3 Journos & not a Cluedo between them

It was funny last night watching the mercurial Graham Spiers attempting to minimise the sins of Doncaster and Regan by suggesting the pair had “bodged” things. No actually Graham, they suppressed the fundamental right of innocence until proven guilty, resorted to bullying and intimidation of SFL Chairmen (one even accused them of corruption), indulged in a spot of blackmail, and even defied the courts of the land by imposing a transfer embargo which had been declared unlawful (even with their advantage of making up the rules as they go along) Now Graham I knew you were stupid – I just didn't realise you were THAT stupid.

But overall, despite a stellar performance from Chris Graham, last evenings Tonight programme was a huge disappointment. You see I had tuned in hoping to see something of a “Whodunnit ?”, something along the lines of...  Rev Green in the ballroom with the candlestick.  After all, with three great journalistic sleuths in Thomson, Spiers and English we had an investigative trio capable of giving Enid Blyton's Fabulous Four a run for their money.

And the source of the mystery ?

[98] Meanwhile, BBC Scotland came, by unknown means, into possession of what they described as “dozens of secret emails, letters and documents”, which we understand were the productions before the Tax Tribunal. These formed the basis of a programme entitled “Rangers – The Men Who Sold the Jerseys”, which was broadcast on 23 May 2012. BBC Scotland also published copious material on its website. The published material included a table containing the names of Rangers players, coaches and staff who were beneficiaries of the MGMRT, and how much they received through that trust. It also listed the names of people where the BBC had seen evidence that they received side-letters. This event appears to have been the trigger for more activity in response to the SPL’s request

This little gem appeared in Lord Nimmo's report, and what particularly delighted me about it was the thought of a considerable number of  arses collapsing as they read it. Furthermore it made Spiery's hissy fit at Chris Graham for use of the a word (agenda) all the more strange, as Spiers himself had tweeted about it earlier in the evening.

“Fascinating, too, that Nimmo Smith makes clear distinction between his and Big Tax Case, and also references the BBC quite a bit. #rangers “

Let me spell it out for Mr Spiers.  Colonel Mustard or Rev Green or a Miss Scarlett, has made their  way, furtively, into the the evidence store and removed  productions from the evidence cabinet. They have then copied (or perhaps passed originals) to the BBC who used the stolen or copied evidence in a documentary. This documentary was then presented in such a way that it appears to have been some kind of “trigger”.

I have a thousand questions but let me just start off with three.

(1) Who broke into the evidence cabinet ?

(2) Whose evidence cabinet was it ?

(3) Is it appropriate that a public broadcasting organisation not only receives stolen evidence, but actively uses it in a documentary which is presented before the relative hearing ?