A WOMAN has said she was repeatedly lied to by former MP Natalie McGarry about the financial running of a pro-Scottish independence group they were both part of.
Kathleen Caskie was employed by Women For Independence (WFI) in the lead-up to the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 and continued to work in the running of the organisation on a voluntary basis afterwards.
The 56-year-old told a jury she was “being given the runaround” by the former MP, who was treasurer for the group at the time, over some of WFI’s financial matters.
READ MORE: Boys' Brigade probe Scottish Tory candidate for Moray Council James Allan
Caskie was called to give evidence at the trial of McGarry, 40, who is accused of misappropriating more than £25,000 from two campaign groups, including WFI.
McGarry, who represented Glasgow East for the SNP, allegedly embezzled £21,000 while treasurer for WFI between April 26, 2013 and November 30, 2015.
It is also alleged that she transferred cash made from fundraising events into her own personal accounts and failed to send donations intended for Perth and Kinross foodbank and the charity Positive Prisons.
A second charge states McGarry took £4661 between April 9, 2014 and August 10, 2015 when she was treasurer, secretary and convenor of Glasgow Regional Association (GRA) of the SNP.
McGarry denies the charges. At a hearing at Glasgow Sheriff Court yesterday, Caskie, who said she has known McGarry since she was a child, was asked about several WFI debts.
The court saw an email from Stirling Council chasing payment for venue hire for an event WFI hosted in 2015.
The email, from a representative at the council addressed to Caskie, read: “I need to speak to you about an invoice that remains outstanding for £326.40.”
Looking at the email, the witness said: “This was really embarrassing. I was lied to. I was told cheques had been sent. I was thrown into panic. I became really cross. Natalie was telling me rubbish that she had sent cheques and none of it was true.”
Prosecutor Alastair Mitchell said: “You had been told by Natalie that this event had been paid for?”
Caskie replied: “Yes. Several times. I was being given the runaround and I was really angry.”
The court was shown a financial report prepared by McGarry ahead of the WFI’s AGM in 2015, which Caskie described as “embarrassing”.
Mitchell asked her to explain why it was embarrassing, to which she replied: “It just wasn’t up to scratch. It wasn’t what you would expect any intelligent person to write. It was just weirdness. It certainly wasn’t the format I was expecting.”
Allan Macleod, defending, read out a written statement from Caskie to Police Scotland where she described WFI as being run in a “chaotic fashion” by McGarry and former WFI member Shona McAlpine.
The witness agreed, telling court “it was chaotic as decisions were not being made properly through the committee”, adding there was a “great need for greater order”.
The jury were then shown an email from former member and co-founder of WFI, Carolyn Leckie, in which she said there was “too much pressure on Shona and particularly Natalie”.
Caskie told the court: “It became clear that Natalie was not capable of managing financial matters.”
As to why McGarry remained in charge of WFI finances until 2015, Caskie said: “No one could get anything off her. No one could get passwords, receipts. It was like we were being held at ransom.”
The trial, before Sheriff Tom Hughes, continues.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article