A TEARFUL Natalie McGarry has told a court she was “overwhelmed” by her work with the Yes groups she is accused of embezzling money from.
The former SNP MP said she was shocked at the rise in demand for T-shirts, mugs and banners during the post-referendum period.
The former Glasgow East MP is standing trial at Glasgow Sheriff Court accused of embezzling £21,000 while treasurer for Women for Independence (WFI) between April 23, 2013 and November 30, 2015.
A second charge alleges she took £4662 between April 9, 2014 and August 10, 2015, when she was treasurer, secretary and convener of the Glasgow Regional Association (GRA) of the SNP.
McGarry, of Clarkston, denies both charges.
The court heard the demand for supplies, merchandise and banners exceeded what the group had ordered – even after the referendum.
Dozens of requests for merchandise were coming in across the country and were directed to McGarry’s personal email address.
The court was shown email records from Kathleen Caskie, then a paid employee at WFI, instructing local groups to contact McGarry directly for merchandise inquires.
And, in February 2015, an email was sent to members of the pro-independence group asking if anyone could take over merchandise responsibility from McGarry.
Defence solicitor, Allan Macleod, asked McGarry if she knew how many local WFI groups there were.
McGarry said she did not know the exact number, however, she said there was a “phenomenal” demand, as the court was shown records of 24 events organised by local groups between mid-February and the end of March 2015.
An emotional McGarry became tearful in court as she recounted the busy period.
She said: “I feel a bit vindicated by seeing this in black and white because people [giving evidence] said there wasn’t much happening after the referendum.”
When asked by Macleod if she had asked for help, she said: “Yes, I had.
“It was overwhelming. I was out every day campaigning and trying to fit Women for Independence around my campaign.”
The court also heard McGarry was reimbursing some members for travel expenses with WFI funds, however, this was not declared to the rest of the group to protect members who were not in a comfortable financial position.
She said: “It was a delicate balance to know the financial position some women were in compared to others.
“Some were embarrassed by their financial situation and I didn’t think it was my place to expose that to anybody.”
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