Top QC Paul McBride calls for jury reform, declarations of jurors interests after Neil Lennon assault trial fiasco

Jurors must face interviews, declarations of interest says QC Paul McBride  PROPOSALS put forward by top QC Paul McBride in the wake of the not proven verdict in the case of a Hearts fan who was cleared of assaulting Celtic manager Neil Lennon would see jurors being required to declare their interests, face interviews and sit tests before being selected for jury service.

The ideas put forward by the well respected QC have been broadly welcomed by legal insiders who view the proposals as a significant improvement on the current jury system which has little in the way of transparency and has been accused by some of being stacked by prosecutors who prefer desirable outcomes for Crown Office statistics spin

Paul McBride QC interviewed on jury declarations & outcome of Lennon assault case

The Herald reports :

Top QC calls for jury reform

Caroline Wilson
Monday 24 October 2011

JURORS should be made to sit tests before being selected for trials in order to improve the judicial system and bring Scotland into line with other countries, according to a leading QC.

Paul McBride said potential jurors should be interviewed to establish they can “read, write and speak English” and are not “riven with prejudice”.

The only requirement to serve on a jury in Scotland is that a person should be over the age of 18, be registered to vote and have lived in the UK for five years.

Mr McBride believes potential jurors should be forced to disclose their occupation and whether they have been a victim of crime. He said Scotland’s jury system, in which 15 people can reach a decision on a majority of 8-7, made reform even more important.

His intervention follows a jury’s not proven verdict in the case of Hearts fan John Wilson, who was cleared of assaulting Celtic manager Neil Lennon during a match earlier this year. Wilson was accused of a sectarian attack on Lennon, but he was acquitted.

The verdict came despite Wilson admitting in court he had lunged at the Celtic manager and struck him.

Mr McBride said: “The question is, ‘can we improve our jury system?’ and the answer is undoubtedly yes.

“This is an area that lawyers have been discussing for some time. Judges and lawyers undergo a high standard of training. The only area where there is no scrutiny at all on the people who actually make the decision, which is baffling.

“You don’t have to be able to read or write or speak English.

“We have got 15 people deciding whether a person is guilty and we know nothing about them.

“In Scotland, unlike any other country on the planet, a person can be convicted by one vote. Following the Lennon verdict a lot of people, and newspapers were asking about the selection process for juries.

“In every other country there is some kind of jury selection process to determine whether they have got the basic skills and whether they have committed a crime. A lot of trials are conducted by police statements. If a member of the jury can’t read or speak English that’s a bit of a disadvantage.”

During the Tommy Sheridan perjury trial a female juror was threatened with legal action after revealing confidential details of the case on Facebook.

The woman posted information about how jurors voted. It is a criminal offence to reveal a jury’s deliberations.

Mr McBride said: “In America they follow the voir dire system where jurors can be questioned by a judge to determine if they might struggle to be impartial.They might not tell the truth but we should ask the question.

“It is supposed to be a jury of peers but you tend to find that most are unemployed or retired because employed people often get out of jury duty. It is not a jury of peers.

“We were told after the Lennon case, that you must respect the jury’s verdict. Why do we have to respect the verdict by the jury? If a judge makes a controversial decision he is open to criticism on the front pages of a newspaper.”

Mr McBride said both Scottish Labour and the Conservatives had voiced their support for a shake-up of the justice system.

Earlier this year, Elish Angiolini, the former Lord Advocate, called for opening and closing speeches to be introduced to help guide jurors through cases.

She raised concerns over the ability of people who were more used to communication through Facebook to sit through hours of detailed evidence.

SECTARIAN SCOTLAND : Reports on prison population show Scotland’s justice system jails MORE Catholics than Northern Ireland

Following on the heels of a study commissioned by the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee into the disproportionate imprisonment of Roman Catholics in Scotland, which confirmed suspicions there are higher numbers of Catholics in Scottish jails than from other sections of the community, Scottish anti-sectarian campaigners today claim the Scottish justice system is jailing more Catholics in comparison to the rest of the population than even in Northern Ireland.

The claims come after a new report on the religious breakdown of the prison population in Northern Ireland confirmed a disproportionate number of Catholics are behind bars in Northern Ireland, showing that while Catholics make up 44% of the general population, around 55% of inmates are drawn from the Catholic community.

The new report from the Northern Ireland Prison Service, available for download here : Owers review of the Northern Ireland Prison Service.pdf (PDF 670 KB) if taken in comparison with the report prepared for the Scottish Parliament by Dr Susan Wiltshire, available for download here OFFENDER DEMOGRAPHICS AND SENTENCING PATTERNS IN SCOTLAND & UK does appear to show via the statistics that Scotland’s justice system appears to be jailing more Catholics than Northern Ireland.

The prospect Scotland’s justice system is itself sectarian in its verdicts & sentencing will make grim reading for First Minister Alex Salmond and the Scottish Government’s latest plans to combat sectarian offences at football matches and attacks on other minorities via the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill, which features in earlier coverage HERE

Speaking today to Scottish Law Reporter, the petitioner of Petition PE 1073, Thomas Minogue said : “The reported disproportionate number of RC‘s in prison in Northern Ireland is troubling; as is the fact that they seem to be treated more harshly once in prison. Given Northern Ireland’s troubled history where the Unionist, and mainly Protestant majority have until recently quite openly practised discrimination against the RC and mainly Nationalist population these stats are hardly surprising.

However things are changing in Northern Ireland and the two communities who have fought each other for hundreds of years are now working together to build bridges, and this is reflected in the concern voiced in the Report at the prison statistics and the determination of the NI government to examine and learn from this imbalance.

Contrast this with Scotland where since 2001 when the much worse disproportionate figures for RC’s—showing them twice as likely to be imprisoned as their Protestant peers—were first highlighted by Pauline McNeil MSP. Since 2001, and despite the then Justice Minister Jim Wallace promising to investigate this, nothing has been done.

In fact it is worse than that and having gone through the motions of examining my petition (PE 1073 Link) on this subject—which also included the equally disproportionate number of Muslims in Scottish prisons—the Scottish Parliament has decided to take no action on this shameful reflection on the Scottish justice system.

The highly-respected Ulsterman, Kenny Shiels, the Kilmarnock FC Manger, recently stated that sectarianism in Scotland is worse than in Northern Ireland, and these figures would seem to show that discrimination against RC’s in the justice system is also worse here than “over the water”.

Following on from the jury verdict on Neil Lennon’s attacker, what shame on the “best wee country in the world”.

Scottish Law Reporter previously reported on Dr Susan Wiltshire’s report, which the Scottish Parliament’s Petitions Committee had initially refused to publish but later met in secret, agreeing to publish, here : Report published by Holyrood Committee says justice system may be prejudiced against Catholics, confirms higher numbers in Scots jails. However it should be noted the Scottish Parliament have pulled all the links to the petition, the report and all discussion about the petition & its written submissions.

A REPORT commissioned & subsequently published by the Scottish Parliament's Petitions Committee in response to a public petition, has endorsed the view of the Catholic Church that Scotland’s justice system is still prejudiced against Catholics. Petition PE1073, by Mr Tom Minogue, calls for the Scottish Parliament to investigate and establish the reasons for the apparently disproportionate number of Catholics in Scottish prisons. Written submissions for Petition PE1073 can be found HERE

The research, undertaken by Dr Susan Wiltshire of Glasgow University for the Petitions Committee, can be downloaded from the Scottish Parliament’s website, here : Offender Demographics and Sentencing Patterns in Scotland and the UK: Research commissioned by the Public Petitions Committee in consideration of PE1073 (203KB pdf) (link has been updated with an online document)

Dr Wiltshire’s report confirmed there are a disproportionate number of Catholics in Scottish jails, concluding : “There is certainly no available research on sentencers’ attitudes to sentencing faith groups in Scotland, however, the statistics do confirm that there are a disproportionate number of Catholics in Scottish jails, which is especially pronounced in the west of Scotland, and further that this disproportionality is evident in long term sentence length.”

Here follows a report from the Mail on Sunday newspaper, Feb 06 2011

Church claims justice system is too harsh on Catholics

THE Catholic Church is demanding action from Scottish ministers after an academic endorsed its long-held view that followers still endure prejudice in Scotland.

A report commissioned by an influential Scottish parliament committee suggested there could be prejudice within the justice system - which may account for the disproportionate number of Catholics serving jail terms. The research paper was written by Dr Susan Wiltshire of Glasgow University for Holyrood's public petitions committee. The report's findings will be discussed by MSPs after May's Holyrood election.

Dr Wiltshire, an expert in criminal justice, was commissioned to produce the report after a petition submitted four years ago by Tom Minogue. The retired engineer from Dunfermline, Fife, was concerned about the disproportionate number of Catholics in Scottish jails. At that time, Catholics made up 13 per cent of the Scots population and 26 per cent of prisoners.

Some committee members have pointed out that Catholics tend to be over-represented in deprived areas with high crime rates. Data from the 2001 Census showed that Catholics were the largest religious group in Scotland's poorest neighbourhoods, with 19 per cent living in the 10 per cent most deprived areas, compared with 8 per cent of Church of Scotland members.

Dr Wiltshire said in her report: "The question should shift from asking why Catholics are disproportionately represented in Scottish jails to why so many Catholics continue to live in areas of deprivation in Scotland." She added: "Discriminatory and prejudiced attitudes continue to feature in Scots society. It might be expected that such attitudes could manifest in the criminal justice system, accounting in part for disproportionality."

Catholic Church spokesman Peter Kearney said the problem was rooted in past Irish immigration. He pointed out that Irish migrants who went to the US in the 1840s and 1850s achieved occupational and economic parity in 1901. But he added: "In Scotland, Irish immigrants achieved parity in 2001. It took another 100 years in this small country, where some, including most politicians, have insisted for years that we don't have a problem."

Last December, only three months after the Pope visited Scotland, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, head of the country's Catholics, warned that sectarianism was still limiting religious expression here. A Scottish Government spokesman said: "While we have a range of initiatives to tackle sectarianism,we are also working to support the whole of society and tackle poverty."

The Belfast Telegraph reports on the newly released report on Northern Ireland’s prison population, here :

'Disparity' in Catholic jail total

New figures on the religious breakdown of Northern Ireland's prison population have shown that a disproportionate number of Catholics are behind bars. A major review that recommended overhauling the prison system, also raised concerns over the monitoring of inmates' religion, race and disability. Figures compiled for the report showed that while Catholics make up 44% of the general population, around 55% of inmates are drawn from the Catholic community. The report said it could find no clear explanation for the disparity, but said it may be the case that there are higher numbers of Catholics among younger age brackets in Northern Ireland.

The figures showed that 56% of prisoners in Hydebank Wood Young Offender Centre were Catholic, while 54% of prisoners at Maghaberry prison were Catholic, with 56% of inmates in Magilligan being Catholic. Prisoners held on basic privileges, as opposed to enhanced status, were also more likely to be Catholic with a 74% figure for Hydebank, 66% in Maghaberry and 82% in Magilligan.

The report found: "Overall, Catholics were also disproportionately represented in matters relating to prison discipline - adjudication, use of force and segregation. "In Hydebank Wood and Maghaberry, Catholics were disproportionately unlikely, and Protestants disproportionately likely, to be granted temporary release, for healthcare, emergencies or resettlement reasons. "It also appears to be the case at Maghaberry that Catholic prisoners are over-represented in the poorer accommodation on the 'square houses' and Protestants over-represented in the newer and better units."

The review team said it was "very disappointing" that some of the discrepancies identified were also picked up in a report in 2008. It added: "But monitoring is pointless if it does not highlight problems and lead to action to investigate and if necessary rectify them. Given the importance of being able to demonstrate equal treatment in Northern Ireland, this is a significant gap."

Supreme Court dismisses Insurance firms challenge to Holyrood’s law making powers on Pleural Plaques compensation

The Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge brought by Insurers Avira, AXA Insurance, Zurich and Royal Sun Alliance against the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009 which was passed by the Scottish Parliament to reinstate compensation for Pleural Plaques, an asbestos related condition, after the House of Lords ruling in 2007 found Pleural Plaques to be unrelated to asbestos exposure. More on the story HERE & HERE

The full ruling from the Supreme Court : Supreme Court Judgement in AXA General Insurance Limited and others (Appellants) v The Lord Advocate and others (Respondents) (Scotland) (pdf)

The Scottish Government issued the following statement welcoming the Supreme Court’s decision :

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill today welcomed a Supreme Court decision to dismiss a legal challenge to a historic Act of the Scottish Parliament. The Minister said the failure of the legal case, brought by a group of insurers, was a "triumph for progressive politics" that would bring great comfort to workers that have developed pleural plaques, brought on by exposure to asbestos. The Supreme Court judges decided unanimously that the Scottish Parliament had acted within the scope of its powers when it passed the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) Act in 2009, legislation that offered those that have pleural plaques the opportunity to claim compensation. The Act has been subject to lengthy legal challenge by a group of insurers.

Mr MacAskill said: "I warmly welcome this significant decision, not least for the sake of people with pleural plaques and all those who campaigned so vigorously to help them. It has always been our belief that the legislation is right in principle and right in law and I am pleased that it has been unequivocally upheld. "The Scottish Government's Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act was passed with overwhelming support in the Scottish Parliament, and today's decision is a triumph for the progressive politics that saw parties unite to do the right thing and help those that have developed pleural plaques as a result of negligent exposure to asbestos. We firmly believe that people with this condition should be able to raise a claim for damages, and we are delighted that this decision has gone in their favour - a result that will surely bring them some comfort. It is our sincere hope that the insurers will now reflect carefully on the decisions reached by the Scottish Parliament, by both the Outer and Inner Houses of Scotland's Court of Session, and now by the UK's Supreme Court and settle those claims that have been stalled for so long."

Exposure to asbestos can result in the development of a number of conditions, including pleural plaques (i.e. scarring of the membranes around the lungs). This condition is generally asymptomatic, though it does indicate that asbestos fibres have lodged in the body and caused a physiological reaction. Medical evidence is that "people with pleural plaques are at risk of developing diffuse pleural thickening causing breathlessness, asbestosis of the lungs causing breathlessness, lung cancer which is usually fatal and mesothelioma, a cancer which can occur in the lining of the chest cavity or in the lining of the abdominal cavity which is almost invariably fatal, usually within 12 to 18 months of the first symptoms. People with pleural plaques who have been heavily exposed to asbestos at work have a risk of mesothelioma more than one thousand times greater than the general population.

From the 1980s onwards, where pleural plaques arose from negligent exposure to asbestos, Courts throughout the UK made compensation awards; those awards were paid by the negligent party or their insurer. On October 17, 2007, however, the House of Lords ruled in respect of a number of cases in England that asymptomatic pleural plaques do not give rise to a cause of action under the law of damages. The House of Lords ruling is not binding in Scotland, but would be considered highly persuasive by Scottish Courts.

In November 2007 the Scottish Government announced its intention to bring forward legislation to ensure that the House of Lords ruling would not have effect in Scotland. In June, 2008, the Scottish Government introduced the Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Bill. The Bill was passed in March 2009, got Royal Assent the following month, and came fully into force in June 2009.

The Outer House decision on judicial review was announced on January 8, 2010, with the Inner House decision announced on April 12, 2011.

While Scottish Ministers welcomed the decision to dismiss the insurers challenge, the Justice Secretary and the First Minister Alex Salmond have not taken any side swipes at parts of the judgement which declare Holyrood not to be a “Sovereign Parliament” (Expect that, and another fight, for another day – Ed)

In Paragraph 46 of the Supreme Court’s judgement on the issue, it is stated : “The Scottish Parliament takes its place under our constitutional arrangements as a self-standing democratically elected legislature. Its democratic mandate to make laws for the people of Scotland is beyond question. Acts that the Scottish Parliament enacts which are within its legislative competence enjoy, in that respect, the highest legal authority.  The United Kingdom Parliament  has vested in the Scottish Parliament the authority to make laws that are  within its devolved competence. It is nevertheless a body to which decision making powers have been delegated. And it does not enjoy the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament that, as Lord Bingham said in  Jackson, para 9, is the bedrock of the British constitution. Sovereignty remains with the United Kingdom Parliament. The Scottish Parliament’s power to legislate is not unconstrained. It cannot make or unmake any law it wishes. Section 29(1) declares that an Act of the Scottish Parliament is not law so far as any provision of the Act is outside the legislative competence of the Parliament. Then there is the role which has been conferred upon this court by the statute, if called upon to do so, to judge whether or not Acts of the  Parliament are within its legislative competence:  see section 33(1) and paragraphs 32 and 33 of Schedule 6, as amended by section 40 and paragraphs 96 and 106 of  Schedule 9 to the constitutional Reform Act 2005. The question whether an Act of the Scottish Parliament is within the competence of the Scottish Parliament is also a devolution issue within the meaning of  paragraph 1(a) of Schedule  6 to the Scotland Act in respect of which proceedings such as this may be brought in the Scottish courts.”

Holyrood and the Scottish Government has been well & truly warned it would seem.

Complaints against Scottish Police Forces fall to three year low reports Police Complaints Commissioner

A new report published today by Professor John McNeill, the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland, shows that in the year to 31 March 2011 complaint allegations about the police have fallen by 8.8% to 7009, a three year low. Police Complaints: Statistics for Scotland 2010-11 download the full report (pdf)

The annual digest of  complaints uses information provided by the eight forces to record the number and type of criminal, non-criminal and quality of service complaints received and disposed of by the police and Area Procurators Fiscal.

Only two forces, Northern and Fife Constabularies, reported increases in complaint allegations, up 9% and 3.8% respectively. Central Scotland Police recorded the largest fall, down 23% (22.9%), while the number of allegations against Strathclyde Police, Scotland’s largest force, fell by almost 12% (11.9%).

By using a complaint/10,000 population denominator, it is possible to identify trends in complaints between forces serving areas with different population sizes. Using this method, Strathclyde recorded the lowest with 11.2 complaints and Grampian the highest at 18.9 complaints per 10,000 population. The average for Scotland as a whole was 13.4 complaints.

Complaints about senior police officers rose from 45 last year to 48 this year. A senior officer is classed as any rank above Chief Superintendent. Strathclyde Police recorded the greatest increase in complaints about its senior officers, rising from 18 to 28. No complaints were made about senior officers from Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary or Tayside Police. The number of complaints about senior officers from Grampian Police dropped to five from 14 last year.

The report also breaks the data down across twelve different categories of complaints, ranging from traffic irregularity to corrupt practice. Irregular procedure remains the most common complaint, with 32.5% of all complaints made falling into this category. This category captures complaints about the way that an officer, or member of civilian staff, has carried out his duties, neglect of duty relates to complaints that an officer has not carried his duties. Incivility or rudeness by officers remains the second most common complaint, accounting for over 15% (15.5%) of all complaints made by the public.

In the period under review, 649 cases were referred to the Procurator Fiscal, with proceedings taken in 37 cases, resulting in 30 convictions. Claims of assault (611 allegations) and the use of excessive force (420 allegations) by officers, showed the biggest reductions this year, at 31% and 28% respectively.

Professor McNeill described the overall drop in complaints as “encouraging”, saying that any decrease in complaints is to be welcomed. However he sounded a note of caution in relation to the increase in those seeking an independent review of their complaint, after the police process had been concluded.

The figures in this report contrast with the Commissioner’s own Annual Report published last month, which showed a 70 per cent increase in the number of people bringing complaints to him, after exhausting the police’s own complaints processes, something he attributes in part to greater awareness of his role. Currently the PCCS reviews and reports on non-criminal complaints only. This may change under a single force, where the PCCS could become part of a new independent body which has the power to investigate complaints and allegations of misconduct by Chief Officers, as well as the ability to investigate serious criminal allegations against police officers and staff under the direction of the Lord Advocate.

Professor McNeill said: “I am sure that the forces will welcome the overall drop in complaints and I am encouraged by any reduction in the number of complaints about the police. Where the police and I may part company is that I do not see the closing  of a complaint by the police as the end of the story. I have seen a significant increase in the number of people coming to me after they have been through the police’s complaints procedure because they are not happy with the way the police have handled their complaint.

“We need to work on better resolution of complaints locally and proportionately. I hope that the Statutory Guidance, which I published in March this year, with its focus on local resolution and forces learning from complaints received, will contribute to a further reduction in complaints made and referrals to my office.”

The stats show :

Central Scotland Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Central Scotland Police in 2010-11 is down -13.2% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is down -22.9% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (85.9%), followed by 8.1% about the quality of service and 6.1% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (93.4%), compared with 8.5% at police staff and 0.3% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was down -22.2% on last year, compared with a fall of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.   

Dumfries and Galloway Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary in 2010-11 is down by one case (-0.6%) on last year, compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is down -6.0% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (66.9%), followed by 29.5% about the quality of service and 3.6% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (93.2%), compared with 5.6% at police staff and 6.2% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was up 22.0% on last year, compared with a fall of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Fife Constabulary

· The total number of complaint cases received by Fife Constabulary in 2010-11 is down (-16.5%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is up +3.8% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (74.2%), followed by 21.2% about the quality of service and 4.6% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (93.3%), compared with 8.8% at police staff and 0.7% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was up 34.4% on last year, compared with -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Grampian Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Grampian Police in 2010-11 is up slightly (+1.6%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is down -8.5% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (79.7%), followed by 19.3% about the quality of service and 1.1% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (92.8%), compared with 7.8% at police staff and 0.2% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was down -18.3% on last year, compared with a reduction of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Lothian and Borders Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Lothian & Borders Police in 2010-11 is down (-6.2%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is down -9.0% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (88.9%), followed by 6.7% about the quality of service and 4.4% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (93.1%), compared with 7.6% at police staff and 0.6% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was down -11.0% on last year, compared with a reduction of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Northern Constabulary

· The total number of complaint cases received by Northern Constabulary in 2010-11 is down (-5.9%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is up +9.0% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

·  The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (78.6%), followed by 19.7% for quality of service and 1.7% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (95.4%), compared with 3.4% at police staff and 3.1% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was up very slightly (+0.8%) on last year, compared with a fall of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Strathclyde Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Strathclyde Police in 2010-11 is down (-11.8%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is similarly down -11.9% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

· The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (81.2%), followed by 9.7% for quality of service and 9.1% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (96.0%), compared with 4.5% at police staff and 0.9% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was down -7.6% on last year, compared with -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.  

Tayside Police

· The total number of complaint cases received by Tayside Police in 2010-11 is down (-7.3%) on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.0%.

· The number of complaint allegations received by the force in 2010-11 is down -10.7% on last year (2009-10), compared with an overall reduction for Scotland of -8.8%.

· The majority of allegations received concerned on-duty conduct (85.2%), followed by 10.6% about the quality of service and 4.2% for off-duty conduct.

· The majority of on- and off-duty allegations received were directed at police officers (93.2%), compared with 7.9% at police staff and 1.8% at special constables.

· The number of all allegations disposed of was up 7.3% on last year, compared with a fall of -5.8% for Scotland as a whole.

SECTARIAN SCOTLAND COVER-UP : Crown Office admits it destroyed sectarian offences data ‘showing majority of crimes were against Catholics’

First Minister Alex Salmond told Church he would publish sectarian data, Crown Office now says it destroyed most of it. THE CROWN OFFICE has been forced to admit it destroyed key statistics & data on sectarian offences which Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond had promised would be released after a meeting with the Catholic Bishop Tartarglia over Church concerns about the SNP’s “thrown together” Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill which aims to deal with Scotland’s now not-so-secret problem of sectarian crime. The Crown Office claim the files were destroyed in line with a policy of holding such data for two years however legal insiders are today claiming the material was destroyed because it showed the majority of sectarian crimes were against Roman Catholics around Orange Order marches.

After a meeting between Scotland’s First Minister & the Catholic Church over concerns about the wording of the bill and concerns the authorities under reported sectarian offences, both sides made it clear there had been a thaw in relations after some ‘heated discussion’. However, the Church remained unhappy that statistics on sectarian offences dating back to 2003, including the targets of any abuse, will not be made public as records are kept for only two years. The bishop spoke of his disappointment that, despite repeated requests, years of data on sectarian offences “remains locked in the vaults of the Crown Office”.

Peter Kearney, a spokesman for the Catholic Church in Scotland, said: “It’s deeply unfortunate the Crown Office practice has meant that a true and complete historic picture will never emerge.”

Bishop Tartaglia is quoted : “I particularly welcome the First Minister’s commitment to track and analyse sectarian crime on an on-going basis using all data relating to Section 74 of the Criminal Justice Scotland Act 2003. Clearly, we cannot tackle a problem without first measuring it.”

After the meeting, Mr Salmond said: “I affirmed the Scottish Government’s commitment to publish the key statistics on the level of sectarian crime – not just on a one-off basis, but as an ongoing commitment to help us eradicate it. I also confirmed we would place an explicit freedom of expression clause in the second part of the Bill.”

In spite of Mr Salmond’s commitment to publish key statistics on sectarian crime, the admission by the Crown Office over the destruction of information & statistics on sectarian offences which has been sought by the Catholic Church in Scotland since 2006 appears to confirm the sectarian file shredding took place under former Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC as the Crown Office are now indicating there is only data available from 2010.

Commenting on the convenient destruction of the sectarian offences data, an insider told Scottish Law Reporter : “The data showed the majority of sectarian crimes were against Roman Catholics around Orange Order marches This would be too shocking for the SNP as they would be seen to be bringing in new legislation to punish Roman Catholics when in fact they should be bringing in legislation to control Orange Order parades.”

The Crown Office admission came after a question in the Scottish Parliament from MSP John Park was cryptically answered by the Scottish Government’s Roseanna Cunningham MSP, who is in charge of the anti sectarian legislation otherwise known as the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Bill.

Question S4W-02895 - John Park ( Mid Scotland and Fife ) (Scottish Labour ) (Date Lodged 22/09/2011 ) :
”To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Lord Advocate’s analysis of crimes committed under section 74 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 in each year since its introduction will be made available to the Justice Committee before it completes its deliberations on the proposed new Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill.”

ANSWERED (pdf) by Roseanna Cunningham ( 06/10/2011 ):
”The Scottish Government will undertake a one year analysis of the data held by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in relation to Section 74 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. The analysis will cover the most recent data available – 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 – and will be completed and published on the Scottish Government website by mid November."

Back in September, the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee chaired by the SNP’s now twice Convener of the Justice Committee, Christine Grahame MSP, heard evidence from Professor Tom Devine who made it clear academics, anthropologists and sociologists were waiting for the publication of the complete data (from 2003-2010) re religiously aggravated crime under the 2003 Act being compiled. Ms Grahame said she also wanted to see the data and ‘will press the Lord Advocate for it’.

Professor Tom Devine told the Justice Committee it was vital the Lord Advocate’s statistics on sectarian crime be released (click image or LINK to watch video clip)

Responding to questions relating to the 2003 act & offences aggravated by sectarian behaviour from John Lamont MSP, Professor Devine said : … I said that only 14 per cent of the cases that were assessed and evaluated related to events at or outside football matches. I was trying to refute the police officer’s assertion—so much of this process has been based on assertion rather than on argument, or on statements with evidence-that the issue is overwhelmingly a public order problem or is related to football matches. Some of the very few pieces of hard evidence from that snapshot of 2003 to early 2004 refute that analysis.

Most of those cases—54 per cent—were in the Glasgow area; 22 per cent were in Lanarkshire; and a substantial minority were in West Lothian. I can consider the reasons why that should be the case if you are interested, because they are historical.

Alcohol featured in the majority of cases, and in 49 per cent of cases, the police report revealed that the accused was under the influence at the time of the offence. Twice as many Catholic victims as Protestant victims were examined, and 1 per cent of cases showed Muslims to be the target. Fifteen per cent of cases arose in the context of marches.

We need the big database from 2003 to 2011 in order to be confident, and it will appear in the public domain in due course. The snapshot so far tells us that such incidents do not necessarily occur when or where one would think that they would—for example, in the marching season or at football matches. They are part of the fabric of certain areas of Scotia, which reflects the fact that the problem is societal

The Convener: You also referred to the Lord Advocate’s analysis, which is a separate matter.

Professor Devine: Yes. That will build on the snapshot, but importantly it will examine all the data between 2003 and the present. Academics, scholars, historians, anthropologists and sociologists have wanted to see that information for some time. It will not necessarily tell the entire truth, but it is hard,quantitative information from which we can learn a lot. It will be interesting to find out, when you next speak to Frank Mulholland, when that information will be release in the public domain.

The Convener: Again, that is a pre-emptive strike. It is going through my head that we will, when we are writing to the Lord Advocate for the guidelines, ask when that information is to be published.

Professor Devine: It is supposed to be published in the autumn.

The Convener: Is it to be published, or is it an internal matter?

Professor Devine: I think that there will be something of a controversial response if it is not published.

The Convener: We will ask if and when it will be published.

Professor Devine: It is not only to be published, but to be analysed.

The Full report of the meeting can be downloaded via the Scottish Parliament’s website here : Official Report of Meeting 13 September (545KB pdf) and the coverage of the entire session of evidence can be viewed in four parts, here : PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART 4

A law campaigner commenting on the Justice Committee’s proceedings said : “So all of these learned people are waiting to see something that doesn’t exist or if it does has been destroyed by the Crown Office. It is Orwellian akin to burning books.”

The Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee subsequently voted along party lines, with the SNP’s majority membership on the Committee voting to ensure it backed the Scottish Government’s Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill.

Scottish Law Reporter’s coverage of the SNP’s anti sectarian legislation can be read here : Sectarianism in Scotland and the Scottish Government

The Sunday Herald newspaper reported :

Crown office admits: we’ve destroyed sectarian crime statistics

9 Oct 2011

HUNDREDS of files that could have provided an invaluable insight into sectarian crime in Scotland have been destroyed as part of a bureaucratic housekeeping exercise, the country’s prosecution service has admitted.

The Crown Office revealed it had disposed of hundreds of police reports on religiously aggravated offences in line with a “strict” internal policy on data retention.

Since 2006, the Catholic Church has called for a detailed breakdown of the offences, after an early study suggested two-thirds of religiously aggravated crimes were against Catholics.

The Scottish Government promised before this year’s Holyrood elections that it would publish an analysis of sectarian offences if re-elected. However, the destruction of the original police reports to fiscals, the basis for the first study, means that is now impossible. The lost data covers most of 2005-09.

A Catholic Church spokesman said the Crown Office action was “deeply unfortunate”. The Government said further analysis would be published, but using data from 2010 onwards.

Section 74 of the 2003 Criminal Justice Act first let courts take into account the religious aggravation of crimes when passing sentence. Since then, the Crown Office has published the annual total of Section 74 reports to fiscals.

Last year, the number was up 10% to 693, of which 587 resulted in court proceedings. However, these figures do not show the nature of the aggravation – whether it was directed against Catholics, Protestants, Jews or Muslims. So far, the only detailed breakdown of this kind was produced in 2006, and covered Section 74 reports from January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005. This study showed around two-thirds of offences were directed against Catholics, with 80% of offences committed in Glasgow or Lanarkshire.

Breach of the peace, which is usually prosecuted as a low-level or “summary” offence in the district or sheriff court, accounted for almost half of police reports ending in conviction.

A Crown Office spokesman said: “In accordance with the data retention policy of Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, police reports in concluded summary cases are kept for two years. In accordance with the same policy, case reports for sheriff and jury cases are kept for five years.”

Calls for inquiry as Justice Secretary MacAskill defends ex Lord Advocate Angiolini’s failure to prosecute 14 lawyers accused of legal aid fraud

A lack of admissible credibility – Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill defended former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini’s decision not to prosecute lawyers for legal aid fraud running into millions. There are calls for an independent investigation into why Scotland’s Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service under the term of now former Lord Advocate, now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC, refused to prosecute a total of fourteen solicitors for what are alleged to be frauds collectively totalling millions of pounds of publicly funded legal aid after an investigation by Scots law journalist Peter Cherbi revealed prosecutors had claimed in each case there was “a lack of admissible evidence” for prosecutions to go ahead. The Crown Office refusal to prosecute any of the accused legal aid crooks has been backed by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, who is also a lawyer. In a remarkable show of arrogance, the Justice Secretary told a worried msp if he was concerned about it, he should fill in a consumer feedback form on the Crown Office’s website.

Earlier revelations in the scandal, featured on the popular Scots law blog Diary of Injustice revealed one of the solicitors accused of legal aid fraud was married to a member of staff at the Crown Office, thought to be a Procurator Fiscal. The solicitor linked to the PF also escaped a criminal prosecution over “a lack of admissible evidence” and alarmingly, it was revealed the Crown Office kept secret the details of the relationship between one of the accused & one of their own from the Scottish Legal Aid Board.

The investigation is reported by Diary of Injustice as follows :

Justice Secretary’s discredited defence for Crown Office in 14 legal aid fraud scandals as links between accused lawyers & Scots crime agencies emerge A lack of admissible evidence, fourteen times? Justice Secretary MacAskill defends refusal to prosecute legal aid fraudsters. WHEN SCOTLAND’S JUSTICE SECRETARY has to rely on the ‘grubby’ defence of “a lack of admissible evidence” to support the actions of his own prosecutors who refused to prosecute AN ENTIRE CLASS OF CRIME spanning SIX YEARS involving legal colleagues accused of systematic fraud running into millions of pounds of public funds, you just know there’s something rotten in the justice system.

And so, amid revelations earlier this week where a solicitor suspected of legal aid fraud by the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) who was reported to the Crown Office turned out to be married to a Procurator Fiscal, and was let off the hook with a decision not to prosecute due to “a lack of admissible evidence”, KENNY MACASKILL, Scotland’s Justice Secretary has now told a Holyrood msp he backs the Crown Office refusal to prosecute any of FOURTEEN LAWYERS who swindled MILLIONS OF POUNDS in taxpayer funded legal aid because there wasn't enough evidence in each of the cases, and that just as the Crown Office had said, it was not in the public interest lawyers be hauled before the courts on criminal charges.

The fourteen cases of solicitors suspected of legal aid fraud were reported to the £100-Million-a-year-to-run Crown Office by SLAB since 2005 under the term of former Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC yet not one single lawyer was prosecuted. An investigation by Diary of Injustice backed up by Freedom of Information enquiries revealed the full details of the scandal which can be read here : FOURTEEN lawyers accused of multi-million pound legal aid fraud escape justice as Scotland’s Crown Office fail to prosecute all cases in 5 years

Mr MacAskill, responding to the Scottish Conservative’s Justice Spokesman John Lamont MSP over queries regarding the lack of any prosecutions of legal aid swindlers from the legal profession itself, is so confident SLAB & the Crown Office can handle legal aid crooks who are stealing millions of pounds a year from taxpayers, he dismissed the msp’s concerns, telling Mr Lamont that constituents can fill out an online complaint form located the Crown Office website if they wished to complain about the way the Crown Office refuse to prosecute lawyers.

Replying to msp John Lamont’s enquiries about the legal aid scandals, Mr MacAskill wrote : “The Scottish Legal Aid Board (“The Board”) takes its responsibility to detect fraud and abuse of legal aid very seriously and carries out a wide variety of work to prevent it in the first instance. The Board’s Solicitor and investigations Unit interrogates internal systems and through analysis of applications received and accounts submitted for payment, or paid, identifies irregularities that may point towards potentially fraudulent activities. If the information gathered and further investigation work carried out amplifies concerns, then the Board engages, at an early stage and at a senior level, with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS).”

Mr MacAskill’s bizarre letter continued, supporting the Crown Office decision there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute any of the fourteen cases of lawyers stealing legal aid : “COPFS is responsible for the prosecution of crime in Scotland and acts entirely independently of Government. In any individual case, the Procurator Fiscal will consider any report of criminal activity and make an assessment as to whether to take any action. This decision must be taken in the public interest. the Procurator Fiscal must consider if there is sufficient evidence in the case, weighing a number of factors in coming to a decision on what action would be appropriate. One of these factors is whether there is sufficient corroboration of the essential elements of the alleged crime.”

MacAskill : If you feel the Crown Office closed ranks to protect one of their own and a bunch of lawyers, fill out an online feedback form. The Justice Secretary ended by suggesting anyone with complaints about why the Crown Office were refusing to prosecute lawyers who steal legal aid could fill out an online feedback form at the Crown Office website. Mr MacAskill wrote : “Your constituent has reported particular concerns about the failure of COPFS to prosecute in some individual cases and about the personal circumstances of a specific Procurator Fiscal. In respect of both matters I would draw your constituent’s attention to the robust complaints process operated by COPFS. Details of the process are available using the following link : http://www.copfs.gov.uk/Contacts/CustomerFeedbackMakeComp”

SLAB now claim the Crown Office failed to tell them a solicitor accused of legal aid fraud was married to one of their own. However, Mr MacAskill’s claims the Crown Office were working to combat legal aid fraud have been seriously discredited today after a flurry of communications from the Scottish Legal Aid Board confirmed the Crown Office DELIBERATELY WITHHELD information from SLAB that one of the solicitors they had investigated for legal aid fraud and had subsequently reported to the Crown Office for a criminal prosecution, was married to a member of the Crown Office. A Scottish Legal Aid Board official told this reporter : “We can confirm that … we do not hold any information (supplied to us by the Crown or otherwise) which indicates that any of the solicitors reported by us to the Crown was married to a PF.”

A legal observer commenting on the growing scandal said : “It is of considerable concern the Crown Office failed to inform the Scottish Legal Aid Board there was a marital relationship between the solicitor reported to them for criminal offences involving legal aid fraud, and a member of the Crown Office own staff. This relationship posed a serious conflict of interest for the Crown Office which could have potentially compromised any criminal investigation against the accused whom we now know was not prosecuted due to the wonders of a lack of admissible evidence. The Legal Aid Board should have been told from the outset.”

Legal insiders have also revealed a lawyer who stole millions in legal aid was married to a Police Officer in training when he was reported to the Crown Office. Even worse for the Justice Secretary, a senior legal insider has now revealed another of the solicitors accused of legal aid fraud, who was found to have stole millions of pounds from taxpayers was married to a Police Officer in training. The wife of the legal aid fraudster was allegedly due to pass out of Tulliallan Police College around the same time her lawyer husband committed suicide by standing in front of a train after his law firm had just been raided by the authorities in connection with a huge fraud inquiry. More on these latest developments will be reported in a future article investigating links between accused lawyers and Scotland’s crime agencies.

A legal insider close to the Scottish Legal Aid Board rubbished the Justice Secretary’s letter to the Scottish Conservative’s Mr Lamont on the legal aid fraud prosecution scandal. He said : “Mr MacAskill knows very well the Scottish Legal Aid Board are trying to do their job by investigating suspicious legal aid claims, however every time a solicitor finds out they are under investigation or are accused of irregularities, the Legal Defence Union step in to argue their case, delay or obstruct the investigation, and prevent any report being made to the Crown Office.”

He continued : “In the case of Niels Lockhart, Mr MacAskill and the Scottish Government were well aware both the Legal Defence Union & Law Society of Scotland delayed the case for four years to prevent SLAB’s S31 complaint relating to Niels Lockhart going ahead to a full hearing at the Law Society and any subsequent report which may have been sent to Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal or the Crown Office.”

“Officials from the Legal Defence Union intentionally delayed matters with lengthy correspondence and the Law Society of Scotland deliberately prolonged their investigation of SLAB’s Section 31 Complaint against Mr Lockhart by passing the complaint file round three different reporters, one of whom had dealings with Mr Lockhart directly, another who apparently refused to write the report although it was claimed the request was lost in paperwork, and the third finally finishing the report in the knowledge the LDU had brokered a deal where SLAB would drop its complaint to the Law Society and not ask the Crown Office to prosecute.”

He ended by saying : “I think the Justice Secretary has not been entirely forthcoming in his response to the msp and if Mr MacAskill claims he or his department knew nothing of these matters, he is not a very capable Minister nor is the Scottish Government capable, or, it appears, willing to protect the legal aid budget from fraudulent claims made by members of the Scottish legal profession.”

A senior legal figure who spoke to Diary of Injustice earlier in the week over the revelations one of the accused legal aid fraudsters was married to a Procurator Fiscal, also criticised Mr MacAskill’s claims the Crown Office were acting in the public interest by not prosecuting the solicitors accused of legal aid fraud.

He said : “If the Justice Secretary feels the Crown Office acted responsibly or impartially in refusing to prosecute all fourteen cases involving solicitors accused of legal aid fraud who were the subject of lengthy and costly investigations by the Scottish Legal Aid Board, he is living in a world of his own.”

He continued : Clearly the Crown Office are unwilling to prosecute solicitors for legal aid fraud. I do not believe the Crown Office are sufficiently independent to investigate cases where the accused is linked to one of their own. The reason for failing to take the case to court on a lack of admissible evidence will be viewed by most plain speaking people as a stitch-up.”

He concluded : “Perhaps Mr MacAskill should take his own advice, go fill out the online feedback format himself and see how far he gets. What an utterly useless suggestion coming from a Minister from the Scottish Government.”

John Lamont MSP (Scottish Conservative). Member of the Scottish Parliament's Justice Committee, John Lamont MSP commented on the mushrooming legal aid fraud scandal. He said : “The legal aid budget is one of the largest components of the Scotland’s justice budget. Given the current pressures on the justice budget in general and the legal aid budget in particular, it is vital that every penny is spent properly. Therefore there must be stringent procedures in place to look out for instances of fraud and to deal robustly with those who engage in it.”

Mr Lamont continued : “Any suggestion of impropriety or fraud must be treated very seriously indeed. Not only does this behaviour take valuable resources away from those who really need it, but it also undermines the integrity of the legal profession in general.”

From this reporter’s own observations on this growing scandal, there is now little doubt this issue must go before the Scottish Parliament, with officials from both the Crown Office & Scottish Legal Aid Board called in to be questioned on why solicitors are escaping criminal prosecution for legal aid fraud costing taxpayers millions of pounds.

BACKGROUND : LEGAL AID FRAUDSTER SOLICITORS PROTECTED BY CROWN OFFICE REFUSAL TO PROSECUTE

A Crown Office FOI response to Diary of Injustice revealed : Since the start of 2005, SLAB has submitted nine reports to Crown Office alleging criminal offences by a total of thirteen solicitors. One report related to a firm of five solicitors; The allegations relating to eleven of these solicitors were marked for no action on the basis of an insufficiency of evidence. This related to seven separate reports (for which Crown Counsel’s Instructions were obtained in three); A report relating to one of the eleven solicitors referred to above was referred to the Civil Recovery Unit for their consideration; One solicitor died before criminal proceedings were commenced; One solicitor was placed on indictment for Sheriff and Jury proceedings for fraud. That solicitor entered a preliminary plea in bar of trial on the grounds of insanity which was sustained by the Court. In light of that decision, the case was deserted pro loco et tempore; and in relation to the final solicitor, the matter remains under consideration (this final case also resulted in a decision not to prosecute).

Crown Office admitted additional lawyers escaped prosecutions over legal aid frauds. A further admission on lawyers referred by the Scottish Legal Aid Board over legal aid irregularities was made from the Crown Office relating to an additional case which had not been initially disclosed to Diary of Injustice. The admission contained details of yet another lawyer accused of allegations of a criminal nature, stating : SLAB made allegations of a criminal nature against a solicitor and sought preliminary advice from Crown Office. SLAB did not submit a crime report but were assisted by the police in carrying out further enquiries. A report was thereafter submitted by the police to the local Procurator Fiscal rather than Crown Office. The case was marked for no proceedings by the Procurator Fiscal.

NIELS LOCKHART : SECRET LDU-LAW SOCIETY-SLAB DEAL ENSURED NO PROSECUTION

Sunday Mail exposed Niels Lockhart’s £600K legal aid claims in two years and accusations over legal aid fiddling. From key evidence involving the Niels Lockhart case passed to Diary of Injustice and verified by Freedom of Information disclosures from the Scottish Legal Aid Board, I revealed earlier in April of this year how the Legal Defence Union ensured solicitor Niels Lockhart, who had already claimed SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS of legal aid over two years would be allowed to continue working as a lawyer without any further investigations over inflated legal aid claims on the public purse : One law for lawyers : Secret Report reveals Legal Aid Board, Law Society & Legal Defence Union ‘cosy relationship’ in Lockhart case On 5 June 2005 the Scottish Legal Aid Board sent a report to the Law Society of Scotland in terms of S32 of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 against the sole practitioner firm of Niels S Lockhart, 71 King Street, Kilmarnock. The secret report, obtained under Freedom of Information laws, can be downloaded here : SCOTTISH LEGAL AID BOARD S31 COMPLAINT REPORT TO THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND : NIELS S LOCKHART (pdf)

SLAB’s report was heavy on accusations yet achieved little, as did their complaint to the Law Society. The Scottish Legal Aid Board presented its report & complaint to the Law Society of Scotland on the 5th June 2006 but had to wait until a stunning FOUR YEARS until August 2010 before the Law Society even got round to sending SLAB a copy of the Law Society investigator’s report, which recommended that 11 out of 12 of SLAB’s complaints were “made out” and also recommended that the Law Society exercise its powers to exclude Niels Lockhart from giving advice & assistance to or from acting for a person to whom legal aid is made available.

Secret deals struck between the Law Society, Legal Defence Union & Scottish Legal Aid Board behind closed doors ensured lawyers suspected of legal aid fraud were never prosecuted. In October 2010, Mr Lockhart’s legal representative James McCann of the Legal Defence Union approached SLAB with a offer Mr Lockhart would withdraw fully from providing legal aid if SLAB’s S31 complaint was withdrawn. A Minute of Agreement was drafter and agreed with Niels Lockhart & the Legal Defence Union outlining the voluntary and irrevocable withdrawal by Mr Lockhart and the firm from the provision of all firms of legal assistance funded by legal aid. A letter disclosed by the Scottish Legal Aid Board in response to a Freedom of Information request revealed what happened : “In November 2010 SLAB advised the Law Society of Scotland that they had negotiated with Mr Lockhart his voluntary removal from the provision of legal assistance with effect from 1 November 2010 and acknowledged that the Society had separately received information from Mr Lockhart signalling his intention to withdraw from provision of all types of legal assistance. In the light of this, we sought to know from them whether they accepted SLAB’s withdrawal of the S31 complaint against Mr Lockhart. In December 2010 the Law Society wrote to SLAB advising that they had accepted SLAB’s withdrawal of the complaint and that they were closing their file and taking no further action.”

Ex Top Cop now at SLCC Douglas Watson’s former lover Chief Inspector Allison Strachan arrested, appears in Court on Data Protection charges

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.