It was my fault but there was nothing dodgy. All I can say is that I was very ill at the time
what was burned but was the fiscal even told those documents had existed never mind destroyed.
“They might, or might not, have contained evidence of fraud but they were definitely embarrassing to the SCDEA and senior officers who were meant to be monitoring what was going on at that unit and signing off on the finances.
“It was an astonishing thing to do. Everything found in that office should have been bagged and tagged. That is normal, routine. “Imagine if a company found evidence that an executive might have been committing fraud but decided to buy an incinerator and some petrol and burn all the paperwork in the carpark before telling the police? It would not go well for them.”
We told last week how two of the officers in charge of the SCDEA announced their retirement as the judgement of Lord Brailsford in the whistle-blower’s case was published.
Police Scotland Deputy Chief Constable Johnny Gwynne, who was No.2 at the agency in 2011, announced his retirement the day before Stephen Whitelock, lead investigator at HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, who was then No.3. The agency was then led by Gordon Meldrum, who has already left the police.
Both men and their organisations said there was no connection between their retirement and the judgement when Lord Brailsford backed Mrs K’s claim she had been scapegoated. Police chiefs are considering whether to appeal.
The Court of Session had heard that Mr Whitelock “lost confidence” in Mrs K after she raised the alarm about the managment of the special operations unit. He decided the he was aware of the Court of Session judgement in favour of his former colleague, known as Mrs K, who claims she was frozen out of her job after blowing the whistle, he said: “I hope everything is alright with her.
“What happened to her afterwards was very little to do with me. It was a management thing. “It was all completely my fault. All I can say is, I was very ill at the time. “None of it was her fault and I told the management that at the time.”
Mrs K won her legal action against Police Scotland at the Court of Session two weeks ago although the force is still considering whether to appeal Lord Brailsford’s judgement. seconded officer should return to Grampian, her home force. The head of HR, later told Mrs K her job at the agency had been advertised. When asked who ordered the role to be advertised, Ms Fraser replied: “The dep”.
Mrs K said this referred to Mr Gwynne, saying: “She said the dep has said Grampian has said you’re never to be an undercover officer again and never to work in special operations again.”
Meanwhile, the influential role of Mr Whitelock at the SCDEA has renewed focus on his involvement in a report into undercover policing in Scotland. The review, published last year, was ordered after a number of scandals linked to covert officers emerged in England. However, the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Scotland (HMICS) report into undercover policing concluded covert officers had been “well-regulated” during 423 operations since 2000. It is not known if Derek Penman, then HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary in Scotland, who wrote the report supported by Mr Whitelock, reviewed the financial mismanagement and effective suspension of the SCDEA undercover unit in April 2011.
On Friday, after being asked if files and documents found at the SCDEA office were destroyed before or after prosecutors had been notified of possible fraud, Police Scotland replied: “We note the decision of the court and are now considering the terms of the judgment.
“There is no connection with this case and DCC Gwynne’s retirement. Any suggestion otherwise would be completely inaccurate.”
Reports: Jim Wilson and Peter Swindon