Nicola Sturgeon’s crooked husband bought 108 loo rolls, 48 hours before she urged public not to panic buy at start of Covid pandemic

Peter Murrell bought more than 100 toilet rolls just hours before then First Minister Nicola Sturgeon warned the public against panic-buying during the pandemic.

The disgraced SNP chief executive splurged on the essentials as his now estranged wife urged Scots to ‘apply common sense’ when lockdown loomed in March 2020.

Court documents reveal Murrell spent £55.98 on 108 Andrex toilet rolls on March 7 while supermarkets battled chronic shortages of a number of essential items. 

Just 48 hours later, Ms Sturgeon appeared at a press conference instructing the public to ‘behave as rationally as possible’ and avoid bulk buying in shops.

Murrell – whom Sturgeon has now divorced – pleaded guilty last week to embezzling huge sums from the SNP between 2010 and 2022. The 61-year-old spent the money on items including a motorhome, cars, kitchen gadgets, expensive watches and pens, and more mundane purchases such as hand cream and toilet seats.

He is set to be sentenced in June, the same month that the SNP faces two by-election contests – one in Aberdeen South and another in Arbroath and Broughty Ferry.

Despite the attempts to crack down on stockpiling, Murrell also bought 144 bottles of Evian still mineral water and four packs of liquid laundry detergent in the following weeks.

The panic purchases have sparked outrage among politicians, who suggest he hoarded the items in the knowledge that his wife’s imminent order would prompt supermarkets to limit purchases.

Scottish Conservative deputy leader Rachael Hamilton said: ‘Peter Murrell’s loo roll splurge suggests that he had advance notice of Nicola Sturgeon’s warning against panic buying, but it’s also typical of the SNP’s “do as I say, not as I do” double standards.’

Scottish Labour deputy leader Jackie Baillie added: ‘The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Every new revelation shines a harsher light on the culture that developed under Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney’s leadership and raises fresh questions about who knew what and when.’

Meanwhile, a poll has shown many Scots question Ms Sturgeon’s repeated denials that she had any knowledge of her husband’s wrongdoing. 

She has insisted that she was unaware many of the purchased items even existed before prosecutors exposed them. Just 7 per cent of Scots are certain she is telling the truth and even among SNP voters, only 15 per cent are totally convinced she is being honest.

A survey by Norstat for The Sunday Times has revealed just 21 per cent of people north of the Border are willing to accept Ms Sturgeon’s account of her ex-husband’s illicit spending.

The findings come as First Minister Mr Swinney insisted voters still have ‘strong confidence’ in the SNP despite the latest scandal engulfing the party.

Opposition politicians counter that cynical voters are no longer willing to trust the SNP after years of double standards, a hypocrisy exemplified by Murrell’s lockdown stockpiling.

Ms Baillie said: ‘The people of Scotland placed their trust in the SNP during a national crisis. They are entitled to feel that trust was abused.’

Russell Findlay, the Scottish Tory leader, added: ‘This survey confirms that Nicola Sturgeon’s comments on her husband’s crime spree have not been accepted by the people of Scotland.’

The loo roll scandal came to light as defiant Ms Sturgeon yesterday refused to apologise to SNP donors over her ex-husband’s actions.

Ms Sturgeon also said she will not help them recoup the missing £400,000 by handing back gifts bought by Murrell using the stolen cash.

In an interview with the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg yesterday, the 55-year-old welled up as she told how much she adored jewellery purchased by Murrell.

But she became indignant when put on the spot over whether she would be offering up any assets to compensate her party’s supporters.

When asked if donors should get their money back and whether she’d contribute in some way, she replied: ‘There will now be, I would imagine, a legal process to recover the money from Peter that he embezzled from the SNP.

‘I am not guilty of that embezzlement so nothing that belongs to me should be part of that – rightly, it should not be part of that.’ 

It is understood Police Scotland have confiscated most of the items Murrell bought with embezzled cash.

During the hour-long interview, Ms Sturgeon also claimed she never once saw the infamous £124,000 camper van parked on her mother-in-law’s drive.

But she revealed that party officials had discussed the vehicle as far back as 2021.

And Ms Sturgeon repeatedly said she knew nothing about Murrell’s crimes and never noticed household goods costing thousands of pounds.

Murrell last week pleaded guilty at the High Court in Edinburgh to embezzling more than £400,000 from the SNP.

She said: ‘(Murrell) perpetrated a crime on the SNP.

‘By definition, that included me as the party leader. He misled. He deceived.

‘He is serving and will be serving a sentence for a crime he committed. I’m out here feeling as if I’m serving a sentence for a crime I did not commit.’

Murrell’s offending took place from shortly after the couple married in 2010 until 2022.

But Ms Sturgeon, who quit Holyrood before May’s election, said she never questioned items that appeared in their home because they were earning decent money and she had little to do with the day-to-day running of the household. 

Ms Sturgeon insisted: ‘I absolutely didn’t know that he was committing crimes.’

She said there would be no apology from her, adding: ‘I will take responsibility for the things I do, the decisions I make.

‘I’m sitting here with you right now, answering questions as I believe strongly in that accountability. But I am not responsible for the crimes that my former husband committed and I’m not going to apologise for somebody else’s crimes.’

Asked if she was angry at Murrell, she replied: ‘Yes, I’m angry, but I’m also carrying a degree of hurt and a degree of trauma about – this whole episode resulted in my sitting in a police station under arrest.

‘What he has done to me I think will take me a very, very long time to recover from.’

But her explanations did not wash with political opponents. 

Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay said: ‘If this was Nicola Sturgeon’s attempt to shut down scrutiny then her wholly unconvincing performance failed on all counts.

‘She failed to provide credible answers about her infamous police “no comment” interview or her aggressive attempts to shut down legitimate concerns about the SNP’s finances. 

‘Her inability to suspect anything untoward about her husband’s rampant spending that bankrolled a camper van, a Jaguar and her lavish lifestyle also lacks credibility.

‘I repeat my party’s call for the Crown Office to publish the reasons why no charges were brought against Nicola Sturgeon, and whether that decision was consistent with that of Police Scotland. There must also be a parliamentary inquiry to be held into this epic SNP scandal.’

Jackie Baillie added: ‘People across Scotland are struggling through a cost-of-living crisis.

‘They will find it extraordinary that Nicola Sturgeon appears more upset about losing the trappings of a luxury lifestyle than about the party members whose trust was abused.

‘Her refusal to acknowledge how tone-deaf this looks shows just how detached the SNP leadership has become from the people they claim to represent.’

Murrell is due to be sentenced later this month.

STEPHEN DAISLEY: Saint Nicola of the Invisible Camper Van emoted about her agonies like a martyr 

Now we know why she remained silent in the police interview. If Nicola Sturgeon had replied ‘no comment’ to Laura Kuenssberg’s every question, she would have come out of Sunday’s sit-down with more sympathy and credibility.

Instead, she threw herself a one-woman pity party. ‘I have been deceived, I’ve been lied to, I’ve been betrayed,’ a sniffling Sturgeon told Kuenssberg. Well, it makes a change.

We were told about her shock, her pain, her ‘trauma’. At last, we were hearing from the real victim of Mr Murrell’s crime spree: Mrs Murrell. 

It will have come as a relief to SNP donors whose money was stolen to know Sturgeon is determined to move on with her life.

Sturgeon cuts a thoroughly unsympathetic figure, a ruthless political combatant who showed no mercy to outgunned opponents but has turned pacifist now that the tanks are circling her.

The line she had settled on was marital deceit. She chose her words with telling care.

When Kuenssberg asked: ‘As the person who shared his life, as his wife, did you really not notice anything?’, the former SNP leader responded: ‘I absolutely didn’t know he was committing crimes.’ 

To the untrained ear, that sounds like a clear and unambiguous statement but anyone who has observed Sturgeon long enough will spot the problem right away: it’s not an answer to Kuenssberg’s question.

There was a story about a pendant Murrell had bought for her on a whim and her distress upon learning it had been acquired using party cash. 

No doubt it was distressing to discover but it was perhaps more distressing for low-paid and lifelong loyal party members who had handed over £20 and £50 they couldn’t afford.

The former First Minister insisted she was uncomfortable with the idea of being thought of as a victim. 

There’s good news on that front. Her words were just that and nothing more. While disavowing the v-word, she emoted about her agonies like a martyr recounting her suffering. Saint Nicola of the Invisible Camper Van.

Speaking of which, Kuenssberg pressed her on the most notorious motorhome in Scotland. How could she have missed it? It was parked at her mother-in-law’s house. Didn’t she visit her mother-in-law?

In earlier times, this would have called for a Les Dawson joke but Sturgeon was entirely serious. She couldn’t ‘consciously remember’ having seen the van and, even if she had, she would likely have assumed it belonged to the neighbours.

The imperceptible vehicle in question is 24ft long. Who lived next door? David Copperfield?

Kuenssberg, to her credit, spoke in a sceptical tone and with one eyebrow permanently arched. She repeatedly pushed her subject on her apparent cluelessness about what was going on in her own home. 

All those two-grand barista machines and she never woke up and smelled the coffee.

For much of the time, there was little that was new and of what was new there was little value. We’d heard it all before.

The cod feminism (she was being held accountable for her husband’s crimes). The well-rehearsed denials (she didn’t discourage party figures from coming forward with concerns). The obfuscation (any complaints had been about the £667,000 indyref2 fund, not embezzlement).

One thing was new, as best as I could tell. Kuenssberg was curious as to when it dawned on Sturgeon that there might have been embezzlement.

Spring of 2023, she replied, which would have been two years into Operation Branchform. I reckon Columbo’s job is safe.

But my ears pricked up at how Sturgeon became aware: ‘It became clear that some people who were being interviewed by the police were being asked not just about the issue of referendum funding, but there were questions being asked about the purchase of individual items.’

Question: how did she know what others were being asked in police interviews?

In a sign of just how unhooked she has become from reality, a tearful Sturgeon decided it would be wise to lament that she was ‘serving a sentence for a crime I did not commit’. 

The woman spends her days on the books circuit. It’s hardly the exercise yard at Attica. If she reckons her life is a prison, the Hay Festival must really have cut back on its green room budget.

If anyone thinks Sturgeon came out of this interview with her public image enhanced, I have a used camper van to sell them.