Can Sturgeon or the SNP survive Murrellgate?

Douglas Murray recently asked a very interesting question - What would you say if your spouse bought a luxury campervan? Now for those of you living outside the UK let me explain because this is a glorious story of embezzlement, deceit and ultimately, political downfall. Admittedly, it’s not quite in the league of William M. Tweed or Randall Cunningham in the United States but it definitely ranks amongst one of the best stories of illegality for the last few years. In sleepy and dare I suggest, somewhat nondescript Scottish politics, Nicola Sturgeon served as, until a couple of years ago, First Minister and leader of the Scottish National Party, while her husband, Peter Murrell was employed as the Chief Executive of the party. Now, Mr Murrell has been charged with and is pleading guilty to embezzlement to the tune of £400,000 (about $540,000) part of which included purchase of a £110,000 campervan.

In her defence, Ms Sturgeon argued she had no knowledge of her husband's criminal behaviour, arguing her salary at that time was £145,000, while her husband's salary ranged between £80 - 100,000. She argued: "None of these things [the purchases] I would have looked at and thought how on earth could he afford them? We were two people on high salaries. We don't have children. We didn't have an extensive social life, mainly because of the pressures of my job."

Now, before we continue, let's not forget, Murrell's purchases included:

·       £9,350.25 on two Bremont watches;

·       £24,324.60 on Montblanc goods;

·       £24,495.50 on items from Smythson;

·       £6,085.86 on Dyson products;

·       £8,991.65 on coffee machines;

·       £1,782.99 on cup warmers;

·       £5,319.28 on Le Creuset products;

·       £1,990.50 on umbrellas;

·       £2,618.16 on two salt and pepper grinders from Lalique;

·       £1,056 on reed diffusers and candles from Jo Malone;

·       £3,500 on a hand chased silver wine coaster from Hamilton & Inches               jewellers.

... that's quite a bit of kit to bring into the marital home without it being noticed. I mean, take my own home, albeit our salaries are less - I can't bring in a custard slice into my home without it being noticed though, in fairness my wife never complains about my occasional ‘sweet treat’ relapses.

But one thing's for sure - if I pulled up outside my home in a huge and brand new luxury campervan, I think she'd notice and when there was no change to our bank account, she would ask how I paid for it. Indeed, and having once owned a motorhome, I think there’s an above average chance she would have hit the roof on spending so much money without us having some kind of conversation about the matter.

So, am I accusing Ms Sturgeon of lying? No, but it does make me wonder about their relationship. Of course, it could be they each held separate bank accounts and kept their financial affairs separate and private. Hardly unknown, though somewhat unusual and of course, in this case it quite easy to accept she might ignore the Montblanc pens and stationery, the jewellery and the watches. However, the new Jaguar iPace worth £80,000 parked in your driveway, and the £125,000 Niesmann and Bischoff motorhome parked outside the home of her (then) 67 year old mother, Joan Sturgeon who, until 2017 also served  SNP councillor and provost (civic head of council) of North Ayrshire? Well that bit is a little harder to understand.

Personal political ramifications

Quite clearly the consequences of the Murrell case will impact heavily on Ms Sturgeon and bring into question her ability to exercise due diligence in her affairs. The annual spending budget of the Scottish parliament averages about £68bn and, of course is heavily monitored and audited, but if (and it remains unknown) Ms Sturgeon was part of a conspiracy to embezzle party funds, could she also have been party to stealing taxpayers money, It seems unlikely, but cannot be dismissed without investigation. In the coming months we can reasonably assume this will be investigated and if, as we would hope, she is innocent then the worst she could be accused of is naivete and gullibility – not qualities you would hope to see in senior politicians. On the other hand, if she is in any way guilty, the political and legal ramifications for her are immense.

Party political ramifications

If the Murrell case has shown us anything it is that the SNP financial system was wide open to abuse. At this time, the SNP is holding a deficit of about half a million and a rapidly declining membership. On the other hand it still hold ownership of the campervan, now only worth £41,000 and a £60,000 loan to Peter Murrell they are unlikely to ever see again. In short, the party is in something of a financial mess with no concrete plan to sort the problem out.

What is clear is that while the SNP secured sizable support in the last Scottish elections (57 seats) it seems unlikely to dam the holes and the only thing holding them up at the moment is the fact there is no viable alternate Scottish Independence party – if that changes before the next general election their future could be bleak.

When Alex Salmond was politically active and set up the Alba Party this may have happened soon er rather than later, but with his untimely death and the demise of his party it seems that for now they are safe. As for the Independence for Scotland Party, they continue to be a minor thorn in the SNP side though their leader Colette Walker remains an unknown and with less than 1% of the vote they pose no real threat.

However, if the likes of ex-SNP members such as Mhairi Black, Ash Regan or Neale Hanvey were to establish a new Scottish Independence Party the threat could be formidable

Wake up and smell the coffee - antisemitism is on the rise and our politicians are doing nothing

Since October 7th the world has seen a huge surge in antisemitism reminiscent  of Germany during the early stage of the Nazi regime. In response a number of political leaders across Europe and the United States have called for action to protect Jewish communities from race hate. However despite these efforts, where they exist, the statistics show that far from being a decline, there remains a significant problem.

Today's blog will explore some of these efforts and will argue the majority are fundamentally tokenistic and do little to reduce race crime.

There is nothing new about Situational Crime Prevention. It was originated by Ronald V. Clarke in the 1970s and became a broad policy approach led by the British Home Office Research Unit and exported in various forms abroad. The approach is underpinned by a core belief that offenders, particularly perpetrators of antisemitic crime act rationally, weighing risks (getting caught) against the satisfaction of upsetting or harming the victim.

                                               Ronald V. Clarke

With this theoretical underpinning of crime prevention against Jews as a base, let us dissect the actions taken by several countries and analyse its effectiveness, starting with the US and the efforts of President Trump 

United States

In the United States, President Donald Trump has enacted the following:

• Executive Order 14188 (2025): Shortly after his 2025 inauguration, President Trump issued a new executive order, “Additional Measures to Combat Antisemitism,” which vowed to vigorously use legal tools to prosecute and remove perpetrators of antisemitic harassment and violence.
• Federal Funding Pressure: The administration has indicated a willingness to withhold federal funds from universities, such as targetting funding for institutions like Columbia University over the way they handled campus protests.
• Targeting Campus Antisemitism: The administration launched investigations and lawsuits against institutions like Harvard, accusing them of allowing anti-Israel protesters to operate "with impunity" after the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas.
• Use of IHRA Definition: The Department of Education under Trump has applied the IHRA definition of antisemitism to include anti-Zionism and certain criticisms of Israel as actionable discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
• Immigration and Visa Controls: Executive actions in 2025 directed federal agencies to review foreign student visas, allowing for the potential deportation of students who "advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats," which the administration tied to campus antisemitism.

In essence these look like promising moves, albeit a little overstating the significance of campus antisemitism rather than looking at Jew-hate in the wider community. However this may be being unfair because it is action. So how have these approaches panned out in practice?

Well, in fairness, it is early days, but initial indicators from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are not good. According to their research, antisemitic incidents in the US. reached record highs in 2024 and have continue to surge throughout the whole of 2025, driven by post-October 7, tensions. According to ADL data, 2024 saw 9,354 recorded incidents, with 2025 data showing a rising, more brazen trend, particularly in high-density areas, with a 21% rise in physical assaults reported.

Furthermore, by the end of 2025 over 30% of American Jews reported feeling unsafe in professional or social settings and 18% experienced direct physical or verbal threats. Meanwhile, on social media platforms 73% of American Jews experienced antisemitism online during 2025, specifically on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok.

The evidence also shows little significant change in the number of hate crimes prosecuted and/ or convictions resulting in over 90% of American Jews feeling unsafe. Consequently and based on data available, early indications are that the Trump initiative isn't working or, if it is the change required to make America safe for Jews is happening too slowly.

United Kingdom

But before we start pillorying Trump for doing too little it would be worth comparing US efforts to address endemic antisemitism compared to other nations. Let us take the UK as an initial example. The UK has a long history of Jew hatred that goes back to Hugh of Lincoln in 1200 and the resulting Jewish expulsion in 1290. They did not return until  l 1656 during the Interregnum under Oliver Cromwell. Since then Jews were largely able to go about their daily business in peace, though antisemitic attacks continued.

It was only really after October 7th that attacks became more prevalent, though signs of antisemitic behaviour became more prevalent among the hard  Left when Corbyn became leader of Labour and the EHRC ruling against the party in 2020.

More recently, the Community Security Trust  "Antisemitic Incidents Report 2025", , showed 3,700 instances of anti-Jewish hate across the UK in 2025, the second highest annual total ever, and a 4% rise from the 3,556 antisemitic incidents in 2024, and second only to the 4,298 antisemitic incidents logged in 2023. CST recorded 1,662 antisemitic incidents in 2022, and 2,261 in 2021.

Broadly speaking UK government action against antisemitism appears to lie primarily with providing financial support to the Community Security Trust who have been allocated £28 million in 2025/26 through the Jewish Community Protective Security Grant. This includes additional emergency funding of £10 million. In addition, the government have prioritised interventions in the following areas: 

1. Security: Providing better support to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities. 
2. Education: Tackling antisemitism in schools, colleges, and universities and ensuring that we raise children and young people who embrace people from all backgrounds and faiths.
3. Institutional Action: Tackling antisemitism in key institutions, particularly the NHS, and the culture, sport, and voluntary sectors.

In short, most would agree the UK government have done next to nothing to eradicate antisemitism but Starmer continues to spout meaningless soundbites to appease the Jewish community. Take for example his recent meetings with Birmingham university students who itemised some of the problems associated with being a student on campus. He listened but offered no suggestions as to how a Labour government might help bring change.

France

Meanwhile, in France, Antisemitism has surged dramatically since October 2023, following the Hamas-Israel conflict, with reported incidents increasing by nearly 400% in 2023 to 1,676, compared to 436 in 2022. This includes a spike in physical assaults, school incidents, and acts of vandalism. The sharp rise continues a trend, with 2024 maintaining similarly high levels of anti-Jewish acts.

In response, the government elevated the domestic security alert to the highest possible level (Vigipirate), increasing security around Jewish schools and places of worship. 

President Emmanuel Macron vowed that perpetrators would be punished, prompting a strong crackdown on vandalism and violent attacks. In 2024, the government recorded 9,400 racist crimes and incidents, with the interior ministry emphasizing "total commitment" to tracking down attackers of Jewish individuals and properties.

Noticeably in the immediate period after October 7th over 1,000 antisemitic crimes were recorded but within that same period (post-October 7, 2023), 486 (less than half) were arrested for antisemitic offences in France.

Sadly, most of Europe reveals the same picture with Germany in particular showing a disturbing number of antisemitic crime and a poor conviction rate.

Political comment

The data clearly demonstrates that throughout much of the 'free world' not enough is being done to reduce or even eliminate antisemitism and without a clear strategy to deal with the problem it will continue to grow and prosper - our children will be frightened in their schools, our teenager boys will fear muggings, or girls will be unsafe on our streets, as will our elderly. Going to synagogue will no longer a joy but will become a weekly and dangerous period in our lives.

We cannot allow this to continue.

- and there is an alternative way. All it needs is for government to be willing to invest in our Jewish communities.

In particular:

Legislation - enact a law where antisemitism is viewed as a hate crime and, if convicted in a court of law a perpretrator would receive a custodial sentence of no less than 12-months for a non-violent crime and no less than 5 years for a violent one. Children under 16 would receive a detention and training order of no less than 12 months, or juvenile detention centre in the US,

• A visible and active police presence in local Jewish communities. Demonstatrors attempting to enter Jewish communities or near synagogues will be subject Dispersion orders or Anti-|Social behaviour orders. Police currently have this authority already but must use them far more to protect local residents.
• Holocaust education to become a core part of the curriculum for all schhol children over 13 years of age.
• The USSA, local college student unions, or NUS should be denied authority to require student unions from preventing college/ university Jewish societies from discussing Zionism or Israeli issues. Any attempt to do would be deemed a denial of free speech.
• Any Imam or Muslim from a foreign country who calls for Jihad or globalising the intifada will be subject to immediate repatriation. If the perpetrator is a UK or US national they will face terrorism charges for inciting violence.
• Legislation should be prepared to stipulate Anti-Zionism is racism and that expression of such by a public servant is subject to disciplinary charges,

Now I would be the first to agree there are significant issues with many of these points, but they offer an initial discussion base that could ultimately lead to feeling safer and a substantial decline in race crime

Whatever we do, one thing is transparent - we must do more!

Remembering Sarah

Today (5th April) will mark  nine years since Sarah Halimi,  a 65 year old retired doctor and a French Jew was beaten and murdered then thrown off her balcony simply because she was Jewish.

Sarah was brutally murdered by her neighbor Kobili Traoré. Traore broke into her Paris apartment, stabbed her to death for approximately 50 minutes, and then threw her body from a third-story window.

Traoré, 27, while torturing Halimi was heard calling her a “dirty Jew”, reciting verses from the Quran, and shouting Alahu Akbar. After the murder, he shouted, “I have killed the sheitan,” meaning the devil or demonic spirit in Arabic. Local police were downstairs waiting for backup while the torture was taking place.

In an unfathomable decision in mid-April, France’s highest judicial body, the Court of Cassation, ruled that Traoré will not face trial due to his consumption of marijuana the night of the murder. The courts cited an article of the French criminal code which states that a person is not liable for a crime if they suffered from a psychological or neurological disorder that impaired their actions at the time it was committed. In a 2017 case, a person also under the influence was sentenced to prison for throwing their dog out a window.

Sarah should have received justice. Her killer should have faced the full weight of the law but this didn't happen

We will never forget.

Israel passes controversial death penalty law

 On Tuesday night, the Israeli Knesset enacted legislation requiring the death penalty for all West Bank Palestinians convicted of carrying out deadly terror attacks. Of course, the broader debate over the legitimacy of capital punishment is an emotive one and will be discussed later. The US has had a long term affinity for capital and the law allows 27 states to apply it, while the UK abolished it in 1960.

The new Israeli law has triggered predictable outrage abroad and deep debate at home. But beyond the headlines, the story is not just about capital punishment. It is about how terrorism, justice, and narrative framing collide and how those collisions are interpreted very differently depending on the lens. While some of the criticism is a legitimate part of the debate, there has also been a predictable international media reaction: alarmist headlines, sweeping generalizations, and, in some cases, outright misinformation.

But a closer reading of the legislation and of the reporting itself reveals a far narrower, more complex reality than many news  outlets would have readers believe.

Not “Palestinians” — Terrorists Convicted of Murder

A striking number of headlines refer broadly to “Palestinians,” implying that the law applies collectively to an entire population, but this is not the case..

A similar story has been seen in other newspapers.

The UK Telegraph newspaper headline completely ignores the fact the law focuses exclusively on terrorists who have murdered innocent civilians, not the average Palestinian.

The new law targets a specific category of perpetrators: terrorists who intentionally kill a person as part of an act of terrorism. It is not applicable to all Palestinians, nor even to all individuals involved in terrorism. Those whose actions do not result in fatalities are not subject to the death penalty under this law.

Yet by stripping away that crucial distinction, media coverage transforms a narrowly defined legal measure into what appears to be a sweeping policy of collective punishment. Nothing new here, as most newspaper in both the US and UK love the opportunity to berate Israel,

That framing is misleading.

The law is NOT retroactive — and not about “thousands of prisoners”

Another claim circulating is that the law could be used against the thousands of Palestinians currently held in Israeli prisons.

Again, that is not the case. This law will only affect terrorists convicted of intentionally killing innocent people, not thousands of inmates.

Furthermore, the law cannot be applied retroactively. It applies only to future convictions meeting a specific criteria. Existing prisoners — regardless of their crimes for which they were convicted — are not affected.

By omitting this basic legal principle, some reporting inevitably has left audiences with the false impression that Israel is preparing to execute large numbers of current detainees but this is not the case

A Country Deeply Divided on the Issue

Another element missing from much of the coverage is the significant domestic debate prevalent Israel itself. Indeed, there is no national consensus behind the law.

Opposition figures, legal experts, and segments of the public have, and are continuing to raise major concerns — from moral objections to questions about deterrence and potential consequences. Even within Israel’s political and security establishment, the issue has long been contentious.

In other words, this is not the action of a monolithic state imposing an uncontested policy despite i9mplications raised by external media.. It is the product of a democratic system grappling openly and contentiously with a deeply sensitive issue.

Furthermore, this law has been passed against the backdrop of the Hamas October 7 massacre. Beyond emotive calls to deal with future terrorist threats or to apply some form of deterrence, there is a very practical reality that Israel has faced. Let us never forget, Israeli hostages were kidnapped and held in Gaza to be exchanged for thousands of Palestinian prisoners.

It is hard to forget that in a previous prisoner exchange, The now eradicated Hamas leader and mastermind of October 7, Yahya Sinwar was among those released  and for some Israelis, the death penalty may reduce the risk of such a murderer being freed in future.

A Law That Will Face Legal Scrutiny

So transparently the legal debate is far from over and Israel’s legal system, anchored by an independent judiciary, is expected to examine the law in detail. Any attempt to implement it will likely face rigorous judicial review.

Yet this reality — that the law will be tested, challenged, and potentially constrained through legal mechanisms is largely absent from coverage that prefers a more simplistic and largely anti:Israel narrative.

In addition, while death by hanging may be the default punishment for West Bank residents convicted of deadly terrorist acts by military courts, judges can opt for life imprisonment under vaguely defined “special circumstances.” Also, the sentence would still require a simple majority of judges, thus avoiding a unilateral decision on a matter of such gravity.

It is worth noting that the law was watered down to ensure it would not go any further than any similar laws enacted under U.S. legislation.

The Bottom Line

The death penalty law raises serious questions. Israelis themselves are debating them.

But the portrayal of the law as a sweeping, discriminatory measure targeting Palestinians as a whole — or as a tool poised to be applied to thousands of existing prisoners — does not withstand scrutiny.

It is a narrower, prospective measure aimed at a specific category of deadly terrorism.

And once again, the gap between what the law says and how it is reported tells its own story..

Political Comment

The new legislation raises a number of political, legal, religious and ethical issues. Now I am very far from as religious or Talmudic scholar so, if I may I will leave that issue to others more learned than me.

But on the political arena I think Israel is making a grave mistake. Internationally the country is not at its strongest and, thanks to a major media and social media campaign the "Palestinian" movement to sway opinion against the country, It is therefore inevitable that when a Palestinian terrorist kills an Israeli and is sentenced to death they could well be perceived as martyrs and undoubtedly anti-Zionists will create a mass campaign against the country.

Secondly, the country is an active war against Iran - a war that could see the US leaving without completing all of the strategic goals required. If that happens Israel will need to be united in what could become a prolonged war with Iran.

Third, it is inconceivable that the PA will recruit terrorists willing to kill Jews and become martyrs to "the cause" and promote their illegitimate campaign. While Iranian money will not be available, there are enough funds available to mount a prolonged campaign.

At an ethical issue there are further problems. The only capital death on Israeli soil was Adolf Eichmann and the nation has a proud history of avoiding capital sentencing despite countless sentencing. If this is to change courts will have to establish unquestionable guilt and internationally there are countless examples of how, despite stringent safeguards mistakes have been made.

So, in short I fear this new law will be a terrible mistake for a country that prides itself for being the only democracy in the Middle East and while the nation is very from an apartheid state, having legislation that punishes according to race leaves Israel vulnerable to accusations of having different rules for Palestinians than Jews. Creating laws based on vengeance and hatred are not the solution - we win when we show even our enemies that we will not succumb to bitterness and revenge. Payback and reprisal will not make Israelis safer.

Fascist and PA activist Kris ‘Charlie Big Potatoes’ Kearney imprisoned for nearly five years

In the last twenty-four hours, another far-right extremist has been jailed – this time because he thought it appropriate to distribute the manifestos of terrorist groups online.

Kristofer Kearney

Kristofer Thomas Kearney, 38, who is probably better known within the far-right community as “Charlie Big Potatoes” and, until yesterday had an active Telegram account, pleaded guilty in March to two offences of disseminating terrorist publications.

The media are reporting that he is believed to be the first member of far-right group Patriotic Alternative to be convicted of terrorist offences, although it must be mentioned the group are not averse to working alongside those who have, or are later convicted of criminal offences. Last month, James Allchurch — who allegedly suggested a politician’s daughter should be raped was convicted of 10 of 15 counts of distributing material intended to stir up racial hatred via his online radio station, Radio Albion. The material included references to hanging black and Jewish people. Following his conviction PA  offered him their full support and condemned “draconian restrictions on freedom of speech”. Additionally, PA Talk (their nasty ultra-nationalist podcast) previously were happy to broadcast an interview with the far-right extremist and convicted criminal, Blair Cottrell who, among his many ‘achievements’ can boast how he is the former leader of the white supremacist group, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).

As for Kearney, the offences relate to two Telegram posts that he distributed on January 23 and March 8, all in  2021. These posts disseminated dozens of documents encouraging extreme right-wing terror attacks, including the manifestos of Christchurch mosque killer Brenton Tarrant and Anders Breivik, who murdered 77 people in Norway. Alongside this, he unashamedly distributed two other far-right manifestos related to Texas Walmart mass killer Patrick Crusius and John Earnest, who killed a Jewish woman and injured three others attending a California synagogue in 2019.

The court heard previously that Kearney told fellow Telegram users Adolf Hitler “showed people the way” and “did nothing wrong” as he shared posts encouraging violence against Jews and Muslims. He also shared a “Punish a Muslim Day” letter, in which readers were encouraged to “butcher a Muslim” for 500 points, remove a woman’s headscarf for 25 points and bomb a mosque for 1,000 points, it has been said.

During 2021, Kearney also posted a numbered list and links to 89 extreme right-wing documents.

An image of Kearney with a National Action flag was also shown to the court, which the defendant said was taken at an anti-grooming gang rally in  Darlington. Although he denied membership, he is known to have been an active member of the neo-Nazi group until a week before it was proscribed.

Kearns seen saluting with members of National Action

In his lacklustre defence, the self-described British fascist said that he was “horrified” to have shared videos which encouraged violence and described some of the phrases used on his channel as little more than a “rallying cry” for people to get involved in community groups. Instead, he argued they were not aimed at promoting violence and denied that his intention was to prompt anyone who saw the material he posted to then go on to seriously injure people or damage property – this is despite that on one occasion alone, he called for people to ‘Butcher a Muslim’.

Kearney told the court the point of setting up his channel was to “spread the right-wing and the fascist world view”.

At the Old Bailey, the court heard how material on Kearney’s Telegram profile did, in fact, depict or encourage violence in the battle against “white genocide”. After a rather long and somewhat tedious trial, Judge Richard Marks KC jailed Kearney for four years and eight months with an extended licence period of two years after finding the defendant ‘legally dangerous’. A notification requirement for a period of 10 years was also ordered.

The judge determined at an earlier trial of issue that Kearney shared the posts both recklessly and with the intention of encouraging terrorism, accepting that he may not have familiarised himself with all of the postings but rejecting the claim that he was completely ignorant of any material involving violence. He told Kearney on Friday:

“In this country, we have lived for many years in a multicultural society which most people regard as being enriching … Right-thinking members of any society regard tolerance, kindness, understanding and inclusivity to everyone regardless of their background as being of absolutely fundamental importance … Much of the material that you posted entirely negates those values and is extreme, vile, inflammatory, divisive and deeply offensive … Whilst I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that your entire agenda and intention was not throughout to encourage acts of terrorism, I conclude from the nature, extent and volume of the material posted that such was your fanaticism in achieving your state of objectives that you were prepared and intended at least in part for that to happen if that is what it took.”

The defendant, who was part of the Army’s parachute regiment for two years, regularly featured on right-wing podcasts called Patriotic Talk and The Absolute State of Britain, and had set up a channel called Fascist Fitness to hand out exercise and fitness tips.

As a result of his incarceration PA now have a vacancy for a new “Head of Fitness” – racists, hooligan and thugs are welcome to send their CV in to Mark Collett, but applicants are advised to use short sentences and single syllable words. Having said this, with the recent splintering of PA and the creation of the new Homeland Party, applicants may wish to consider whether it is worth taking a job with an organisation that will struggle to see out the rest of the year.