Those of my readers who have been closely following the estimable David Whitehouse taking Police Scotland and The Lord Advocate to task will know that he is not taking prisoners. To this end I can exclusively reveal that:
When the next David Whitehouse hearing comes to court, his counsel will be accusing DCI Robertson of committing perjury and providing proof of his makeasance.
The fact that the former Detective Sergeant was fast tracked for two promotions to add a veneer of credibility to his botched arrests and illegal seizure of client privileged documents cuts no ice with Whitehouse, Grier and Clark.
A cynic might contend that these promotions were an attempt by Police Scotland to cover their arse. Allowing a DS the free rein of their newly formed Economic Crime Unit was analagous to running the bulls in Pamplona through a china shop.
Of course one should not overlook the influence of Freemasonry in Robertson’s elevation. Everyone knows that the craft is rife in Police Scotland. Would looking the other way apropos King’s, Paul Murray’s and Yuanker Traynor’s Charlotte Fakovers endeavours be well perceived by the knuckle shufflers?
My impeccable source does not specify how Robertson’s perjury will be proven. One could venture that when Robertson claimed that he was using Mark Daly’s information as the basis of his investigation, while collating the contents of Craig Whyte’s hacked hard disk from King, he was being disingenuous but not necessarily engaging in perjury.
I would hazard that a closer look at Robertson’s affidavits might lead to a smoking gun. If Robertson’s pert assistant Jackie O’Neil added her tuppence worth in support of her superior officer, should counsel for Whitehouse also consider subornation of perjury viz the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury, which is a criminal offence in Scots Law?
The swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, whether spoken or written, is punishable by imprisonment. If perjury can be proven Police Scotland will have a dilemma:
1. Should they settle out of court on the proviso that messrs Whitehouse, Grier and Clark sign non-disclosure agreements. Robertson’s could be quietly ‘retired’ in the manner favoured by Dave King.
2. Alternatively do they go into bat holding their dicks hoping that the judiciary swings the lead and will do a solid for a pillar of the Scottish Establishment, risking the imprisonment of Robertson?
This matter has settlement written all over it. Proven perjury would hole the Police Scotland’s defence under the water line.
As for The Lord Advocate he must surely be aware that in 2000 the DTI prosecuted Jim Keegan. The Court of Session ruled that Keegan was ‘involved in fraudulent conduct’ and banned him from being a company director for 3 years.
Keegan was involved in other shady business dealings and on one occasion was forced to admit, under oath, that he did not always tell the truth.
Could this also have been the case when Keegan took silk, or did his three years ban slip his mind? How remiss of him.
Throughout this time the Law Society did absolutely nothing about Keegan. One would not have to colour me surprised to note that Keegan was a Law Society Council member at that time.
However any man convicted of engaging in fraudulent conduct, with his elevation to silk shrouded in doubt, should not be leading the prosecution in preliminary hearings where individuals have been indicted for fraud.
One could argue that he should not have been leading any prosecutions whatsoever. One could incontrovertibly posit that Keegan won’t be asked to step up again.
Robertson took a hairy arse, an abacus and a knuckle shuffle to the table. Keegan took his admitted mendacity and an elevation to silk under dubious circumstances.
What could possibly have gone wrong? How about £16m and little change from £20m when one factors in the wild goose chase and costs. All paid for by the public purse.
Should one engage in a chorus of The Billy Boys to cheer Robertson up? Is he up to his knees in perjury?