Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Admissible Evidence ? Crown Office Prosecutor married to lawyer accused of legal aid fraud, both still working, Legal Aid Board ‘convinced of guilt’

slab copfsCrown Office refused to prosecute case where Procurator Fiscal was married to a lawyer accused of legal aid fraud. SCOTLAND’S £100-Million-a-year-to-run Crown Office has been forced to admit it REFUSED TO PROSECUTE a criminal case of alleged legal aid fraud against a solicitor who was married to one of its very own top prosecutors DUE TO A LACK OF ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE during the term of former Lord Advocate now Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC. The admission came in response to a Freedom of Information request after details of the case, one among a total of FOURTEEN cases of solicitors reported by the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) to the Crown Office for legal aid irregularities & fraud involving public funds were made available to Diary of Injustice by senior legal figures who claim the Crown Office has been operating a policy of refusing to prosecute legal aid crooks from Scotland’s legal profession because the cases “are too complicated.”

The solicitor, who legal sources have confirmed was “in a marital relationship with a Procurator Fiscal” is still working as a lawyer and is bizarrely still able to claim legal aid, after the Crown Office decided not to prosecute the solicitor concerned because of a lack of admissible evidence. The refusal to prosecute the solicitor partner of the Procurator Fiscal has angered insiders at the Scottish Legal Aid Board who claim they “are convinced of guilt in the case”.

Crown Office were forced to admit alleged legal aid fraudster solicitor is married to a Procurator Fiscal. A response from Scott Pattison, the Deputy Director of Serious Casework for the Crown Office to a Freedom of Information request stated : “I can confirm that one of the solicitors who was reported by SLAB was married to a member of COPFS staff. In that case, in accordance with the practice which I have described above, the matter was reported by a Procurator Fiscal to Crown Counsel for consideration. The member of staff concerned would have had no access to, nor dealings with, the case.” The Crown Office response to the FOI request, asking for information relating to (i) whether any of the solicitors reported to the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) were in marital relationships with members or officials of the COPFS, (ii) any discussions which took place relating to such cases, and (iii) what was the outcome of those cases, began with an attempt to explain how complaints against members of its own staff are dealt with.

The letter stated : “It might be helpful if I start by explaining the procedures which are followed where there is an allegation of criminality by a close relative of a member of COPFS. When an allegation is made against a member, or close relative of a member, of COPFS a report will be submitted by the investigating authority, in accordance with standard procedure, to COPFS. Thereafter, the matter would be reported by a Procurator Fiscal to Crown Counsel. Crown Counsel are the senior, independent lawyers who take decisions on behalf of the Lord Advocate – ordinarily in the most serious types of case.”

“In cases involving allegations of criminality by members of COPFS staff, or close relatives of members of COPFS staff, Crown Counsel will provide an independent instruction on what, if any, action is appropriate in respect of the allegation.”

However, and in line with the rest of the FOURTEEN CASES of alleged legal aid fraud by solicitors reported to the Crown Office by the Scottish Legal Aid Board over the past SIX YEARS, Mr Pattison confirmed the Crown Office REFUSED TO PROECUTE the lawyer married to one of its own high profile Fiscals, claiming THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT ADMISSABLE EVIDENCE to proceed with a criminal case

He said : ““Having carefully considered the facts and circumstances of this case, Crown Counsel gave an independent instruction that there was insufficient admissible evidence to justify criminal proceedings.”

NO CASE TO ANSWER Sunday Mail 17 July 2011Crown Office under former Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini refused to prosecute a single case out of 14 solicitors accused of legal aid fraud. The decision by the Crown Office to refuse to prosecute a lawyer married to one of their own prosecutors on reasons there being a lack of admissible evidence has greatly angered senior officials at the Scottish Legal Aid Board who, insiders indicated had been determined to clamp down on solicitors who are potentially ripping off taxpayers to the tune of millions of pounds a year from Scotland’s gigantic £160 MILLION POUND legal aid budget. I reported on the lack of prosecutions of legal aid fraudsters from the legal profession back in July, 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

A legal insider commenting on the latest revelations of links between Crown Office prosecutors & alleged legal aid fraudsters, said : “Given tens of thousands of pounds of public money has been spent on detecting, investigation & reporting legal aid fraud, it would be a big help if the people at the Crown Office who are charged with prosecuting criminals would actually do their job in at least one out of fourteen cases.”

He continued : “Clearly there is something amiss. The Crown Office have prosecuted members of the public for legal aid offences yet in each of the reported cases of legal aid irregularities concerning solicitors, not one has been prosecuted. With the revelation one of the solicitors reported to the Crown Office was in a marital relationship with a high flying Procurator Fiscal, there is an overall impression the Crown Office closed ranks and refused to prosecute because of links to one of their own.”

Since the investigation by Diary of Injustice into abuse of the legal aid system began turning up links between alleged legal aid fraudsters and Crown Office personnel, there have been indications the Crown Office are upset one of its own has now been publicly fingered in a case involving alleged legal aid fraud.

A senior Scottish Government official who has knowledge of discussions on the subject warned Diary of Injustice over the difficulties caused by revelations of links to legal aid fraud and the Crown Office and the lack of prosecutions. Whilst Diary of Injustice has agreed not to publish certain comments given in confidence in an interview, I can report the source did say : “Considering this was all supposed to be kept secret, and the Crown Office were apparently determined to do so at any cost, I’m surprised no one has bothered to ask you where you got your information from.”

Crown Office FOI response refused to release any information on how they came to decision not to prosecute alleged legal aid fraudster linked to one of their own colleagues. SUSPICIOUSLY the Crown Office REFUSED TO DISCLOSE ANY INFORMATION on what discussions had taken place within its realms over the case which led to the Procurator Fiscal’s partner being let off the hook from legal aid fraud charges. The Crown Office response to the FOI request asking for information on discussions over the case stated : “In respect of your second request, I am satisfied that any information relating to the consideration of the evidence in this case, including the recommendations made to Crown Counsel, and the terms of the instruction issued by them, are exempt from disclosure in terms of sections 30(b)(ii), 34(1)(a)(i) and 35(1)(a), (b) and (c).”

“As you will be aware, none of these exemptions are absolute, and I have therefore required to consider, notwithstanding that I am satisfied that they apply, whether the public interest nonetheless favours disclosure of the information. In doing so, I have had regard to the type of question which the Scottish Information Commissioner has recommended that public authorities ask themselves when considering whether the public interest favours disclosure despite the fact that certain exemptions apply.”

“In particular, I consider that it is of the utmost importance that Procurators Fiscal are able to freely and frankly share their analysis of the evidence in a criminal case, and their recommendations in respect of same, with Crown Counsel, who act under the authority of the Lord Advocate, without any such discussions being subject to release to the public. In reaching this view, I have also taken into account that any such recommendation or analysis would necessarily be based on an assessment of the legal position, which in turn is based on the available evidence.”

“I have concluded that witnesses provide evidence in respect of criminal allegations in the expectation that such evidence will not be released, save for within the context of criminal proceedings, with the attendant procedural safeguards. In reaching this view, I have had regard to the comments made by the Scottish Information Commissioner in decision 115/2007. Having considered the circumstances of this particular case, I have come to the conclusion that the public interest falls overwhelmingly in maintaining the exemptions in this instance.”

A senior legal figure who has been given access to details of the case provided to Diary of Injustice described the Crown Office decision not to prosecute as “inconsistent with public claims of the law applying equally to all”.

He said : “Having considered what the Crown Office said, and the fact not one single case out of fourteen of alleged legal aid fraud committed by members of the legal profession was prosecuted, it is clearly in the public interest information on how the Crown Office arrived at its decision not to prosecute in this and the remaining cases be fully disclosed, reported by the media and debated in public.”

He continued : “The public perception in this case, and rightly so, will be that the Crown Office have closed ranks to protect one of their own. There are a great many questions unanswered, for instance whether the married partner who is a PF benefited in any way financially from the alleged legal aid fraud. Clearly there must be an independent investigation into why these cases of alleged legal aid fraud committed by solicitors have resulted in not one single prosecution.”

An msp who has been following revelations of the lack of legal aid fraud prosecutions and has constituents who are affected by some of the solicitors accused of legal aid irregularities told Diary of Injustice : “A lack of admissible evidence. Clearly the public will have watched enough television & read enough newspapers to realise exactly what this means. I doubt many will be fooled by the explanation offered up by the Crown Office.”

He continued : “As for the fourteen cases and not one prosecution. Who would be stupid enough to believe something isn't going on when not one lawyer ends up being charged. It’s preposterous to suggest otherwise. This needs to go before msps for proper scrutiny.”

61 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Lack of admissible evidence" is usually the excuse of expensive lawyers protecting mafia dons and major corporations who poison local communities with their wares.

You are a brave person Mr Peter Cherbi for investigating your own prosecution service.Watch your back!

Anonymous said...

Corruption right at the heart of the justice system if ever proof were needed.

Anonymous said...

“In cases involving allegations of criminality by members of COPFS staff, or close relatives of members of COPFS staff, Crown Counsel will provide an independent instruction on what, if any, action is appropriate in respect of the allegation.”

Riiiight and they get let off - what a surprise

Anonymous said...

Hmm
I have concluded the Crown Office are bent beyond belief!
No comment from the Justice Minister?He must be fiddling somewhere while his colleagues loot our legal aid!

Law Society Persecution is Legal and Repugnant said...

Self regulation is persecution by law. Now in political theory if there is no government nothing can be illegal because there is no law. Without a law saying you cannot steal a persons money, you do not need police to investigate. So people would all want to make their own laws with the resulting chaos that would result as Thomas Hobbes pointed out long ago.

Self regulation is no law, because one group secretly decides what is legal and illegal. The Law societies monitor that boundary. That means the lawyers group can do anything they want to members of the public. In these circumstances there is no law because lawyers do not act against each other so the client is left rightless. Self regulation is like the abolishment of state institutions, if these do not exist, law does not exist and the websites are proof that the legal profession must be monitored by clients. What the hell are they frightened of if they are so honest?

Anonymous said...

“Considering this was all supposed to be kept secret, and the Crown Office were apparently determined to do so at any cost, I’m surprised no one has bothered to ask you where you got your information from.”

duh!

Anonymous said...

Its very hard to imagine someone not benefiting from any financial enterprise of their partner,fraudulent or not.

Considering the legal aid board seem to feel this man/woman is guilty and probably spent awhile investigating we are entitled to see what really happened.

Anonymous said...

The old chestnut of lack of admissible evidence!

Anyway what did you expect?They will charge one of their own partners for being a legal aid fiddler?

Its disgusting of course also what is even more disgusting is the attitude of these crooks being untouchable by the law because they run it while we have to pay for it.

Anonymous said...

More Crown Office lies.The new Libyan Govt would be mad to cooperate with this lot who just want to stitch up more people to fit in with its version of Lockerbie.

How can they ever be trusted after that no surprise to me to read now one of their own is married to a legal aid swindler(alleged of course haha)

Anonymous said...

So the Crown Office are out to get you now are they?

Better watch for evidence planting etc they dont like their own exposed to media attention I remember some of the arm twisting over their PF MacFarlane caper in Glasgow with the hooker they didnt want that one getting too many headlines (case also dropped)

Who decides what is evidence said...

REFUSED TO PROSECUTE a criminal case of alleged legal aid fraud against a solicitor who was married to one of its very own top prosecutors DUE TO A LACK OF ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE.
=================================
Like I have said they can engineer any outcome they want. They are the real criminals in this country.

Anonymous said...

A senior legal figure who has been given access to details of the case provided to Diary of Injustice described the Crown Office decision not to prosecute as “inconsistent with public claims of the law applying equally to all”.

ALL ARE NOT EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW. THE CROWN OFFICE IS DOING WHAT THE LAW SOCIETY TOO, PROTECTING CRIMINALS WHEN THEY PROSECUTE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY WHEN THESE CRIMINALS AVOID PROSECUTION.

Anonymous said...

Lawyer married to lawyer is accused of legal aid fraud.Partner turns out to be a Fiscal.No charges because evidence is inadmissible for whatever reason and they pontificate about getting independent advice.
They are all members of the Law Society of Scotland so how can any advice not to prosecute be independent?

Anonymous said...

The solicitor, who legal sources have confirmed was “in a marital relationship with a Procurator Fiscal” is still working as a lawyer and is bizarrely still able to claim legal aid, after the Crown Office decided not to prosecute the solicitor concerned because of a lack of admissible evidence. The refusal to prosecute the solicitor partner of the Procurator Fiscal has angered insiders at the Scottish Legal Aid Board who claim they “are convinced of guilt in the case”.
-----------------------------
WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE IS THAT THEIR IS NO LAW WHERE LAWYERS ARE CONCERNED. ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE MY BACKSIDE, THEY ARE JUST BEING LAWYERS, LOW LIFE CORRUPT CRIMINALS WHO BELIEVE THE RULE OF LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO THEM. THEY IS WHY THE FOURTEEN HAVE NOT BEEN PROSECUTED. AS A WOMAN ONCE SAID "ONLY THE LITTLE PEOPLE PAY TAXES" IT SEEMS ONLY THE LITTLE PEOPLE GET PROSECUTED FOR LEGAL AID FRAUD.

Anonymous said...

Cant remember the movie but there's one beginning with some hoodlum getting off a murder rap because of a lack of admissible evidence.

Sound very much like this has made its way to Scotland BIG TIME!

Legal Engineers don't do justice said...

“A lack of admissible evidence. Clearly the public will have watched enough television & read enough newspapers to realise exactly what this means. I doubt many will be fooled by the explanation offered up by the Crown Office.”

Who policies this lot? It is not "a lack of admissible evidence" it is as everyone realised legal engineering where laws are applied only to those unfortunate to be outside the boundary of the legal profession. The Crown Office do not prosecute because the Crown Office is a state protection racket for those rats with an LLB. An outrage.

Anonymous said...

“As for the fourteen cases and not one prosecution. Who would be stupid enough to believe something isn't going on when not one lawyer ends up being charged. It’s preposterous to suggest otherwise. This needs to go before msps for proper scrutiny.”

Is Douglas Mill in charge by any chance, it seems they are all the same, corrupt, blinded by prejudice and non fit to be lawyers.

Anonymous said...

This ladies and gentlemen is what the Law Society do too when a lawyer steals your money. If legal aid fraud is legal when lawyers committ it they will close ranks the same way when it is private money. A lot of mandacious evil bastards, that is lawyers the world over.

Anonymous said...

Crown Office cant be trusted you've said it yourself often enough.Look what they did to the Chhokar family and the Simon San murder refusal to prosecute as a race crime and then they go and hang themselves trying to convict on sectarian crimes thrown out by a jury.Now its all about getting their own off the hook by the old pals act disgusting cant be trusted neither can the Police these days who are hacking or harassing innocent people for anyone with money including lawyers

Anonymous said...

I think we are now beginning to see why the legal establishment in Scotland don't want naming & shaming as in Solicitors from Hell style.

Its because they are all wrapped up in the corruption going on.Disgusting.

Thanks to Peter once again we know exactly what is going on in our justice system and who NOT to trust.

Anonymous said...

"The solicitor, who legal sources have confirmed was “in a marital relationship with a Procurator Fiscal” is still working as a lawyer and is bizarrely still able to claim legal aid, after the Crown Office decided not to prosecute the solicitor concerned because of a lack of admissible evidence"

That part alone is enough to make someone sick!

Anonymous said...

The sort of thing which should be in a newspaper dont you think?

Still I doubt anyone would be allowed to write it up as you do.

Keep up the good work Peter.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for posting this.There are not too many PFs in Scotland so I'll check them all out and see what turns up.

Good work Peter.Have you ever considered writing for a newspaper?

Anonymous said...

“A lack of admissible evidence. Clearly the public will have watched enough television & read enough newspapers to realise exactly what this means. I doubt many will be fooled by the explanation offered up by the Crown Office.”

He continued : “As for the fourteen cases and not one prosecution. Who would be stupid enough to believe something isn't going on when not one lawyer ends up being charged. It’s preposterous to suggest otherwise. This needs to go before msps for proper scrutiny.”

MacAskill will not like this. Some legal system Kenny, criminality buried to protect lawyers. What can we say, Deja Vue?

Anonymous said...

Buried Evidence ? Crown Office Prosecutor married to lawyer accused of legal aid fraud, both still working, Legal Aid Board ‘convinced of guilt’.

The Crown Office has no honour.

Anonymous said...

and this all happened under the SNP so no excuses this time Kenny MacAskill

How about Angiolini.No comment from the former Lord Advocate on her department's lack of prosecutions of legal aid FRAUDSTER lawyers?

Anonymous said...

Excellent work Peter!

Anonymous said...

Very interesting.I wonder how many draft replies they went through before responding to your FOI.

How they must have begrudged having to reply to you.

Keep up the good work etc

Anonymous said...

I wonder how much legal aid he/she has been able to claim since the Crown Office let them off without charge?

What a bunch.All that money wasted on them and no one charged or prosecuted for fraud.Its even worse than the FSA and the crooked bankers!

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Crown Office take revenge for this expose.They are well know for it in the trade,journalists have been given the heavy hand before after breaking news about fiddles within the copfs.I know a journalist on a paper you are familiar with who ended up arrested as part of a set up to shut him up over the rent boys for judges affair.Their methods of setting people up to shut them up have improved a lot since then.

Anonymous said...

Positively sinister!

Anonymous said...

Sometime over the next few days or maybe even tonight,the Mr & Mrs of the [alleged] Legal Aid fraud world will read this and laugh "Hehe he doesn't know who we are".I am willing to bet you do and that it will only be a matter of time before their names are revealed.

Good work.This is the kind of story which should be on a front page.

Anonymous said...

I think the public should see the evidence and let us decide if its admissible or not.However now you've written about it anything more they disclose could well be fabricated so we will never get to the truth now.

Isnt Scotland's justice system one of THE most corrupt in the world these days?It must be after reading stories like this!

Anonymous said...

I suspect what happened in this case may well have affected the other 13/14 cases of legal aid fraud you found out about.Put it this way if they prosecuted one they would have to prosecute them all but they couldnt because one of them is married to a Crown Office Fiscal or whatever.

This is certainly a big scandal Peter.Huge.Just think all the cases this Fiscal has been involved in could now be questioned because of what happened with her partner and SLAB being convinced of guilt my goodness the potential for abuse of power is tremendous.

Good on you for taking a stand against it!

Anonymous said...

The problem with independent investigations/inquiries is they are often used to cover up or whitewash what really happened.Dunblane & the Lockerbie trial comes to mind to name but a few.

Anyway your own investigation of this seems to be pukka Mr C.This dogged determination of yours serves the community very well.If only others were so well motivated.Dont listen to those twerps telling you to write in a paper go into politics and take your determination to help the small guy into places where it really counts.

Over & Out.And good luck!

Peter Cherbi said...

Thanks for your comments on this article ...

Clearly there is a general agreement the information sought from the Crown Office on this particular case should be disclosed in the public interest.

The situation as it stands, where sources have alleged with a great degree of foundation the Scottish Legal Aid Board are "convinced of guilt" in this and all cases reported to the Crown Office which involve allegations against solicitors concerning legal aid irregularities, surely deserves an independent investigation, however as has already been said in comments, independent investigations generally do not get to the truth, particularly when matters involve the legal establishment and its wrongdoings ...

As we have seen in this latest article, the problem of who watches the watchers is as great an issue at the Crown Office as it is in the Law Society of Scotland's self regulation of the legal profession.

There is no quick solution to this problem which has existed for many years. However, public pressure on politicians and more headlines to come should help the issue along into the spotlight where change is inevitable ...

Anonymous said...

Maybe they should be renamed "Crooked Office"?!

Alas this monster in Chambers St must be culled along with all other organisations set up to keep the status quo at its corrupt maximum.

Anonymous said...

Crown Office = District Attorney right?

You guys have serious problems by the sounds of this post!

Anonymous said...

Far too much of the Crown Office running itself all these years and look where its got them and us.

This case will be the tip of the iceberg.Fiscals partners involved in everything right up to criminality and there will be plenty of that in the Crown Office itself.

Anonymous said...

I also believe this legal aid fraud accused lawyer married to the Crown Office is what probably killed any chance of prosecuting the rest.

Deeply corrupt and we all know who has the final decision in what happens next DONT WE.

Anonymous said...

This 'Independent Decision' by Crown Counsel on behalf of the Lord Advocate reminds me of another method of admonishing solicitors used by the Law society of Scotland, the infamous 'Sifting Panel', whereby damaging allegations against solicitors are magically wiped away without recourse!

What we have here is the SLAB measuring the actions of legal aid claimant solicitors against Legislation through their own compliance department solicitors, who after having found contraventions with the Legislation have felt it 'Serious Enough' to refer it to the Crown Office for Prosecution.

It is inherent within the fact, that the SLAB as a Statutory body, with its own Compliance Department has the 'Power' to refer cases to the Crown Office and under such a situation it should be 'MANDATORY' for a 'PROSECUTION' to follow as the SLAB (Statutory Body) has already 'RECORDED & COMPILED EVIDENCE OF OFFENCES BEING COMMITTED'. (ie proven)

Given the above, it is clear that after the SLAB referal, something has gone wrong.

Either, the SLAB Compliance Department are wrong in these 14 cases and are therefore their solicitors are 'INCOMPETENT' in being able to interpret the Legislation and if this is the case it should be replaced; Or the Crown Counsel giving their 'OPINION' in all of the 14 cases is either 'INCOMPETENT' or 'CORRUPT'.

Now, I propose that neither the SLAB Compliance Department or Crown Counsel(s) are 'INCOMPETENT', which means that there is now a role for the Police to intervene as it is 'Reasonable To Expect, Given The Circumstances That A Crime Has Been Committed By The Lord Advocate Refusing To Prosecute A Crime'.

If the Lord Advocate cannot be prosecuted in Office then he should be removed from Office for misconduct in public office.

If the Police won't act then it is reasonable to expect that a member of the public make a citizen arrest in the public interest.

I wonder how much money was 'Defrauded' in total by these 14 crooked lawyers? The SLAB should be able to release this figure under FOI, which would be a useful measure of the seriousness of this intitutional state cover-up?

Judy x

Anonymous said...

Given that the SLAB solicitors have found that 14 solicitors have defrauded the Scottish Legal Aid Fund but have been let-off Scot-Free (I wonder if this is where this phrase originated from?) Could we please have the names of all of the names of Crown Counsel published in each of the 14 cases, in the public interest, so that we can see how widespread or otherwise the corution goes.

Presumeably, when the Lord Advocate is removed and Prosecuted for his part in this crime then the other Crown Counsel(s) will be similarly dealt with?

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute....

For a moment there I thought I was dreaming....dreaming that I was living in a fantasy make-believe utopian Scotland, where public officials honestly served Scotland's citizens with integrity and diligence.

No......................No...................No.......................
I am back, definitely back to reality Scotland; Public official lawyers lying, cheating, perverting the course of justice and trying to defy the public interest in seeking to keep their nefarious work secret.

Yep, definitely back in Banana Republic Scotland!

Anonymous said...

Basically we are being robbed of £100 million a year to pay the Crown Office to save lawyers from being prosecuted for criminal offences.

If one of them committed a murder they will not face justice with people making decisions like this.

Anonymous said...

A criminal conspiracy from start to finish, let's hope the MSP who contributed to your revelatory report will take steps to ensure it definitely is raised and discussed fully in what passes for the scottish parliament.

I and no doubt many others will be watching that space.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone else noticed the deafening silence emanating from the BBC and STV on this and other excellent reports exposing corrunption in high places?

Purely coincidental no doubt.

Anonymous said...

The Crown Office explanation takes it round so many Crown Counsel it sounds like a pyramid selling scheme.

You did the right thing making all this public.

Anonymous said...

What a larf the Crown Office have to rely on "a lack of admissible evidence" on a case involving one of their own.There must have been a big party after that [pre-determined] came along from Crown Counsel (not that there would have been any possibility of a criminal charge from the outset)

All this does is reinforce my belief all lawyers are crooked no matter what side of the law they stand on.CROOKED!

Anonymous said...

A colleague of mine ended up losing his job after a PF threatened to have drugs planted in his locker if he didn't lose his notes on a traffic incident involving the PF's wife.

Of use to you I hope.

Anonymous said...

SLAB are clearly upset about the lawyer still being able to claim legal aid - This stinks!

As for the attempt to keep all this secret well they didnt reckon on you did they?

Hoping to see some more scandals about this Crown Office they really are a bunch of crooks just like the Law Society of Scotland.

Anonymous said...

“Considering this was all supposed to be kept secret, and the Crown Office were apparently determined to do so at any cost, I’m surprised no one has bothered to ask you where you got your information from.”

Why should it be kept secret?If there's nothing to fear there's nothing to hide as they keep telling us.Clearly there is corruption afoot here and the Crown Office are well at it just like the rest of the legal profession.

Anonymous said...

This is a disgusting waste of money on both of these quangos or whatever you want to call them.the Crown Office are all about protecting their own and the Scottish Legal Aid Board obviously have problems policing their even bigger budget.

Scrap both these decadent unionist gangs and start afresh just like we need to with the judges who are getting away with anything they like because this bunch will cover up for them at any cost!

Scotland needs new Justice Secretary said...

MacAskill's on the tv criticising the courts over a rapist winning an appeal yet no criticism about corruption in legal circles.

He must be replaced as Justice Secretary he doesnt give a toss for the rights of people trampled by the justice system and the lawyers within it!

Anonymous said...

I'm glad you wrote this one up Peter.It shows where the real corruption lies and who is behind it.Criminals we are taught should be charged and thrown in jail yet those who are doing the jailing are as corrupt as the criminals.

Good work Peter.Take them apart for me and all the others who have suffered and lost their lives to these scum dressed up as "the law".

Anonymous said...

The only way to deal with these 'Untouchable' white-collar organised crime gang members is to expose them.

Their POWER lies in their ability to act with impunity in SECRET.

Is our Society SO utterly broken that these insidious parasites can be allowed to practise their dark arts and suck the life blood out of the rest of us?

Expose them. Jail them. (As the inhabitants of Meerkovo would say, 'Simples')

As Mr Ed Millibean would expouse, these Scottish lawyers are the very individuals that add precisely NOTHING to Society as a whole. They are TAKERS. They are CHEATERS. THEIFS. CROOKS. CRIMINALS. Yet these same individuals would wax lyrical and have you believe that they are paragons of JUSTICE. Have Charachters ABOVE REPROACH and are PILLARS of the Community. You will see them at church, where they like to be seen, smartly dressed in all their respectable finery disguise of the chameleon but they know who they really are?

They are the inwardly snidely sniggering ones, the psychopathic psychophants, the gravy lickers, the twisters, the tricksters, the liers, the condescenders, the insulters, the deliberately obtusers, the bouble dealers, the double billers, the triple billers and more, the fraudster, the hater, the spiter, the
morality deprecator, the inability to understand or to show compassion, the power seeker, the expenses cheater, the adequate attempter, my client exists to service me-er.

Yes, they know who they are?

Do you?

Anonymous said...

Is it true that all of the organised crime syndicates, operations and families operating in Scotland have arranged for their members/family members to become lawyers, just so that they can obtain the VETO on prosecution for all OFFENCES committed by them, that Scottish Lawyers enjoy at the moment?

Apparently, it would be worth the University Fees and once the Lawyers Union the Law Society of Scotland allows them membership they can call themselves a lawyer for ever, thereby evoking the VETO and saving themselves £M in potential lost revenue?

It doesn't sound likely to me but given the unbelievable factual reports of corruption emanating from SLAB/ LSS/ SLCC/ Crown Office, it makes you wonder?

Anonymous said...

Having read your article carefully, my understanding is that the SLAB are non too happy about this fraudulent lawyer continuing to charge for Legal Aid, when they have shown them to have broken the law and yet who has gone un-punished by the Lord Advocate for this CRIME.

Surely, If the SLAB are the sole arbiters of the supply of funding under Legislation and they are themselves satisfied that they have evidence of this lawyer's CRIME, then they simply MUST refuse him legal aid claims as a result, regardless of the Lord Advocates decision NOT to prosecute his colleague.

A failure by the Statutory Funding Body to continue to grant funding to such a Fraudulent Lawyer, would result in the SLAB being guilty of the same offence as the Fraudulent Lawyer.

Therefore the question now has to be asked of the SLAB of the 14 Fraudulent Lawyers. How many of that 14 have gone on to claim further monies and have the SLAB been a PARTY to the FRAUD, whether knowingly or otherwise.

I believe also that a member of the public should make a complaint to the FRAUD UNIT POLICE forthwith, as a matter of 'PUBLIC INTEREST' as this is a 'VERY SERIOUS' matter concerning the very core of the confidence the public have in the ability of public officials to uphold the rule of law at all times and not to 'CHERRY-PICK' the law's which suit the individuals at the top in power who hold the Office of the day but appear to be 'UNACCOUNTABLE' to the public.

If a member of the public make a valid complaint, then the Fraud Unit Police MUST Investigate.

That is unless the Lord Advocate et al are 'ABOVE THE LAW'

Will that mean bananas will become cheaper?

Judy x

Anonymous said...

Cant SLAB just go directly to the Police and have this bunch of sleazy lawyers arrested?
I am amazed this corruption is so blatant no one in your government is doing anything about it.

Anonymous said...

SLAB can go directly to the Police but what happens next is the Crown Office order the investigation to be stopped.They wont tell you this via foi!

Anonymous said...

The Crown Office are institutionally corrupt its well known especially when it comes to their own being caught and let go even for taking money from gangsters who then oddly enough wind up dead in some Glasgow gangland hit

Anonymous said...

Wow this is corruption at the highest levels of law enforcement they are making it so their colleagues benefit from theft of public money