Peter Murrell’s court hearing was postponed ‘in the interests of justice’, prosecutors have said.
Murrell admitted his 12-year embezzlement on May 25 – but his hearing had been originally scheduled for February 20.
The adjournment until after the Scottish election on May 7 sparked a row over possible political interference.
In an unusual move, the Crown set out the reasons for the postponement of the hearing, which it said was ‘administratively adjourned’.
The Crown Office said: ‘In larger cases, preliminary hearings may be postponed where further preparation is required.
‘In this case, the first preliminary hearing, originally scheduled for February 20, 2026, was administratively adjourned to May 25 by way of a Section 75A [of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995] minute presented jointly by Crown Counsel and defence counsel.
Peter Murrell as the court charges against him were read out at Edinburgh High Court
‘The application reflected the scale of the indictment and the statement of uncontroversial evidence which had recently been provided to the accused.
‘It would not have been in the interests of justice for the Crown to oppose a motion to adjourn where the defence was not ready.
‘The motion was granted by a High Court judge.
‘On March 3, 2026, the accused instructed his legal representatives to explore resolution of the case by way of a guilty plea. ‘Discussions continued over the following weeks because of the length of the schedules [the list of embezzled items in the indictment] and the detail of the plea ultimately agreed.
‘On May 21, 2026 the accused confirmed to the Crown that he would plead guilty.
‘The Crown considered the plea offered and accepted that it secured a conviction for serious criminal conduct and provided a proper basis for sentencing without the need for a trial.
‘On May 25, 2026, amendments were made to the schedule of purchases, and the charge remained one of embezzlement.’
Scottish Tory deputy leader Rachael Hamilton said: ‘The Murrell case was always going to be hugely damaging to the SNP – and so it was clearly in their partisan interest for it to be delayed until after the Scottish parliament election.
‘It’s only natural that people will suspect that political pressure may have been applied to ensure Murrell’s case was put back.
‘If John Swinney wants to dispel that suspicion, he should order the Crown Office to publish all the details relating to the case – including the reasons why Nicola Sturgeon wasn’t prosecuted along with her estranged husband.
