now I'm just frightened. This just wouldn't and couldn't happen in the UK. There are rich pickings to be made in this country through exploiting gullible foreigners."

Quill says his life was threatened when he left jail and a man, who was found with photos of him and a map of his house, was later given a suspended jail sentence this year. Armed police protected him for a while. Quill has also made a complaint to the police about an alleged assault on him by Lumsden two months ago.

Quill spotted Lumsden and May sitting at a bar with a police officer he believes is in their pay. He took photos of the three, he says, to show that "they were one big happy family". According to Quill, Lumsden dashed over to him and assaulted him. He's been told the case is now with the prosecuting authorities.

May is now in Canada. On Friday, the Sunday Herald learned that Lumsden had flown from Bangkok and made his way back to his mother's house in Falkirk. By the time the Sunday Herald arrived in Falkirk, Lumsden had gone. A relative said he'd just left on a plane ... for Canada.

NIMMO THE DIMMO

MPs blast taped QC

By David Dinsmore The Scottish Sun, Saturday 20 December 1992

SCOTLAND'S “Gay Judges” probe should be scrapped and started again, an MP claimed yesterday.

Former Solicitor General Sir Nicky Fairburn hit out after QC William Nimmo-Smith was conned into spilling the beans on his inquiry — as exclusively revealed yesterday by The Scottish Sun.

Last night, Perth and Kinross Tory MP Sir Nicky Fairbairn said: "This absolutely impurifies the whole process. I don't see that the Lord Advocate can do anything but re-appoint a new commission to do the whole thing again."

Yesterday we told how gay businessman Derek Donaldson, the man suspected of the Fettesgate break-in at Edinburgh police HQ, posed as a journalist from a posh paper to get into Nimmo-Smith’s home with a tape recorder.

He grilled the top lawyer for an hour over his probe into an alleged gay conspiracy in Scottish legal circles. Last night. Sir Nicky said: "We have to clear up this whole unfortunate business."The Lord Advocate should start again with very senior people."

He was backed by MPs of all parties who could not believe a top lawyer like Nimmo-Smith could give away so much about his highly-confidential inquiry.

Labour's Tam Dalyell said: "I will be bringing up this matter in the House of Commons when the opportunity arises."

Scottish Lib-Dem leader Jim Wallace added: "I am surprised that anyone acting in a quasi-judicial role should speak to a journalist in this manner.

SNP leader Alex Salmond claimed Scotland's legal establishment had sunk lower in the public's estimation because of the affair.

And Tory MP Phil Gallie said: "It does not impress me that a senior QC has made such a fundamental   mistake."

Nimmo-Smith, 50, looked tired and drawn as he left his Edinburgh home guard yesterday morning — accompanied by two detectives and two uniformed police officers. He refused to comment on our story.

The Lord Advocate Lord Rodger and Scots Secretary Ian Lang also refused to discuss our revelations.

But a Lothian police spokesman said: "We are aware the report to the Lord Advocate is still to be published and we can make no comment until that time."

A leading Scots QC said: "It doesn't look as though the Lord Advocate has much choice but to start again. "How can he allow him to stay in charge of such an important inquiry."