The Kintyre Forum

Is it right that the Deputy First Minister should make representations to a Sheriff on behalf of a constituent who has pleaded guilty to fraud charges and potentially faces a custodial sentence?

In the news report I saw this morning, she says it is her duty to a constituent to do so. I'm afraid I don't know enough about their rules/codes of conduct to refute this, but I personally don't think she should have. I would like to know what the alternatives to a custodial sentence are - repaying £80,000? Community service for years? Apparently he "has made attempts to repay the amount", but no further details. Any individual stealing this amount from a company expects a long jail term, I don't see why defrauding the benefit system is any different.

I actually quite like Nicola Sturgeon but think she has got it totally wrong. Preach about being hard on crime then attempt to bail someone out when caught bang to rights so to speak. Don't know if she should or will but an apology would be a start.

Ian Bell of the Herald sums up this sorry saga very well:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/ian-bell/up-the-creek-amid-paddle-shortage-as-mr-110-is-beaten-hands-down-1.1005864

If Salmond and Sturgeon were to be believed, every MSP would receive post-bags heaving with pleading letters from every criminal looking for a 'good word'.

Bobh is right. She made a big mistake. The least she should do is apologise.

I wasn't aware of this story down here but considering where her constituency is, at least she won't have a lot of letters to write!

I always find it strange how those in high positions find it so difficult to admit when they have been wrong/stupid.

I would have thought that it was the job of Rauf's defence lawyer to present his case for mitigation, not an elected representative. It's difficult to believe that anyone in Ms Sturgeon's position, knowing the facts of this case and Rauf's criminal history, would wish to make a plea for leniency on behalf of someone who was already jailed for 3 years in 1996 for forging signatures on 779 DSS payment orders and involving £58000 when he was a sub-postmaster. What is also truly astonishing is that someone like Rauf, who is effectively a serial fraudster, would have the temerity to approach an MSP to try to gain support when the crime he has committed is the telling of lies in order to fraudulently obtain public money i.e. taxpayers money. It looks like Rauf is an incorrigible thief, and Ms Sturgeon would have been better advised not to have become involved.

Does this " the crime he has committed is the telling of lies in order to fraudulently obtain public money " not slot into parliamentary life quite neatly at the present time ? Birds o a feather an aw that !

Depends on whether it's "within the rules".