THE Crown Office is to further pursue a case against an MP cleared of kicking a pro-independence campaigner because the word “Glasgow” was not included in court papers outlining the charge.
Labour MP Marie Rimmer had been accused of assaulting Patricia McLeish on the day of the Scottish independence referendum at the entrance to Shettleston community centre, Amulree Street, then being used as a polling station, and kicking her on the body.
The 68-year-old, a former leader of St Helens Council in Merseyside, denied the charge and appeared at Glasgow Sheriff Court yesterday for the trial.
The case started briefly before being halted when the prosecutor noticed that the word “Glasgow” was not included on the document known as a complaint outlining the charge.
Now the Crown Office has said it intends to re-raise the case today to avoid any delays that may occur by going through an appeal process.
Depute Fiscal Adele MacDonald said that her research on the internet showed that there was only one Shettleston in Scotland, and that is the area in the east end of Glasgow.
However, Liam Ewing, defending Ms Rimmer, asked Sheriff Brian Adair to dismiss the complaint.
He said: “The locus of a complaint is one of the fundamentals of a summary complaint.”
After a 40-minute adjournment, Sheriff Adair ruled that the case was dismissed due to the lack of location in the charge.
He said: “I determine that the complaint is fundamentally nil and is dismissed.”
He told Ms Rimmer: “You’re free to go.”
The Crown Office are expected to oppose the sheriff’s conclusion and believe the case did not need to be dismissed.
A Crown Office spokesman said: “We note the decision of the court to dismiss the case. We intend re-raising the case tomorrow.”
The initial charge read: “On September 18, 2014 at the entrance to Shettleston community centre, Amulree Street, then being used as a polling station you did assault Patricia McLeish and did kick her on the body.”
Earlier the court heard from first witness Ms McLeish, 51, a local government officer, who described how Ms Rimmer allegedly approached her while she was handing out Yes campaign leaflets outside Shettleston community centre.
She told the court that Ms Rimmer, who was wearing a red and yellow t-shirt and appeared to be from the Better Together campaign, twice came up very close into her face.
On the second occasion, she said Ms Rimmer came into her face in a “right intimidating manner” and asked “are you a shop steward?”
Ms Rimmer then allegedly asked where Miss McLeish worked and said that she herself was leader of St Helens Council, the court heard.
At the time Mrs Rimmer was a Labour candidate and is now MP for St Helens South and Whiston.
She was deposed by Cllr Barrie Grunewald – himself a Scot – as leader of St Helens Council in 2013.
Miss McLeish said: “At that I disbelieved it because I thought the manner she had approached me and her tone of voice was not akin to something like a leader of a council.”
She alleged that later Ms Rimmer, who received a CBE in the 2005 Birthday Honours for services to local government, came up and kicked her.
The witness told the court: “She came into my face again, right up and invaded my personal space, really close, something that normally doesn’t happen. Then she kicked me on the left shin.”
Asked whether it could have been an accident, she replied: “Definitely not because she smirked after it happened and the manner leading up to the event, it was not an accident.”
She said she then reported the incident to the presiding officer.
Mr Ewing did not have the opportunity to cross-examine Miss McLeish as the case then collapsed.
A spokesman for Ms Rimmer said that she would not be making any comment on the matter.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article