And then there were none. The Crown Office had initially indicted seven men, including Craig Whyte, for a range of offences following a huge and costly police investigation.
But last year, cases against Mr Whyte’s six co-accused were dismissed. He was the last man standing, “the fall guy” in the words of his counsel, Donald Findlay, QC, but was acquitted of the remaining two charges against him yesterday.
In 2015, the first indictment in the Rangers case included charges of fraud, conspiracy to defraud, and attempting to pervert the course of justice, as well as statutory offences under the Companies Act 2006 and the Criminal Justice and Licencing (Scotland) Act 2010.
Among those originally indicted were Gary Withey, Mr Whyte’s lawyer, David Grier, David Whitehouse and Paul Clark, of the financial consultancy Duff & Phelps, and the businessmen Charles Green and Imran Ahmad. None of their cases came to court and all charges were dropped.
Prominent lawyers were critical of the Crown’s handling of the case. Brian McConnachie, QC, a former principal advocate depute, said: “When you start off with that number of accused, and only one goes to trial, that would tend to suggest there have been problems with the presentation of the case at some stage.”
Advertisement
Another senior legal source questioned the role of Lloyds, Rangers’ bankers, who allowed the deal to proceed, and compared Sir David Murray, the former Rangers owner, to Sir Philip Green.
Sir David accepted £1 from Mr Whyte as symbolic payment for the club; Sir Philip sold British Homes Stores for £1 to Dominic Chappell, who has been bankrupted three times. BHS subsequently collapsed with the loss of 11,000 jobs.
“This is a very unusual case, an exceptional situation because you would not expect reputable financial advisers to behave like this,” said the source, who asked not to be named.
“Green had a motivation, Murray had a motivation: any deal is better than no deal.
“How can a man such as Whyte turn up with £18 million? The bank has to ask where the money is coming from. What inquiries were made? In most cases, banks and reputable financial advisers bend over backwards not to break the rules. It is something to be avoided.”
Advertisement
Many in the legal establishment believe that the Crown’s failure to secure a conviction under the 2006 Companies Act on the second charge will lead to amendments to the legislation.
Part of the case brought against Mr Whyte under the terms of the act was based on his admissions in 2012, when Rangers was first placed into administration. At that time, Mr Whyte conceded that he negotiated a £20 million deal with the Ticketus agency, when he purchased the club 12 months earlier, maintaining that the money had allowed “us to complete the takeover and maximise working capital”. In other words, he bought the club with its own assets, breaching the 2006 Act, which prohibits a public company and its directors from giving “financial assistance” in connection with the purchase of its own shares.
The nuances of the legislation helped the defence. To the accusation that his client did not use his own money when he bought Rangers, Mr Findlay said: “So what?” No one had lost in the deal, argued the QC; indeed Rangers, Mr Whyte, the Murray Group, and the club’s bankers, all benefited.
A senior legal source told The Times: “Findlay essentially asked, what was wrong with this deal?
“The simple answer is, it’s asset stripping. Someone at the bank was desperate to get that £18 million.” After selling Rangers to Mr Whyte, the Murray Group was effectively wound up. Murray International Holdings was liquidated with debts of more than £200m, but the Murray family had been able to acquire portions of his businesses back.
Advertisement
This year Sir David made a return to the Sunday Times Rich List as the 53rd wealthiest person in Scotland.
The Crown Office defended its handling of the case, saying that it was “clearly in the public interest that the allegations of fraud at Rangers were thoroughly investigated”.