Thursday, July 02, 2009

SLCC appointments scandal 'humiliation' for Justice Secretary as MacAskill forced to abandon new lay member recruitment

MacAskill tight lippedJustice Secretary Kenny MacAskill was forced to cancel appointments round after media reports of scandals at the SLCC. Amid denials from the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission that at least one of it's lay members who were personally appointed by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill last year wished to 'step down', revelations from Scotland's independent appointments regulator and sources now confirm the incident did take place and that the new appointments round, had to be abruptly cancelled by the Justice Secretary just one month later after reports appeared in the media of scandals involving the SLCC's lawyer members.

SLCC lay member steps down February 16 2009SLCC delayed publication of meetings details for 5 months to hide secret recruitment drive. The Legal Complaints Commission's requirement for new lay members only emerged this week, in the five month late publication of their meetings minutes, which insiders allege was a deliberate delay to cover up the fact that at least one commission lay member had asked to step down, as I reported earlier, here : Justice Secretary forced into new appointments round at Scottish Legal Complaints Commission after lay member ‘steps down’

Insults fly at SLCC as Law chiefs launch bitter tirades against campaign groups & law reformersMedia reports showed extreme anti-public bitterness at SLCC. However, revelations from documents obtained under the Freedom of Information act which I reported on, and were also reported in the Sunday Mail newspaper, portrayed board members & staff of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission as anti-consumer, anti-reform, and having the same closed shop mentality as the Law Society of Scotland, where papers showed that board members had engaged in bitter hate fuelled rants against victims of crooked lawyers, had also attacked individuals who were claiming compensation against 'crooked lawyers' and were seemingly more interested in being out on the town than performing their public duties.

ocpasScottish appointments regulator OCPAS confirmed they were involved in now cancelled recruitment of SLCC lay members. The Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments in Scotland have now confirmed they were involved in an abruptly cancelled round of lay member appointments to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, initiated in February by the Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill who was then forced to cancel the appointments round after only a month, in April.

A spokesman for OCPAS said : "We did assign an OCPAS Assessor to oversee a new appointments round for the SLCC in February of this year. The Scottish Government cancelled the round in April before it got beyond the planning stage. This is the prerogative of the Scottish Ministers."

He continued : "It is not possible for the Scottish Ministers to recruit ministerial appointees for the Commission without our regulatory oversight. When we do have regulatory oversight over appointments the vacancies always have to be publicised appropriately. As a minimum they must be publicised on the Scottish Government’s public appointments website"

Scottish Legal Complaints CommissionSLCC Board members – Who wants to step down now ? However, this is not the first time board members have wanted to 'step down' at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which has received over £2 million pounds of public money so far, where board members earn up to £350 a day in expenses, and some salaries of particular members of staff are hitting up to £1350 a week.

I reported earlier that the entire board of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission threatened to resign over a lack of insurance cover and increased perks, which itself could have also provoked another costly round of appointments by the Justice Secretary. On that occasion, the Scottish Government were forced to give in, and bow to the demands of the SLCC board members.

ScottishGovernmentScottish Government ‘were humiliated’ by lawyers complaints quango the SLCC. A Scottish Government insider talking about the scandal at the SLCC claimed today the whole episode "had made a fool out of the Justice Secretary" after Mr MacAskill instituted a new appointments round for lay members in February of this year, but was then forced to cancel it just a few weeks later.

Margaret Scanlan - Called to the Bars - Sunday Mail  15 March 2009 emailMedia focus on booze culture & secret goings on at SLCC derailed the latest shoe-in appointments. The insider claimed : "The SLCC's failure to competently handle their lay member issue ended up causing a lot of problems for the Justice Secretary and Justice Department officials, who, after the media reports on Margaret Scanlan and Eileen Masterman, had to cancel the new recruitment round the commission itself had requested."

"Secrecy on the issue was viewed as important as the SLCC was presenting its budget to Parliament and no one wanted awkward questions on the conduct of ministerial appointees and the fact some suspected there would have been shoe-in appointments if there had been no press attention."

He went on : "I understand the whole episode was very humiliating for MacAskill and the justice team. They were and still are very angry over the whole thing but many are thinking the SLCC is just not up to the job they are supposed to be doing."

A spokesman for a consumer organisation today also expressed concern over the SLCC's handling of the appointments affair. He said : "If the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission always choose the secrecy route in trying to hide their problems then I don't see how the public can have any confidence in them at all."

He continued : "This latest affair, which seems to show the Government and the commission were trying to hide their need for new lay members raises questions over the whole appointments process, especially where lay members are supposed to be independent of the legal profession and are there to balance the complement of lawyers already sitting on the SLCC."

A member of the public, who read my earlier report this week on the lay member scandal at the SLCC decided to call in and ask for an explanation.

He said : "After reading your report on Monday, I called the SLCC to ask why lay members were resigning but the person I spoke to denied there were any resignations or anyone wanted to step down, despite the fact it says in their own minutes a lay member was going to step down which you also published. How can anyone trust an organisation like that ?"

Jane IrvineSLCC Chair Jane Irvine – greater clarity needed at SLCC for new lay members. To end the theme of secret resignations & secret appointments for now, the SLCC managed a two line reference in their April minutes to the ‘delay’ of the lay appointments round. The SLCC’s Chairman, Jane Irvine is quoted in the briefest terms as saying : “The Chair also advised that SGvt have agreed to defer the additional appointment of Lay Members to the Board until there is greater clarity over need by the SLCC.”

However the April minutes have only now been released, months after the events took place which you read by clicking on the following thumbnails :

SLCC April’s minutes – published 5 months late, hopefully not for public eyes ?

SLCC 20th April Meeting 0001SLCC 20th April Meeting 0002SLCC 20th April Meeting 0003SLCC 20th April Meeting 0004SLCC 20th April Meeting 0005

So, it seems, secrecy and outright lies are the order of the day at the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, where news of internal scandals and the failures of its board members to live up to their expected duties towards the public are concealed, just in the same way the Law Society of Scotland conceals all its dirty operations. Is this what we expected from the hard work put in on the Legal Profession & Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007 ? I think not.


Anonymous said...

Hell I want £350 a day too ! Where do I apply if someone's standing down ?

£350 a day for covering up bent lawyers .. dunno if I can do it though ..

Anonymous said...

So basically MacAskill Masterman & Irvine tried to pull a fast one on this but were caught out by you and the Sunday Mail story.

Nice one.Proves to me at least there's a lot of shady goings on at this slcc.

Anonymous said...

cover up! and Macaskill's lot playing fast and loose with the facts!

Anonymous said...

I dont pretend to understand all you write about Mr Cherbi because I try to stay away from lawyers (especially after reading of your experiences).I do think though what you reveal shows a very dark side to having anything to do with the legal profession and this latest business with the slcc just confirms that.Best to keep away from lawyers for they are certainly wicked and probably evil.

Anonymous said...

The scales of justice will always favour lawyers in a complaints system where lawyers are integral to that system.

The secrecy is clearly aimed at minimising embarrasment for MacAskill, in this messy quango. This secrecy clearly shows that we have The Scottish Legal Coverup Commission. Independent, my arse.

Blacked out documents even with freedom of information. Clearly nothing has changed the lawyers are still breaking the law with impunity.

Anonymous said...

Yes I agree MacAskill looks like he has been made a fool of but thats not too hard to do.

Anything the snp touch turns to dust and this quango is no exception.When they start recruiting lay members again they will probably have to go dig up some wartime nazis who will happily do their dirty work.

Anonymous said...

Scotland is so infested with crooked lawyers they forgot to clean the hospitals which are now infested with maggots !

An infestation of maggots has caused the closure of three operating theatres at Royal Aberdeen Children's Hospital.

NHS Grampian said that it was investigating the possible cause.

Several patients have had procedures postponed since the closure, and some others had them carried out at accident and emergency.

Anonymous said...

Heh yes.With Scanlan and Masterman blown all over the papers there would be little point in trying to get anyone to join up unless MacAskill was recruiting for a rave !

Anonymous said...

The SLCC can't even lie effectively - just ask MacAskill.

Anonymous said...


* Independent-Not true.
* Impartial-Not true.
* Accessible. Bullshit.

Please do not contact these criminals, they are the law society with a new name.

You will never get justice here, they are protectors of lawyers, simple as that.

Masterman gets £1,350.00 per week to protect lawyers like herself, no wonder she wants to keep lawyers clean. To bad if you find me offensive. Being left with no legal rights is offensive and immoral.

Anonymous said...

I think the salaries of these people are utterly disgusting.What next? Private jet and duck house?

I seem to have read online you warned what the SLCC would come to in 2007.Your crystal ball must have been very clear because what you said in the Herald has happened word for word.

Anonymous said...

Yes I agree with the earlier comment MacAskill was trying to pull a fast one so nobody noticed but it all backfired on him.Good show!

Anonymous said...

Good thing OCPAS (only heard of them now) told you the full story otherwise we'd have been stuck with the lies from MacAskill's 'spokesman' the other day.

I think the SLCC need a clean out themselves too but someone better than MacAskill will have to do it.

Anonymous said...

I was going to say maybe the person wanting to step down has discovered the whole slcc is a fit up to shield bent lawyers from their victims but I clicked on that posting you wrote last year about the sleaze investigation into the original appointments and changed my mind.
The whole thing should be scrapped and redone at cost to the Law Society and lawyers and all the taxpayers money put in so far should be paid back now.

Anonymous said...

MacAskill : Man or Mouse ?

Anonymous said...

What makes the public think they have a right to say who sits on the SLCC ?
We as solicitors are now having to pay for the commission.He who pays says.

Peter Cherbi said...

Thanks for all your comments & contributions on this article.

# Anonymous @ 4.14pm

That is exactly what happened, however OCPAS must be informed to sit on Ministerial appointments ... so the Scottish Government would have had to rely on as little advertising as possible for the lay member appointments drive.

Actually, a list of possible names for the Justice Secretary's choices of new lay members to the SLCC 'flew past the window' earlier ... all to be published in due course ...

I don't think Mr MacAskill or anyone connected with the legal profession actually understand the term "lay member": .. or maybe they have just co-opted the definition for themselves and their own particular, if dishonest, usage ...

# Anonymous @ 6.20pm

Yes, I agree with your comment. The SLCC is now as bad as the Law Society of Scotland on regulating the legal profession.

# Anonymous @ 8.53pm

Exactly."Being left with no legal rights is offensive and immoral." .... it certainly is ...

# Anonymous @ 11.15pm

There is always consistency in corruption .. which makes the SLCC's actions easy to predict.

Even a child can tell the difference between the truth and a lie - it seems lawyers and anyone connected with them have no such ability ... blinded by corruption & the all important preservation of self regulation.

# Anonymous @ 1.04pm

Yes, I imagine they will be getting a roasting today by the Justice Secretary .. not that it matters as the Government cant really fiddle about with the OCPAS role in Ministerial appointments.

# Anonymous @ 11.06am

There would be a greater chance of pigs flying than conscience hitting anyone connected with the SLCC (except perhaps the former SLSO staff).

# Anonymous @ 11.40am

Neither is applicable, and one not strong enough.

Just how would you measure a 'man' who sits by while abuse victims, or people fitted up by the justice system write to him for years and he does nothing ?

Certainly not a 'man' ... surely. Usually if someone writes to me with those kinds of cases, I put them in touch with newspapers, and if need be, the Police .. and do my best to see their case is publicised, and those who caused their suffering identified & shamed.

Why cant the Justice Secretary do that ? He is supposed to be in charge of justice, right ?

# Anonymous @ 12.28pm

The public have every right to a say who is parachuted into the SLCC ... as both lay members and the solicitor members are supposed to be impartial while doing their job to protect consumers from the legal profession.

If, as a solicitor, you can't get your head round that idea (the idea of a fair hearing for members of the public against self regulating professions), I suggest you go find another field of work.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

What makes the public think they have a right to say who sits on the SLCC ?

Answer-What makes lawyers think they have a right to sit on the SLCC, inpartial I do not think.

The public have the right there are, £2,500,000 reasons, a corrupt Law Society that made the LPLA Act essential, now a corrupt SLCC. Lawyers like facts, here they are,

Reform would not be necessary if lawyers were honest.

Lawyers who destroy lives are protected like the SS protected Hitler. You warped lawyers, what makes you think you have the right to investigate complaints from the public about other lawyers. The system has evolved this way, that is why all lawyers without exception are self protecting criminals. Members of the public reading this please never never trust one of these filthy corrupt bastards.

We as solicitors are now having to pay for the commission. He who pays says. ---Is that right Mr Lawyer old ladies you rob will be paying for the commission, you would not be paying for the commission if the Law Society was not a suppurating cesspit of cover up corruption. The blame for this lies at the lawyers door. Please note laypersons, they are not even balanced enough to see that the commission was set up to protect us. This has exacerbated this problem because the public mistrust of lawyers has been augmented. They want NO LAYPERSONS in the commission, another department of the filthy Law Society. Lawyers are extremists, THEY WANT TO KEEP STEALING YOUR MONEY, COVERING UP WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO YOU, PROTECTING THEIR BROTHER PARASITIC VERMIN.

The SLCC must be devoid of lawyers and lawyer sympathisers, if that happened most of the staff in the Law Society of Scotland would be rehoused in Saughton. Criminals to the core.

At the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial the surviving Nazi's were asked "what gives you the right to decide who lives or dies"?

What gives these lawyers the right to decide who is blocked from justice and who is not? MacAskill and the politicians, Money talks.
12:28 PM

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

What makes the public think they have a right to say who sits on the SLCC ?
We as solicitors are now having to pay for the commission.He who pays says.

12:28 PM

We as the public have to suffer your rip offs and whitewashes so we bloody do well have a right to say who sits on the slcc even if MacAskill and the snp think otherwise.

Anyway what kind of a politician actually defends lawyers and claims he owes his position in a government to lawyers ?

Isn't that just a wee bit fucked up Kenny ?

Anonymous said...

I'll wager MacAskill and his team were happy this was all covered up until now.What a pity.Proves to me that lawyers have way too much influence in Scotland over eck and his pals

Anonymous said...

"right to a fair hearing" is not in a lawyers vocabulary unless there's a large pot of money at the end of it!

Anonymous said...

Stuff a quango with lawyers and their allies and this is what you get MacAskill just as you probably wanted

Anonymous said...

I see the usual round of dirty tricks are being dished out against people with problem lawyers.

Its about time we got the advantage on these crooks.Complete exposure on all their twisted schemes please !

Anonymous said...

Hi Peter
Very interesting to see Margaret 'On the Razzle' Scanlan's headlines caught out MacAskill and the slcc on this occasion.
Keep up the pressure - I know for a fact you put a few noses out of joint this week with your stuff !

Anonymous said...

Has this lay member stood down because they cannot stand the corruption in the SLCC?

Anonymous said...

The public should get plain white T shirts with the following on the back and front.

"Justice Secretary
End self regulation for Politicians Accountants, Lawyers, & Doctors Now".

The cost about £12.00 from most outlets. When you go to the supermarket, garage, anywhere you are a walking advert against injustice. That is how to get the message across at the local level. I am getting mine made this weekend.

Anonymous said...

The SLCC was set up to protect lawyers clients. Clearly it has been demonstrated that this is a front for the cover up culture that protects crooked lawyers. The Law Society with it's rotten anti client attitudes, has spread through the lawyer appointees.

Independent complaints systems can only work when they are free from those the complaints are made against. This is not the case with the SLCC, so the public should not be surprised at what is happening.

They are throwing public money at a quango that CANNOT PROTECT THE PUBLIC, because lawyers are involved.

On the subject of lay member recruitment, I am sure Mr MacAskill would fill the SLCC to the brim with lawyers if he could. That's how much he stands for justice. From experience I know lawyers are compulsive liars, who hate the thought of clients getting rights against them. These people believe self regulation is sacrosanct, as if they have devine rights over clients. With attitudes such as these, it is impossible for any lawyer to look at both sides of an argument, especially one that involves self regulation. Criminals, no more, no less. Do not trust any of them.

Anonymous said...

Corrupt lawyer cheated hospitals

George Brangam swindled more than £270,000 from health bodies

A solicitor defrauded the health service of more than £270,000 over eight years, the Audit Office has said.

Most of the late George Brangam's fraud involved medical negligence cases, the government watchdog found.

He would invoice health bodies for more money than the case had actually been settled for, then keep the extra cash, ranging from £1,250 up to £75,000.

Auditors found the fraud could have been detected earlier if existing financial controls had been used.

A senior partner in legal firm Brangam, Bagnall and Co, George Brangam died last August.

At the time of his death, he was under investigation by the PSNI Fraud Squad for his work on NHS compensation proceedings.

There is no suggestion that anyone else in the firm knew anything about his activities.

In July 2006, the Causeway HSS Trust informed the Department of Health of potential irregularities.

Within a period of less than five weeks, his practice was shut down by the Law Society. PITY THEY DID NOT DEAL WITRH DOUGLAS MILL, THEY LEFT THAT TO JOHN SWINNEY.

Money that could have been spent on front-line activity in the health service was siphoned out of the system.

Auditor General John Dowdall said the lawyer systematically defrauded six of the 11 health bodies he provided legal services to on a known 28 occasions over an eight-year period.

"There is a possibility that the extent of fraud committed by George Brangam was higher than determined by available evidence," he said.

According to the report, management in some health bodies were "not sufficiently alert to the risk from fraud".

"Money that could have been spent on front-line activity in the health service was siphoned out of the system," it said.

The report said it was not unreasonable to expect services to be rendered with integrity and honesty by professionals. THE JOKE OF THE CENTURY, HONEST SELF REGULATORS, IMPOSSIBLE.

But it added: "One of the key lessons of this case is that it is not appropriate or sufficient to rely on this.

"It is management's responsibility to exercise proper care and attention in the area of legal and litigation services by ensuring adequate controls are in place and that they are complied with."

Patricia McKeown of health union Unison said she hoped measures would be put into place to prevent such fraud ever happening again.

"I want to see this whole process of how the government spends its money on buying in goods and services open and transparent. I think the public needs to know and be confident that it's all being protected from here on in."

The Law Society said it "expects professional standards of its members at all times, LIKE DOUGLAS MILL, PHILLIP YELLAND, AND THE REST including that they act with integrity and honesty". GRANNY KNOWS YOU ARE A BAD BOY DOUGLAS.

It added: "The society has also made recommendations for improvement of public sector litigation management which we note the Audit Office has accepted."


Anonymous said...

Asking the Law Society or the SLCC to deal with a complaint about your lawyer, is the same as trusting the Klu Klux Klan to be the jury at the trial of a black man. The latter would have no chance, and neither do you the public when complaining about lawyers.

Anonymous said...

What an affront to the legal system this bunch are.
Disgusting that despite all the efforts of campaigners that self regulation still rules and protects crooked lawyers

Anonymous said...

Yes put me down for £350 a day also but I see from the 'qualifications' of this lot some previous with the legal profession is a must ?

Sounds bloody awful the whole thing.Macaskill must be getting a big fat brown envelope to keep this racket on the go!

Anonymous said...

I applaud your efforts to write about corruption in the justice system but I feel much more powerful protests and public gatherings are needed against these crooks who are twisting justice for their own ends.


Anonymous said...

To be honest Peter I'd be wary of anyone who wanted to be on such an organisation.Volunteers to regulate complaints against bent lawyers ?
It just doesn't sound right does it..and you have been proved right time & again on that one !

Keep up the good work.

Anonymous said...

actually I work at the Stamp Office but we have hardly seen any of these people you say are board members of the slcc

I wonder what they do exactly to get £350 a day ?

Anonymous said...

Very interesting as usual Peter.

Since we are a few months on from this lay member's wish to stand down,one wonders why no one has stood down so far (that we know of).

Has whoever decided they'd had enough been persuaded to stay on in the wake of the daily idiocy at the commission itself ? or perhaps offered a tempting bonus to avoid a resignation so quickly into their appointment that obviously no one wants hitting the headlines ?

I will be watching.

Anonymous said...

Just out of interest are these salaries in line with the Law Society's Client Relations department or are they higher ?

Anonymous said...

Bad lawyer is a real ass

Jun 7 2009

The Judge I'll get it sorted

I went to the Law Society after my lawyer messed up the purchase of my new house. I still don't have title deeds in my name and it's cost thousands. I asked for my file but he refuses to return my calls.

DEMAND the file back. If you don't get it contact another lawyer to take the matter up on your behalf. You may be able to reclaim your losses and the Law Society will help.. WILL THEY?

Anonymous said...

Probed lawyer 'quits' after clients lost £300,000

Oct 19 2008 By Charles Lavery

A LAWYER being probed after buyers lost up to £300,000 on their dream homes is retiring aged 48.

Tony Murphy's firm, A.D. Murphy & Co, has shut down and phone calls from clients are unanswered.

One source said: "He has been walking about with a spring in his step, telling everyone he has retired."

The Sunday Mail revealed in January that 29 homebuyers had each lost £10,000 after paying deposits for flats through Murphy's law firm in Hamilton, Lanarkshire.

The flats were to be built in nearby Wishaw by builder Stephen Connelly. But he sold the site for £700,000 just before his firm, Glen Isla, went bust. Liquidators found Murphy had links to the firm and was paid £50,000 in fees by Glen Isla.


Anonymous said...

Easy to see MacAskill is going all out to save his pals in the legal industry with this effort to cover up this scandal.

Keep at him !

Peter Cherbi said...

Thanks for all your continuing comments and emails on this article.

I have been busy interviewing some individuals for a report on the Master Policy, more to come shortly.

I do agree with those who suggest more protect and campaigns are required to overcome the species of 'crooked lawyer' infesting the Scots legal system ...

The T-Shirt idea sounds good too ...

# Anonymous @ 11.06am

Yes .. and look how it turned out !

# Anonymous @ 1.23pm

Do keep me posted ! and yes .. I also wonder what they do for £350 a day ...

# Anonymous @ 4pm

Yes .. the charm must have been turned on to retain whoever it was who wanted to stand down ... for obvious reasons.

# Anonymous @ 5.24pm

Higher I think ... but now there are double the people to pay for .. must make solicitors very happy to know how their money, and of course the 2+ million pounds of taxpayers money is being wasted ...

# Anonymous @ 6.38pm

I'm getting a lot of similar cases too .. and actually several where it seems the solicitors have used the titles of houses bought or sold to clients, as security for finance to keep their firm and their personal finances afloat.

Anywhere else that would be called fraud and be a criminal offence but in Scotland the Law Society are trying to keep cases of this nature swept under the carpet of self regulation.

# Anonymous @ 6.42pm

No .. another cover up I'm afraid ...

I understand this article has upset a few in higher places at the SLCC ... I would reply "Too Bad ... learn the lesson for next time and be honest to the public, and while you are at it - pay back all the taxpayers money spent so far !"

Anonymous said...

Good reply Peter.
It sounds like we have a bunch of criminals running the legal system in Scotland for the benefit of criminals in suits & ties.

Anonymous said...

May 11 2008 Exclusive by Charles Lavery

A FAMILY doctor's bizarre double life as the owner of a sex dungeon can be revealed today.

GP Keith McIntyre is the registered owner of a flat where a dominatrix called Mistress Scarlet whips and beats clients.

The doctor admits knowing Mistress Scarlet, speaks to her regularly on the phone and has been seen visiting the flat which is used as a torture chamber.

McIntyre, 41, paid s165,000 for the property in a tenement block in Woodlands, Glasgow, last year.

Inside, Mistress Scarlett - real name Quentin Younger - charges clients s175 an hour to inflict degrading sexual abuse.

Our investigators paid Mistress Scarlet to watch her torture one client.

She told us: "If you want to watch then fine. I can keep the electrics to the end because he gets too excited by it."

"You can be naked or clothed - it's up to you. It's s125 for the session and an extra s50 for the slave.

"I don't shout and scream but that's the way the people who come to me like it. I don't need to shout. I have quite a commanding voice.

"I have been all over the world doing it and it's a part of my life.

"If you want to come back again then that's fine, we can maybe do some of the things I did to the slave to you and if there are things you don't want me to do, just say."

Our man watched as the client appeared wearing just a leather mask, which concealed his identity. (PROBABLY A LAWYER).

He then endured a series of depraved sexual acts involving a range of torture instruments, whips and electrical apparatus. Our man made his excuses and left.

McIntyre works at North Avenue NHS surgery in Cambuslang, near Glasgow.

Younger, a 35-year-old former lab technician, and her husband - who runs a tattoo parlour in the city's west end - live in an exclusive street and she earns s50,000 a year as a dominatrix.

A source said: "It is a bizarre state of affairs.

"Dr McIntyre knows Younger as Mistress Scarlet and they spend a lot of time talking to each other on their mobiles. It is certainly an unusual friendship."

When we asked McIntyre if he knew "Mistress Scarlet", the married GP said he did but refused to comment further.

He said his lawyer would contact us with a statement but no contact was made. (WAS THE LAWYER THE ONE IN THE MASK)?

When our reporter made contact with Younger to discuss her relationship with Dr McIntyre, she hung up the phone.

'He knows her as Mistress Scarlet.. it seems unusual' (IT IS MORE USUAL THAN WE THINK, KINKY LOT ARE DOCTORS).

A source yesterday


Anonymous said...

Addict doctor in rehab death case left alone by boss

May 31 2009

A DRUG addict doctor was left alone to prescribe methadone to a patient who later died - because his boss was getting a kilt fitted.

Kieran Nichol, 20, died after being given 90mls of methadone in just over 24 hours at Castle Craig rehab clinic, in the Borders, in November 2005.

Reformed addict Dr David McCartney was practising under strict General Medical Council conditions which included his prescriptions being checked by a supervisor.

But on the day he wrote out the methadone detox plan for Kieran, of Hawick, his mentor, Dr Robert Young, was not in the building, a fatal accident inquiry heard last week.

User Dr McCartney told the inquiry, at Edinburgh Sheriff Court, that Kieran told him he was a regular heroin user, smoking £60-£80 per day.

This conflicted with the notes from his earlier stay when he told staff he used the drug just a few times.

Dr Young told the court he was not in the clinic when Kieran's prescription was written out.

He said: "I had an appointment in Edinburgh to be fitted for a kilt." Dr Young said he and Dr McCartney had believed Kieran's story about being a regular user.

The medic said Kieran's "uncomfortable detox" during his first stay at the clinic possibly covered up a more serious problem so he prescribed methadone.

The inquiry continues..

Anonymous said...

Certainly this episode at the slcc is less than above board but isn't everything to do with lawyers a little bit crooked ?

Anonymous said...

A doctor who inhaled gas and air while on duty at a children's accident and emergency ward admitted he was lucky he did not harm any of his patients.

Dr Jonathan Chahal used the anaesthetic Entonox from a canister on four occasions at Ormskirk General Hospital.

The paediatrician also persuaded four female nurses to inhale the gas in what were described as "Entonox parties", a General Medical Council panel heard.

His fitness to practise is being decided by the panel.