• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Scottish MP Arrested over Covid Rule Breach

Status
Not open for further replies.

takno

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
5,092
That sounds a remarkably vague offense. I hope there are very strict rules about what is permitted under that, because it sounds like it could be used for almost anything that the authorities wanted to frown upon.
A lot of Scottish offences have rather grand and huffy-sounding names. In terms of being a bit needlessly wide-ranging they're usually equivalent to English offences, and generally only get used when there isn't another appropriate offence. I am certainly not a lawyer, but this sounds to me like it basically means "She hasn't done anything particularly charge-worthy but we've been told to get her up before the beak"
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
16,142
Location
0036
It seems to be a step-up from the similarly wide-ranging Scots law offence of “breach of the peace”. “Culpable and reckless conduct” examples I have found elsewhere include chucking road cones off an overbridge and having unprotected sex whilst knowing oneself to be HIV-positive.
 

oldman

Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
1,027
Culpable and reckless conduct is a common law offence and is used for conduct potentially harmful to other people.

It is a bit elastic. Many years ago a shopkeeper was convicted for selling small amounts of glue for children to sniff, although at the time there was no legal age-limit.
 

Randomer

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2017
Messages
317
Now I don't necessarily agree with some of the lockdown rules or the enforcement thereof but in this case I have sympathy whatsoever. In my mind a huge difference exists between conduct when you potentially could be asymptomatically spreading the virus (i.e. what most of the health protection regulations are meant to prevent) and doing something knowing you are infected with the virus for your own convenience which is what happened here. Travelling on public transport whilst knowing you have a positive test is not a potential risk of spreading the virus it is a defined one.

My knowledge of Scottish law is very limited, essentially that common law offences are used far more, but reading the applicable Scottish laws (Coronavirus (Scotland) Act 2020) and the various regulations I don't see a statute she could be charged under and there have been convictions for knowingly exposing others to a risk of infection from other viruses under the common law offence charged. Generally Scottish common law charges are far more common but the laws themselves are defined by previous court cases so the procurator fiscal (who decides on the charges not the police) can't just magic a charge out of thin air.

A lot of Scottish offences have rather grand and huffy-sounding names.

Including my favourite obscure but still chargeable common law offence hamesucken. Despite Scots law not having statutory offences for loads of common England & Wales ones it is one of the few Scottish offences that doesn't have an equivalent in England & Wales.

Personally I quite like the former Scottish approach of letting offences develop via court rulings rather than knee jerk reactions creating dozens or hundreds of new offences every parliament.
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,631
Location
Gateway to the South West
In the general case, what is someone supposed to do if they are away from home when they get or think they might be at risk of having the illness? How do they get home and isolate if they aren't in walking distance?

Note, I am not defending any particular individual (and all I know of this story is from a skim-read of the BBC article linked early on), just a genuine question about what one should do.
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
2,710
In the general case, what is someone supposed to do if they are away from home when they get or think they might be at risk of having the illness? How do they get home and isolate if they aren't in walking distance?

Note, I am not defending any particular individual (and all I know of this story is from a skim-read of the BBC article linked early on), just a genuine question about what one should do.

I assume by away from home you mean staying in some accommodation that is not your normal residence. As far as I'm aware the advice is you should stay where you are. Arrange for a test at the location where you are and try and isolate yourself from others living there for the length of time necessary. (Which varies on whether you have symptoms or it's a close contact and what the results of a test are).
I can't find appropriate guidance on gov.uk, I suspect the lockdown may have superseded it as you shouldn't be staying elsewhere. But What you need to do if you fall ill with COVID-19 symptoms while travelling - East Devon matches what I thought and I can only assume they've taken their advice from the UK government.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,420
Location
Ely
In the general case, what is someone supposed to do if they are away from home when they get or think they might be at risk of having the illness? How do they get home and isolate if they aren't in walking distance?

I saw some LNER posters on March 23rd - I recall at Retford in particular - that said if you had symptoms and needed to travel home, it was ok to get the train, but try to keep as far away from other people as possible.

Though I think we're quite a number of iterations of advice on since that!
 

pdeaves

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2014
Messages
5,631
Location
Gateway to the South West
I assume by away from home you mean staying in some accommodation that is not your normal residence.
That, or any other reason (e.g. gone to a specialist hospital for something unrelated to covid, or gone to another town for a legitimate work-related purpose, and then felt ill while out. Maybe even was staying in accommodation and the landlord has decided to throw in the towel and please leave so I can shut up shop).
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,296
Location
West of Andover
I'm not surprised she hasn't resigned.

Originally part of the 2015 SNP tsunami she lost her seat in 2017 and won it back in 2019.

The lady is 60 and will no doubt get a good pay out if she can hang on till the next Election.

She doesn't appear to be a high flyer academically or workwise and this is probably the first time in her life she has been exposed to a gilded experience.

Once you've had your nose in the trough ( especially late in life) it must be difficult to give it all up - whatever party you represent.

She won't give up the salary of a MP that easily, similar to other MPs (the MP who won Clegg's seat in Sheffield in 2017 springs to mind)
 

Butts

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
11,330
Location
Stirlingshire
She won't give up the salary of a MP that easily, similar to other MPs (the MP who won Clegg's seat in Sheffield in 2017 springs to mind)

Or the severance payment !!!

Has anyone asked her how she justified calling for Dominic Cummins resignation at the time of his "moment of madness" but not following suit in light of her own exposure ?
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
2,710
An MP has pled guilty to breaching Covid rules after travelling by train despite knowing she had the virus.

Margaret Ferrier spoke in parliament in September 2020 while awaiting the results of a Covid test.

She then took the train home to Glasgow after being told she had tested positive.

Ferrier admitted that she had culpably and recklessly exposed the public to the virus ahead of a trial at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

She was elected as an SNP MP but lost the whip and now sits as an independent.
Took her long enough. Hopefully her constituents will soon get the opportunity to show how they feel about her behaviour.
 

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
4,957

Acfb

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2018
Messages
395
I would love to see a by election in Rutherglen and Hamilton West (which would likely be a narrow Labour gain) but I doubt there will be an opportunity for recall as she surely won't get more than a suspended sentence/very large fine?
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,037
What gets me, in addition to the returning home after a positive result thing, is the travelling out from Scotland to London. It's been a while but I thought, at that time, that if you thought you had Covid you were supposed to self-isolate pending a formal positive test result.
 

greatkingrat

Established Member
Joined
20 Jan 2011
Messages
2,782
What gets me, in addition to the returning home after a positive result thing, is the travelling out from Scotland to London. It's been a while but I thought, at that time, that if you thought you had Covid you were supposed to self-isolate pending a formal positive test result.

I think isolating if you had symptoms was only guidance, you were only legally required to isolate if you had a positive test.
 

Huntergreed

Established Member
Associate Staff
Events Co-ordinator
Joined
16 Jan 2016
Messages
3,023
Location
Dumfries
I think isolating if you had symptoms was only guidance, you were only legally required to isolate if you had a positive test.
In Scotland - isolation was never law (which is why I’m so surprised this is being pursued!) - it was always merely guidance
 

JamesT

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2015
Messages
2,710
In Scotland - isolation was never law (which is why I’m so surprised this is being pursued!) - it was always merely guidance
The news reports say she's pled guilty to 'Culpable and reckless conduct'. That doesn't appear to be a Covid-specific offence. I'm assuming the reasoning is that failing to follow the guidance is evidence of such conduct.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,420
Location
Ely
The news reports say she's pled guilty to 'Culpable and reckless conduct'. That doesn't appear to be a Covid-specific offence. I'm assuming the reasoning is that failing to follow the guidance is evidence of such conduct.

As I said earlier in the thread, that such a vague offense can be used in such a way is very troubling, whatever one's opinions of this specific case.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,786
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
As I said earlier in the thread, that such a vague offense can be used in such a way is very troubling, whatever one's opinions of this specific case.

Indeed.

With the focus on “public health” at the time, you could find a whole list of things which someone would find reckless.

That said, it was wrong of her to get on a train knowing she was infected.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,037
Indeed.

With the focus on “public health” at the time, you could find a whole list of things which someone would find reckless.

That said, it was wrong of her to get on a train knowing she was infected.
She was wrong to get on the outward train suspecting she was infected, wrong to go to the pub and wrong to go to church. She did all of those things after she had taken a test. Given the instructions the rest of us were expected to adhere to she set an appalling example. If she was so worried about 'self-isolating on a London hotel room for two weeks' then the most sensible course of action would have been to stay in Glasgow until the test result was known. Perhaps it was a world class contribution but I suspect the world would not have stopped turning had she not made that speech in the house!

From the BBC story linked above:
The MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West took a Covid test on Saturday 26 September because she had a "tickly throat".
While awaiting her results, she went to church on the Sunday and gave a reading to the congregation, and later spent more than two hours in a bar in Prestwick, Ayrshire.
She then travelled to London by train - which had 183 passengers on board - on the Monday and spoke in the Commons later that day before finding out a short time later that she had tested positive for the virus.
Ferrier decided to get a train back to Glasgow the following day, fearing she would have to self-isolate in a London hotel room for two weeks.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,738
Location
Redcar
She's been sentenced to 270 hours of community service:

Margaret Ferrier: MP who exposed public to Covid must do unpaid work​

An MP who travelled by train despite knowing she had Covid has been ordered to carry out 270 hours of community service.

Margaret Ferrier spoke in parliament in September 2020 while awaiting the results of a Covid test.
She then took the train home to Glasgow after being told she had tested positive.

Ferrier had previously pled guilty to culpably and recklessly exposing the public to the virus.

The charge stated that she had failed to self-isolate and had "exposed people to risk of infection, illness and death".

Prosecutors told Glasgow Sheriff Court that her conduct had shown a "reckless disregard of public safety".

Ferrier was an SNP MP at the time of the offence, but subsequently lost the party whip and has been sitting in the Commons as an independent. She has so far resisted calls to stand down.

Ordering Ferrier to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work within the next nine months, Sheriff Principal Craig Turnbull said she had "wilfully disregarded guidance" by not self-isolating after her test.

He added: "Your behaviour was deliberate and extended over a number of days. The gravity of harm that could have resulted from your actions could have been significant."

The MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West took a Covid test on Saturday 26 September 2020 because she had a "slight cough", but did not believe she would be positive.

....


We have decided to keep the thread locked for the time being as there doesn't appear to be anything worth discussing following this however we are aware people may not have seen the update regarding the outcome of the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top