SNP MSP accused of ‘unreliable’ evidence in race defamation case
COURT evidence given by an SNP MSP under oath has been labelled “unreliable, self-serving and evasive” in the closing submission of a £100,000 defamation case.
Uddingston & Bellshill MSP Richard Lyle was accused by a QC of giving “wholly unbelievable” testimony in an action against his office worker, Sheena Mcculloch.
The claims were made on the bruising final day of a proof at the Court of Session by Kenny Mcbrearty QC, acting on behalf of former North Lanarkshire SNP councillor Julie Mcanulty.
In reply, Roddy Dunlop, QC, for Ms Mcculloch, accused Ms Mcanulty of being heedless of racial sensitivities, and accused her and her key witness of lying in court.
Ms Mcanulty is suing Ms Mcculloch for alleging she used the word “Pakis” in Ms Mcculloch’s car in 2015 and saying she wanted Asians out of the local SNP. Ms Mcanulty denies making the remark. Ms Mcculloch, who the court heard had a 2006 conviction for theft, has defended the case on the grounds of accuracy, fair comment and qualified privilege.
She initially said the conversation was in late May 2015, but it later emerged she and Ms Mcanulty were in her car on 20 June.
Steven Bonnar, a current SNP councillor in North Lanarkshire, testified he was in the car on that date with the two women, and heard no racist remarks being made.
After four days of evidence in April, the case resumed - and concluded - yesterday.
The court previously heard Ms Mcanulty and Ms Mcculloch were on rival sides of a “toxic” turf war within the local SNP, with two camps vying for dominance.
Ms Mcculloch emailed the racism complaint from Mr Lyle’s office on 5 February 2016, and it then leaked to the press.
A Daily Record story three days later led to Ms Mcanulty’s suspension by the SNP.
In his submission to Lord Uist, Mr Mcbrearty said Mr Lyle, who was not present in court, had been a “bit part player”.
However he criticised his evidence, including his attempt to “dissociate” himself from the feuding, and his claim he knew nothing about the racism complaint for three days, despite his childhood friend and employee sending it from his office. He said it was “completely implausible” Mr Lyle, who previously denied “input” to the complaint or misleading evidence, was unaware of it until it was in the Record.
Mr Mcbrearty said the email was part of a targeted campaign against Ms Mcanulty.
He said Ms Mcculloch could not credibly explain why she emailed 13 people, only three of whom dealt with party discipline, nor explain why she waited until February.
He called her evidence incredible, untruthful, illogical and absurd.
Mr Mcbrearty said it would make no sense for Mr Bonnar, who told the court he “abhors” racism, to concoct a story about being in Ms Mcculloch’s car to help a racist.
In his submission, Mr Dunlop attacked Ms Mcanulty’s evidence, saying problems with in it cast doubt on her whole case.
He said that at an SNP meeting in 2012 she was “heedless of racial sensitivities” by questioning whether a senior Asian member directed the votes of other Asian members.
He said Ms Mcanulty was also prepared to “sully the reputation” of other witnesses by accusing them of perjury, fabrication and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
He said her “demonstrable mendacity… taints her evidence irretrievably”.
He also said Mr Bonnar had been “lying” about being in the car, and that there had been no room in it for him as the back seat was full of campaign materials.
He said Ms Mcculloch’s evidence had been “credible” and “reliable”, and it made no sense for her to concoct a lie about a talk in a car if Mr Bonnar had been there too.
Mr Mcbrearty said that assumed Ms Mcculloch was a “good liar”, not a bad one.
Lord Uist is expected to give his judgment in two to three months’ time.