Whyte trial jury out to consider verdict
THE jury in former Rangers owner Craig Whyte’s fraud trial have retired to consider their verdict.
Judge Lady Stacey told the eight men and seven women to take as long as they needed to reach a decision.
The judge started her charge to the jury yesterday at the High Court in Glasgow and told them to keep “cool heads” as they consider all the evidence in the case.
Whyte is accused of acquiring Rangers by fraud in May 2011. He denies the charge and another under the Companies Act.
The Crown alleges the 46-year-old pretended to then-owner Sir David Murray that funds were ‘immediately available’ on an ‘unconditional basis’ to make all required payments for a controlling and majority stake in the Glasgow club.
Advocate Depute Alex Prentice QC has told the court Whyte did not have authority over the funds used in the takeover and ‘induced’ the Murray Group to sell, but defence QC Donald Findlay described the accused as the fall guy in the case.
Lady Stacey laid out the verdicts available – guilty, not guilty and not proven – and told the jurors to have a ‘good, hard look at what has been put before you’.
Asking the jury to retire, the judge said: “You have listened patiently to all of the evidence and must have as much time as you do require.”
In his closing speeches, Mr Findlay told the court Sir David Murray wanted to protect his legacy at the club but was “badly let down” by others who advised on the sale.
He said: “Nobody in this court should be the fall guy.
“A lot of people have come in determined that he (Whyte) would be the fall guy and didn’t have it in themselves to accept some responsibility.”
The defence case did not call any witnesses in the trial but Lady Stacey told the jury the onus was on the prosecution to prove its case.
She said: “Craig Whyte doesn’t need to prove his innocence. You must not draw an adverse inference against Mr Whyte because he did not give evidence.”
The judge also explained the law around the charges of fraud and financial assistance to the jury.
Describing financial assistance, Lady Stacey said she could not find another case where the law has been considered. “Juries very rarely, if ever, are asked to look at this,” the judge said. She described the trial as a “long case with many witnesses” and urged the jurors to give equal weight to submissions made in court.