:00:03. > :00:12.Repetitive Flashing Images (e.g. Strobe lighting). It's the end of
:00:12. > :00:17.the most dramatic season in the 140 year history of Rangers. This is a
:00:17. > :00:22.difficult day. For more than a year, this proud football club has been
:00:22. > :00:27.mired in uncertainty, deceit and scandal. And whilst its very
:00:27. > :00:30.survival is under threat, fans no longer know what, or who to believe.
:00:30. > :00:35.And they are angry. If it comes to light that they did
:00:35. > :00:37.tell lies, absolutely. Totally betrayed. They've destroyed or
:00:37. > :00:40.almost destroyed one of the greatest football institutions on
:00:40. > :00:43.the planet. Tonight BBC Scotland Investigates
:00:43. > :00:48.goes in search of the truth behind Rangers' descent into
:00:48. > :00:51.administration and what we reveal is shocking.
:00:51. > :00:54.If the conflict of interest is as it appear to be, then I would
:00:54. > :01:00.expect Duff and Phelps to stand down as administrators, or to be
:01:00. > :01:03.replaced forcibly by some other practitioner.
:01:03. > :01:13.This is a story based on hundreds of secret documents, which name and
:01:13. > :01:14.
:01:14. > :01:20.shame those responsible - from the tax scheme up to the present day.
:01:20. > :01:24.want to speak to them. Off the record. Absolutely not. On camera,
:01:24. > :01:27.on the record. What on earth have they got to be afraid off if they
:01:27. > :01:37.have done nothing wrong? This is a story of hubris, negligence and
:01:37. > :02:08.
:02:08. > :02:12.greed. This is the story of Rangers For Govan mechanic Sammy Paterson,
:02:12. > :02:15.Rangers to him are more than a football club. They are a way of
:02:15. > :02:18.life. Well, according to family legend,
:02:18. > :02:21.my grandfather was supposed to be babysitting me and I was about six
:02:21. > :02:27.months old, and when my grandmother went to work, he shoved me inside
:02:28. > :02:31.his jacket and took me to Ibrox stadium. My grandfather and my
:02:31. > :02:35.Uncle Sammy were massive Rangers fans and they used to take me to
:02:35. > :02:42.the matches and it just progressed from there, you know. As I got old
:02:42. > :02:44.enough to go myself I started doing so. What have the last three months
:02:44. > :02:49.been like for you, living with the uncertainty of administration and
:02:49. > :02:52.possibly liquidation and maybe even worse, maybe even Rangers dying?
:02:53. > :03:01.Absolute hell. I couldn't contemplate, you know, not, there
:03:01. > :03:04.not being a Glasgow Rangers because they're too big to die. There's
:03:04. > :03:11.thousands upon thousands of fans who'd feel the same as I'm feeling
:03:11. > :03:15.- angry, upset. Rangers are on the brink - and
:03:15. > :03:18.Sammy wants answers from those responsible.
:03:18. > :03:21.I'd love to hear them explain themselves to me. And the thousands
:03:21. > :03:25.of other Rangers fans that have been put through this hell, this
:03:25. > :03:29.turmoil because of what's happening with the club. I would love to see
:03:29. > :03:32.them answer, truthfully, but will they? I don't know.
:03:32. > :03:35.Sammy Paterson is one of the many tens of thousands of loyal Rangers
:03:35. > :03:38.fans who turn up here every fortnight to support the team they
:03:38. > :03:41.love and they are demanding to know who's betrayed the club's proud
:03:41. > :03:51.history, who's benefitted at the club's expense and who really has
:03:51. > :03:53.sold the jerseys. I'm setting out to try and answer
:03:53. > :03:59.these questions and discover who's ultimately responsible for the mess
:03:59. > :04:03.Rangers are in. We need to analyse the roles of all
:04:03. > :04:10.the key players. And there are enough of them to fill a football
:04:10. > :04:13.team. Sir David Murray, the man who
:04:13. > :04:15.enabled the famous nine in a row, but whose reputation is now under
:04:15. > :04:17.serious question. Then there's serious question. Then there's
:04:17. > :04:25.Craig Whyte, Sir David's successor and now pantomime villain of the
:04:25. > :04:28.piece. Andrew Ellis, the man who brought Whyte to the table. Gary
:04:28. > :04:31.Withey, Whyte's former lawyer who helped him buy Rangers. Alastair
:04:31. > :04:35.Johnston, chairman of the Rangers board which opposed the Craig Whyte
:04:35. > :04:40.deal. Paul Baxendale-Walker. Millionaire playboy pornographer
:04:40. > :04:45.who brought the infamous tax scheme to Ibrox.
:04:45. > :04:47.Duff and Phelps, appointed by Craig Whyte as administrators.
:04:47. > :04:53.David Grier, also of Duff and Phelps, adviser to Craig Whyte
:04:53. > :04:59.during the negotiations to buy the club. Ticketus - the London finance
:04:59. > :05:04.firm who put up the cash for Whyte. Lloyds Bank of Scotland - calling
:05:04. > :05:11.the shots. The Taxman - claims he's owed a fortune for a tax wheeze
:05:11. > :05:15.operated by Murray Group. The formation is often difficult to
:05:15. > :05:18.detect but most claim to have the best interest of the club at heart.
:05:18. > :05:23.An unusually large subs bench includes the Rangers players and
:05:23. > :05:26.staff who were on EBTs, they'll come on later. And to make sure
:05:26. > :05:32.that the game is played by the rules, the referee will come from
:05:32. > :05:35.rules, the referee will come from the SPL and SFA.
:05:35. > :05:45.But before we start, here's some pre-match entertainment for the
:05:45. > :05:53.
:05:53. > :05:58.So what has brought this proud Scottish institution to the edge
:05:58. > :06:01.and more importantly who's responsible? At the centre of
:06:01. > :06:06.Rangers' problems is an offshore tax scheme used to pay players over
:06:06. > :06:09.ten years. HMRC claim the scheme was tax evasion, and that Rangers
:06:09. > :06:19.could could owe up to �75m. Rangers say they were just exploiting a
:06:19. > :06:25.
:06:25. > :06:29.loophole which up until 2010 was perfectly legitimate.
:06:29. > :06:34.I knew the existed because we had been shareholders for a long time.
:06:34. > :06:36.Nobody should be surprised. We had major accounting firms representing
:06:36. > :06:39.Murray that were retained to represent Murray in dealing with
:06:39. > :06:42.the tax authorities. Again, I think we're entitled to assume that if
:06:42. > :06:45.these accounting firms thought there was no validity to what we
:06:45. > :06:48.were representing, they would have basically said, "We're not going to
:06:49. > :06:54.take this case because you guys are totally wrong."
:06:54. > :06:56.But I wanted to find out who was right. Rangers or the taxman? The
:06:56. > :06:59.BBC has obtained a wealth of information which could provide the
:06:59. > :07:03.answer. Tax schemes can be a bit
:07:03. > :07:07.complicated but this one - is very simple. It's called an Employee
:07:07. > :07:12.simple. It's called an Employee Benefit Trust, or EBT. So how does
:07:12. > :07:15.it work? The company deposits funds in an offshore trust. The trust
:07:15. > :07:18.then divides the money into sub- trusts allocated to individual
:07:18. > :07:23.employees. They could then apply for a loan which apparently they
:07:23. > :07:25.didn't have to pay back. And, Bingo. Neither the company, not the
:07:25. > :07:32.employee pays income tax. Everybody's happy. Except of course,
:07:32. > :07:34.Everybody's happy. Except of course, the taxman.
:07:34. > :07:41.It's not every day in investigations one gets to meet a
:07:41. > :07:48.porn star, but that's exactly what I'm doing today. Not any old porn
:07:48. > :07:54.star. This porn star also doubles as a tax advisor. And he's the tax
:07:54. > :08:04.advisor that brought the EBT scheme to the Murray group, and to Rangers.
:08:04. > :08:18.
:08:18. > :08:23.I'm not entirely sure what to Are you responsible for the
:08:23. > :08:26.calamitous mess that Rangers now find themselves in?
:08:26. > :08:34.No, because, if I build you a bus and it's designed according to
:08:34. > :08:38.specifications, I'm not responsible for who you carry in the bus. I
:08:38. > :08:42.can't stop you driving it into a brick wall or over a cliff and I
:08:42. > :08:46.can't stop you running over an old lady in it but that's not what the
:08:46. > :08:49.bus is for, and that's the key, isn't it? What is a Rangers fan to
:08:49. > :08:52.think then when he sees you on this programme, a struck-off lawyer, a
:08:52. > :08:55.pornographer who has been the person who has advised the Murray
:08:55. > :09:02.Group on the very scheme that has driven their club to extinction?
:09:02. > :09:09.What are they to think about that? Well, porn doesn't make you blind.
:09:09. > :09:12.Running EBTs badly does, as for that one. I'm sure lots of them buy
:09:12. > :09:16.my stuff anyway. I mean, it's very entertaining, great value for the
:09:16. > :09:19.price. Not exactly a family pack but you know... And the problem as
:09:19. > :09:28.we all know is how they implemented the structure, how they drove the
:09:28. > :09:31.bus. But then again it's only a problem if HMRC win. If HMRC don't
:09:31. > :09:34.win, then hopefully you're going to come back and say, Paul, all the
:09:34. > :09:44.Rangers fans in this country want to thank you because you single-
:09:44. > :09:47.
:09:48. > :09:50.handedly saved Rangers FC �50m. You're a hero.
:09:50. > :09:56.So if Paul Baxendale-Walker says the scheme can be perfectly legal,
:09:56. > :10:01.why is the taxman chasing Rangers? I've developed a few trusted
:10:01. > :10:07.sources who might be able to answer that question. One of them, in
:10:07. > :10:10.particular, had a treasure trove of documents he wanted me to have. To
:10:10. > :10:17.ensure secrecy, we both travelled to a covert location outside
:10:17. > :10:19.Scotland. But what he's promised to do today
:10:19. > :10:25.is let me see documentation, Tribunal documentation that hasn't
:10:25. > :10:28.been seen by any other journalist so far. And it will, he says, lay
:10:28. > :10:35.bare the role that Rangers played in the EBT scheme, which has
:10:35. > :10:38.contributed to the mess they're in It was worth the trip. I was now
:10:38. > :10:43.inside the tax scheme which threatened to put Rangers out of
:10:43. > :10:45.business. I had been given access to some of
:10:45. > :10:51.the most sensitive, highly-guarded documents you can imagine in this
:10:51. > :10:54.story. With so many files, letters and e-mails to process, we decided
:10:54. > :11:04.to set up a data room which will provide answers to the questions
:11:04. > :11:04.
:11:04. > :11:09.that so many Scottish football fans have been asking for the past year.
:11:09. > :11:12.The first thing the documents reveal is who benefitted most.
:11:13. > :11:18.Coming in at number 1, was not the highest paid player at Rangers but
:11:18. > :11:22.Sir David Murray. Total loans for sub trust number 1, Sir David
:11:22. > :11:32.Murray, �6.3m. Rangers and the Murray Group contributed funds to
:11:32. > :11:35.the trust with Sir David taking the biggest single payment.
:11:35. > :11:37.Sir David Murray declined to be interviewed but told the BBC: "I
:11:37. > :11:46.personally have never received any payment from any trust which
:11:46. > :11:55.involved contributions coming from By 2010, Rangers had contributed
:11:55. > :11:59.more than �47m to the trust. Footballers, 63. Rangers staff, 24.
:11:59. > :12:08.Murray Group employees, 24. Total Murray Group Remuneration sub
:12:08. > :12:11.trusts, 111. So If I thought the man behind sub
:12:11. > :12:15.trust number 1 was a shock, sub trust number 2 was even more
:12:15. > :12:23.surprising. And involved a manager who'd left the club ten years
:12:23. > :12:27.previously. Graeme Souness, sub trust number 2 - �30,000.
:12:27. > :12:29.It was Graeme Souness who led the Rangers revolution and set them on
:12:29. > :12:36.the road to their famous the road to their famous
:12:36. > :12:39.championship run of 9 in a row. He left the club in 1991. Ten years
:12:39. > :12:42.later Mr Souness received �30,000 from the trust - so what was that
:12:42. > :12:45.for? He was managing Blackburn Rovers at
:12:46. > :12:55.the time, and just five weeks after asking for the cash, Mr Souness
:12:56. > :12:59.
:13:00. > :13:02.completed the signing of Turkish that HMRC suspected this cash could
:13:03. > :13:06.have been an illegal payment in relation to the transfer, but found
:13:06. > :13:09.no additional documentation to verify it.
:13:09. > :13:13.Sir David Murray says our information is wholly inaccurate.
:13:13. > :13:21.Mr Souness did not respond to our allegations.
:13:21. > :13:29.allegations. It's Saturday, May the 5th, and the
:13:29. > :13:38.last home game of the season. His club is in limbo. If a new owner is
:13:38. > :13:40.not found, his club will go bust. The fans are not ready to let
:13:40. > :13:50.Rangers die, and have already raised �500k for a fighting fund.
:13:50. > :14:01.
:14:01. > :14:05.It's a far cry from the heady days It was absolutely incredible,
:14:05. > :14:10.especially in the Advocaat years, if you like. They brought in Andre
:14:10. > :14:12.Flo for, was it twelve million? Which was just insane. You had the
:14:12. > :14:17.likes of Numan, the Dutch contingent, and they were just
:14:17. > :14:20.something else to watch as well but no-one gave the money a thought. I
:14:20. > :14:23.thought the regime at the time, David Murray obviously had been a
:14:23. > :14:29.very, very successful businessman, would have had all this expenditure
:14:29. > :14:32.in control because he's a businessman. It's as simple as that.
:14:32. > :14:41.40% of players between 2001 and 2010 had their salaries topped up
:14:41. > :14:45.by EBTs, sometimes as much as half paid through the trust.
:14:46. > :14:49.But it wasn't just the players. Directors were getting in on the
:14:49. > :14:54.Directors were getting in on the act too. Ex-chairman John McLelland
:14:54. > :15:01.- �200,000 over five years. Ex- finance director Douglas Odam -
:15:01. > :15:09.�120,000 over three years. Ex-chief executive Martin Bain. Receives
:15:09. > :15:16.�100,000 loan in 2003. Total payments over 5 years, �250,000.
:15:16. > :15:19.Ex-director Campbell Ogilvie - �95,000 over five years.
:15:19. > :15:23.The evidence we've seen reveals who The evidence we've seen reveals who
:15:23. > :15:28.was benefitting and by how much but was it legal? Sir David Murray
:15:28. > :15:32.thinks so. "We believe we had a legitimate
:15:32. > :15:35.scheme. We never hid the fact and we believe it was set up. It was
:15:35. > :15:45.non-contractual. It was discretionary so we believe we
:15:45. > :15:48.
:15:48. > :15:50.worked the rules. For it to be legal the payments have to be
:15:50. > :15:53.genuine loans and made at the discretion of the offshore trusts.
:15:53. > :15:56.This means the recipients cannot expect the money as part of their
:15:56. > :16:00.regular salary and neither Rangers nor the Murray group should have
:16:00. > :16:03.any say over who gets the money or when. In a letter to HMRC in 2008
:16:03. > :16:07.the Murray group insisted they were playing by the rules: "There is no
:16:07. > :16:09.trigger for the chain of events that led to an employee being told
:16:09. > :16:12.that that they can apply for a loan that that they can apply for a loan
:16:12. > :16:14.from the trustthe company has no control over the funds in the
:16:14. > :16:24.trust." Our evidence suggests Rangers were not playing by the
:16:24. > :16:26.Rangers were not playing by the rules. Let's look at two examples.
:16:26. > :16:30.When Ronald Waterreus was negotiating his contract in 2005
:16:30. > :16:33.his agent questioned the tax scheme. He was told by the club using the
:16:33. > :16:40.trust was "in the interests of Ronald as it enables him to receive
:16:40. > :16:43.funds tax free." "I can confirm that we will not pay these amounts
:16:43. > :16:47.to Ronald unless they are made through the use of the remuneration
:16:47. > :16:50.trust." So, not only were the payments not
:16:50. > :16:54.discretionary but the company insisted this was the only way he
:16:54. > :17:02.would get the money. Ronald Waterreus - two trust payments
:17:02. > :17:05.totalling �510,000. Then there's the case of Sasa Papac.
:17:05. > :17:11.In November 2008, the finance controller at Rangers noted a drop
:17:11. > :17:12.in Papac's weekly salary and in Papac's weekly salary and
:17:13. > :17:17.queried this with a colleague. "..note apparent drop in weekly and
:17:17. > :17:23.no appearances, if I am correct? Is there a remuneration trust on the
:17:23. > :17:25.side?" The reply came simply: "Yes."
:17:25. > :17:29.So it seems that tax-free trust payments were being regularly used
:17:29. > :17:32.as a substitute for salary. And that's why HMRC is gunning for
:17:32. > :17:35.Rangers. Rangers.
:17:35. > :17:38.The case against Rangers has yet to be decided by a tax tribunal. They
:17:38. > :17:41.could face a charge of more than �50m.
:17:41. > :17:44.They could be cleared. But whatever the result, many Scottish football
:17:44. > :17:52.fans believe the club derived from this tax scheme an unfair financial
:17:52. > :17:57.advantage over their rivals for During these ten seasons years
:17:57. > :18:00.Rangers won 13 trophies. But some of those could be at risk if
:18:00. > :18:04.Rangers are found to have lied to the Scottish Premier League about
:18:04. > :18:11.how they were paying their players. Once again - our investigation
:18:11. > :18:17.could provide some vital clues. Clubs must declare every penny a
:18:17. > :18:19.player earns from playing football. player earns from playing football.
:18:19. > :18:22.SFA Rule 12.3 states: "All payments, whether made by the club or
:18:22. > :18:28.otherwise must be fully recorded within the relevant written
:18:28. > :18:31.agreement." The charge against Rangers is that
:18:31. > :18:34.they flouted this rule by declaring the players official salaries, but
:18:34. > :18:40.having secret, or side contracts with players, promising them tax-
:18:40. > :18:45.free cash from the EBT scheme. This has been strongly denied by
:18:45. > :18:48.the man whose company implemented the tax scheme at Rangers.
:18:48. > :18:51.There's categorically no two There's categorically no two
:18:51. > :18:55.contracts running at Rangers. But evidence to be exposed tonight
:18:55. > :18:58.for the first time casts serious doubt on that claim. According to
:18:58. > :19:05.documents seen by the BBC, no fewer than 53 players had side letters,
:19:05. > :19:08.giving undertakings to fund their subtrusts with cash. We can reveal
:19:08. > :19:18.the two top-earning side letter recipients were Barry Ferguson - �
:19:18. > :19:20.
:19:20. > :19:23.2.5m over five years, Stefan Klos - �2.5m over six years. These were
:19:23. > :19:29.payments agreed on top of their normal salaries and not declared to
:19:29. > :19:39.the SFA. But it wasn't just players who had side letters. Alex McLeish
:19:39. > :19:41.
:19:41. > :19:45.- �1.7m over five years. Paul le We asked everyone in the EBT scheme
:19:45. > :19:48.featured in this programme about their use of the trust. None would
:19:48. > :19:54.tell us anything about their EBTs, except one director, who we're
:19:54. > :20:01.getting to in a moment. We also asked Sir David Murray who
:20:01. > :20:06.said the scheme had been legitimate, and was known to HMRC and the SFA.
:20:07. > :20:10.The SPL is investigating the issue of side contracts at Rangers. One
:20:10. > :20:13.person they might want to talk to is just down the corridor at
:20:13. > :20:18.Hampden - the president of the Scottish Football Association.
:20:18. > :20:22.Remember Campbell Ogilvie? He would know about the EBT scheme, and
:20:22. > :20:27.admitted he got �95,000 from it. But what did he know about side
:20:27. > :20:29.contracts? Mr Ogilvie declined to be
:20:29. > :20:37.Mr Ogilvie declined to be interviewed. But in a statement, he
:20:37. > :20:40.said: "I was not aware of which players received EBTs and, having
:20:40. > :20:43.been advised that the scheme was being operated in accordance with
:20:43. > :20:45.the regulations, I therefore did not raise any aspect of this with
:20:45. > :20:47.the Scottish FA." The case against Rangers is not
:20:47. > :20:50.The case against Rangers is not just that they could have broken
:20:50. > :20:55.tax law but that they were using the scheme pay players that they
:20:55. > :20:59.would have been otherwise unable to afford.
:20:59. > :21:01.Whether the tax case finds against the club is yet to be decided, and
:21:01. > :21:03.it's certain the football authorities will be watching this
:21:03. > :21:13.programme carefully. But the fans, they're watching their club
:21:13. > :21:23.collapse around them. Well, Sammy, how did it go? Nothing
:21:23. > :21:25.
:21:25. > :21:28.each. Didn't go out with the bang we hoped. The crowd were behind the
:21:28. > :21:34.team towards the end, but the realisation is dawning that this
:21:34. > :21:37.might be the last time we see Glasgow Rangers at Ibrox.
:21:37. > :21:41.Sammy believed Sir David Murray when he said he would always look
:21:41. > :21:44.after the best interests of the club. Now Sammy wants answers.
:21:44. > :21:49.Why did he let it go ahead? Because it's crippled Glasgow Rangers in
:21:49. > :21:57.every, every manner. Champions League football, possibly being
:21:57. > :22:00.liquidated. I would ask him if you knew this was going to come, why
:22:00. > :22:03.did you do it? Why didn't you just play by the rules?
:22:03. > :22:07.To answers those questions, we have to go back in time, and try to
:22:07. > :22:10.understand what drives Sir David Murray.
:22:10. > :22:14.At his height of his success, he was one of Scotland's richest and
:22:14. > :22:16.most powerful men. He rubbed shoulders with Britain's most
:22:17. > :22:26.influential, from Scotland's First Minister to the future Prime
:22:26. > :22:36.Made a knight of the realm in 2007, he boasted a personal fortune of
:22:36. > :22:40.
:22:40. > :22:47.If I can find out what drove him to be a success, many I can find out
:22:47. > :22:56.where it went wrong. I started by going to meet someone who knew
:22:56. > :23:02.David Murray as he was starting out. He has a very good range of
:23:02. > :23:09.business skills, very good traitor, -- trader. He is also a very
:23:09. > :23:13.careful thinker. He was obviously very bright, he
:23:13. > :23:16.was very quick. He was the kind of guy who could buy something today
:23:16. > :23:20.for a pound and sell it tomorrow for �1.30 and then move onto the
:23:20. > :23:24.next deal. But the other thing he had, and I saw this on several
:23:24. > :23:28.occasions while I knew him, was that he had vision. He could, and
:23:28. > :23:31.had the patience to develop something on a much bigger scale.
:23:31. > :23:37.Aged just 25, Murray had been a keen rugby player, and was involved
:23:37. > :23:40.in a tragic road accident, losing both of his legs.
:23:40. > :23:46.It seemed to me the accident kind of galvanised him into wanting make
:23:46. > :23:50.a success of his business life. I think he would always have wanted
:23:50. > :23:53.to have made it. It seemed to be a catalyst to make a success. But I
:23:53. > :23:56.think most other people would, on occasions, have dropped their guard,
:23:56. > :24:06.have said, "It's hellish not being able to walk, it's awful," and he
:24:06. > :24:12.
:24:12. > :24:16.never did that. By the mid-1970s he had marked
:24:16. > :24:26.himself out as the number one metals trader in Britain. But he
:24:26. > :24:33.
:24:33. > :24:43.would set his set his sights on He'd been to Monaco, a metals
:24:43. > :24:43.
:24:43. > :24:47.convention. And he told me about meeting Joanna Lumley there. Joanna
:24:47. > :24:52.Lumley's in her 60s but she would have been a lovely 25-year-old then.
:24:52. > :24:55.And he told me that he had a crack at her. I mean, I think he lost. He
:24:55. > :24:58.didn't, there wasn't, he was honest enough to say. But the idea of a
:24:58. > :25:05.26-year-old Scottish metal trader with no legs having a crack at
:25:05. > :25:08.Joanna Lumley... It tells you what a confident, sure guy he was. And
:25:09. > :25:12.honest that he said, "And it didn't work." She rebuffed him. That's,
:25:12. > :25:16.that's his story. Maybe a humble metals trader was
:25:16. > :25:20.not the kind of title he needed to woo the likes of Joanna Lumley. He
:25:20. > :25:27.needed something else - it was time to move up to the big league. And
:25:27. > :25:33.that meant buying a football club. In 1988, David Murray decided he
:25:34. > :25:43.wanted Rangers. He was no longer just a metal trader, he was now the
:25:43. > :25:47.owner of one of the most important But this audacious move could hold
:25:47. > :25:51.a clue for what was to come - because it wasn't his own money
:25:51. > :25:54.that he put on the line. In a single phone call to the Bank
:25:54. > :26:02.of Scotland he borrowed the �6m he needed to buy the Ibrox club, and
:26:02. > :26:05.changed his status in the world and Rangers' place in history.
:26:05. > :26:15.We didn't expect what was coming, you know, with David Murray and the
:26:15. > :26:18.
:26:18. > :26:21.Souness revolution and it was just phenomenal when that kicked off.
:26:21. > :26:24.Rangers have won the Premier Division Championship. It was like
:26:24. > :26:34.we could get anyone we wanted without the top players in Europe
:26:34. > :26:46.
:26:46. > :26:50.or wherever, we could get them. And to see that kind of talent at
:26:50. > :26:54.Ibrox was just something else, you know, it was class.
:26:54. > :26:58.Murray was a heralded figure, a euphoric figure. I remember banners
:26:58. > :27:01.at Ibrox, "The Royal Bank of Murray" and it was great. The
:27:01. > :27:04.Rangers fans revelled in this wealth being lavished on the club
:27:04. > :27:14.and the famous phrase, for every fiver Celtic spend, we'll spend a
:27:14. > :27:20.
:27:20. > :27:23.Nine in a row. That was just fabulous, that was some of the
:27:23. > :27:27.greatest times of my life as a supporter of Rangers Football Club.
:27:27. > :27:28.Fantastic, you know, and no one could touch us, no one could get
:27:28. > :27:31.near us. Everything about his relationship
:27:31. > :27:35.with Rangers in that first decade was so sweet for him, so ego
:27:35. > :27:45.nourishing, made him feel a big man, a real player in industry and in
:27:45. > :27:55.
:27:55. > :27:58.society and in sport. And it was like a perfect marriage for him.
:27:58. > :28:04.So David Murray had what he wanted, Rangers had what they wanted and
:28:04. > :28:09.the fans were in blue heaven. But how much of this success was built
:28:09. > :28:12.on solid foundations? This is Roger Isaacs, he's one of the UK's
:28:12. > :28:14.leading forensic accountants and insolvency experts, and we've asked
:28:14. > :28:20.him to help us analyse David Murray's business empire and how
:28:20. > :28:23.its fortunes can be related to Rangers.
:28:23. > :28:27.If you look at the accounts for Murray International Holdings for
:28:27. > :28:34.the year to 31st of January, 1999, it's got net debt at the start of
:28:34. > :28:37.the year of �69 million, at the end of the year �57 million. It then
:28:37. > :28:47.embarks on a period of rapid expansion where it borrows to
:28:47. > :28:51.
:28:51. > :28:55.acquire assets and properties. That Bank of Scotland was very keen to
:28:55. > :28:58.grow its corporate lending book. It had almost reached the stage where
:28:58. > :29:01.the bank seemed to believe that David Murray could walk on water.
:29:01. > :29:06.You know, they would lend money for almost anything that he seemed to
:29:06. > :29:11.want it for. Rangers were coming good on the
:29:11. > :29:14.pitch again, and had just won their first of three titles in a row. But
:29:14. > :29:22.that was hiding the true financial picture lurking in Murray's
:29:22. > :29:29.And having looked at these accounts over the past weeks, what was your
:29:29. > :29:32.opinion on the scale of the growth of the debt over the decades?
:29:32. > :29:37.easy to judge with the benefit of hindsight. The question is when
:29:37. > :29:40.does responsible risk-taking become reckless gambling? But there's no
:29:40. > :29:43.doubt that by borrowing to the extent that this group borrowed,
:29:43. > :29:49.the group was embarking on a strategy which by any definition
:29:49. > :29:59.was high-risk. But Murray thought the high risks
:29:59. > :30:03.
:30:03. > :30:08.were worth taking. If you don't buy In Rangers case that was an
:30:08. > :30:10.expensive ticket - in 2004 they owed the bank more than �70m.
:30:10. > :30:17.How could a club like Rangers, within the financial constraints of
:30:17. > :30:21.the SPL, possibly cope with that amount of net debt? So, it became
:30:21. > :30:25.obvious to me that something was going badly wrong in the running of
:30:25. > :30:35.Rangers. And my final red card issued by Sir David Murray to me
:30:35. > :30:36.
:30:36. > :30:40.was when I accused him of doing financial vandalism to Rangers.
:30:40. > :30:42.About 2004 or 2005. My editor phoned me up said, "Look, David
:30:42. > :30:45.Murray is complaining about you fairly vehemently." He loved
:30:45. > :30:50.throwing his weight around and he had considerable weight,
:30:50. > :30:53.considerable clout, chairman of Rangers. You could argue one of the
:30:53. > :31:00.biggest and most influential people in Scottish society is the chairman
:31:00. > :31:03.Spiers was banished by Murray. his words would prove prophetic.
:31:03. > :31:07.Rangers were on the ropes and needed a major cash injection. Sir
:31:07. > :31:16.David turned to the public to raise �50m - but it raised only �1m - so
:31:16. > :31:19.what about the rest? Any other amounts of money over and above
:31:19. > :31:22.that, the Rangers Club will be supported by the Murray Group
:31:22. > :31:26.because the Murray Group indirectly owns the shares of Rangers and it's
:31:26. > :31:29.our job to fund the club. So Murray says that his company is
:31:29. > :31:33.always going to ride to the rescue of Rangers. But where does Murray
:31:33. > :31:36.Group's money come from? It looks as if the majority of that 50m came
:31:36. > :31:42.from one of the Murray Group companies which in turn borrowed
:31:42. > :31:46.that money from the bank. The money then flowed into Rangers and was
:31:46. > :31:52.used to repay the bank so from what I can see, the bank lent the money
:31:52. > :31:55.with one hand and took it back with the other.
:31:55. > :32:01.We've asked you to look at the accounts of Rangers and Murray
:32:01. > :32:04.since 1999. Sir David has always said he has been a benefactor to
:32:04. > :32:07.the club. Have you seen any evidence
:32:07. > :32:11.whatsoever that Sir David Murray has put any of his own money into
:32:11. > :32:13.Rangers? No, all the evidence I've seen
:32:13. > :32:16.suggests that the money that's been invested in Rangers has come
:32:16. > :32:26.directly or indirectly from the bank.
:32:26. > :32:28.
:32:28. > :32:36.But what happens to Rangers when the banks stop lending? After the
:32:36. > :32:38.crash, Lloyds bought HBOS, Murray's bankers.
:32:38. > :32:42.They were absolutely horrified because they'd been hoodwinked. I
:32:42. > :32:45.believe the board of HBOS had not revealed the true extent of the
:32:45. > :32:52.exposure to toxic assets including the Murray ones, so they bought the
:32:52. > :32:54.bank under false pretences. And when they did finally have full
:32:54. > :32:57.sight of the balance sheet from January '09 onwards, they were
:32:57. > :33:06.absolutely appalled and they realised they'd bought a complete
:33:06. > :33:10.basket case. So how much trouble was Sir David
:33:10. > :33:13.Murray now in? So if you look at the accounts to
:33:13. > :33:19.the year to June 2009, the net debt's increased to just under a
:33:19. > :33:24.billion pounds, at �942m. The bank suddenly was no longer Sir
:33:24. > :33:32.David's best friend, and now took a firm grip of his failing empire.
:33:32. > :33:35.High on the bank's list was Rangers. Just one last question, Walter.
:33:35. > :33:37.We've been talking about this all day. Is what's happening in the
:33:37. > :33:43.boardroom or not happening in the boardroom affecting the dressing
:33:43. > :33:47.room? There are things that are outwith everyone's control. David
:33:47. > :33:51.Murray has been fantastic over these 20 years. He's had to step
:33:51. > :33:54.away and now the banks have taken over the running of the club.
:33:54. > :33:56.Sir David Murray had gone from metals trader to one of the most
:33:56. > :34:01.powerful men in Scotland who counted the country's establishment
:34:01. > :34:09.club as his calling card. But his empire was on its knees, the
:34:09. > :34:12.Rangers fans had had enough and the bank was calling the shots.
:34:12. > :34:16.Sir David Murray's ambition and risk-taking left him with a debt of
:34:16. > :34:26.almost a billion pounds, no longer able to turn to the bank to fund
:34:26. > :34:27.
:34:27. > :34:30.Rangers excesses. Under pressure to sell the club, Sir David Murray
:34:30. > :34:36.left Rangers hopelessly exposed and easy prey for the sharks that were
:34:36. > :34:39.circling. And so began the next chapter in
:34:39. > :34:43.the downfall of a giant - as the for-sale signs went up at Ibrox.
:34:43. > :34:53.If somebody wants to come in and do a better job than me and wants to
:34:53. > :34:56.
:34:56. > :34:59.take a serious interest, then I'm happy to talk to them. But that's
:34:59. > :35:01.going to take serious money as well. Enter Cockney football fixer Andrew
:35:01. > :35:05.Ellis. He thought he knew the very man to save Rangers.
:35:05. > :35:10.I was introduced to Craig as a guy who was very, very, was reportedly
:35:10. > :35:16.very, very wealthy. He was a Rangers fan. We got on, we went out,
:35:16. > :35:20.we socialised and we sort of became friends. He said, "Well, I want to
:35:20. > :35:23.do it. I'm desperate to do the Rangers deal." He said, "You know,
:35:23. > :35:31.me and my family, you know, we're Scottish." I looked at it. I
:35:31. > :35:33.thought, "It makes sense." There was another reason for
:35:33. > :35:35.Ellis's confidence. Whyte apparently claimed there was a
:35:36. > :35:39.super-rich investor. One of the reasons that I switched
:35:39. > :35:41.to run with Craig, was Prince Albert of Monaco was going to be
:35:41. > :35:44.Craig's investor. Prince Albert of Monaco was going to invest?
:35:45. > :35:48.Yeah. That's what Craig Whyte told you? Yeah. We sat there, we talked
:35:48. > :35:51.about it and I said, "Look, you've got to be very careful about that
:35:51. > :35:54.name." He said, "Because he doesn't want to be involved, doesn't want
:35:55. > :35:58.to be named to it. Just keeping the name very, very quiet, he will
:35:58. > :36:01.invest." So I said, "Are you, are you sure?" He said, "Look, I see
:36:01. > :36:08.him every weekend in Monaco." He said, "He's excited about getting
:36:08. > :36:11.involved." Craig Whyte says Ellis's claims are nonsense, so we called
:36:11. > :36:13.Prince Albert's office. His spokeswoman went away to check,
:36:13. > :36:16.and, slightly puzzled, said this: "His Royal Highness doesn't know Mr
:36:16. > :36:19.Craig Whyte. His Royal Highness has never had the intention to invest
:36:19. > :36:23.in this club, Rangers FC." Should you have done more to check
:36:23. > :36:26.out this guy? I don't see what more I could have done. I'm not a
:36:26. > :36:28.private investigator. I'm, I'm not a solicitor. You know, we're told
:36:28. > :36:31.the funds are available. While David Murray motivation to
:36:31. > :36:34.own Rangers might have been a place in Scotland's high society, what
:36:34. > :36:39.were Craig Whyte's? He was paraded as a Motherwell-born billionaire
:36:39. > :36:43.and a big Rangers fan. But dig a little deeper and he was a venture
:36:43. > :36:48.capitalist, with a history of asset stripping. But at the time, most,
:36:48. > :36:51.including the mainstream media, did not bother to look past the surface.
:36:51. > :36:56.On the 6th of May, Craig Whyte walked into Ibrox to a hero's
:36:56. > :37:01.welcome. The deal had cost him �18m - which was to clear the club's
:37:01. > :37:04.existing bank debt. The Rangers fans were right into
:37:04. > :37:09.the arrival of Craig Whyte, partly because, I dare say, they'd been
:37:09. > :37:11.misled a bit by press. The Record and other papers routinely referred
:37:11. > :37:15.to Craig Whyte as being a billionaire. There's a story that
:37:15. > :37:19.you can find if you click on the Internet. You'll find, you know,
:37:19. > :37:22.billionaire Craig Whyte is going to do this and going to do that. He's,
:37:22. > :37:26.he's going to provide a cache of money for Rangers managers to
:37:26. > :37:30.invest in. Absolutely preposterous stuff. Uncritical, gullible stuff.
:37:30. > :37:33.Craig Whyte has been exposed in the media before. But tonight we can
:37:33. > :37:37.tell you even more about how Craig Whyte should never have been able
:37:37. > :37:40.to get his hands on Rangers in the first place.
:37:40. > :37:44.This is the key document - a "proof of funds" letter that formed the
:37:44. > :37:49.basis of the deal. It states that a UK financial institution can
:37:49. > :37:54.confirm that Whyte's company: "Liberty Capital Ltd has available
:37:54. > :37:57.to it up to �33m for the acquisition of RFC." And that's it.
:37:57. > :38:01.No proof, it doesn't say where the money's coming from or even what
:38:01. > :38:05.the financial institution is. Seems a bit vague.
:38:05. > :38:08.And I'm not the only who thinks this. David Roberts from London
:38:08. > :38:17.Solicitors Olswang had originally been lined up by Ellis to broker
:38:17. > :38:21.the deal. Initially, there was just an e-mail that was suggested we
:38:21. > :38:24.sent, the genesis of which is, is the basis of that letter. I mean.
:38:24. > :38:27.Blind Freddie would realise that that's not going to be acceptable.
:38:27. > :38:31.Show us the letter that underpins your proof of funds. And we weren't
:38:31. > :38:34.given access to the letter. There was total refusal. We weren't even
:38:34. > :38:37.given the name of the institution. Despite Whyte's reluctance to tell
:38:37. > :38:44.anybody, we can reveal the identity of that institution, Merchant House
:38:44. > :38:50.Group. So why was he so keen to keep them a secret? Maybe because
:38:50. > :38:54.he was on the board of the company. But in reality, what chance would
:38:54. > :38:57.this company have had of raising �33m for the takeover of Rangers?
:38:57. > :39:00.Almost certainly none, it seems - its shares were suspended by the
:39:00. > :39:07.Stock Exchange last month amidst concerns they were running out of
:39:07. > :39:13.working capital. So we asked Craig Whyte and his now ex-lawyer Gary
:39:13. > :39:16.Withey about the proof of funds letter. Mr Whyte said: "The proof
:39:16. > :39:21.of funds letter provided, reflected my ability to provide funds from
:39:21. > :39:26.both my own and third party resources." Mr Withey, who wrote
:39:26. > :39:29.the letter, replied: "The term 'proof of funds' is a technical
:39:29. > :39:32.term and this was only a comfort letter given after my previous firm
:39:32. > :39:34.Collyer-Bristow had itself received comfort from Merchant House Group
:39:34. > :39:44.that Mr Whyte had readily realisable assets in excess of �33
:39:44. > :39:47.But if the guy who wrote it says it's not even a real proof of funds
:39:47. > :39:52.letter, how come it was it was good enough for someone as famously
:39:52. > :39:55.shrewd as Sir David Murray? I said that I would only sell it to
:39:55. > :40:00.someone who had the best interest of the club. And the information
:40:00. > :40:02.that I had at the time, then I think that I did so. But as it
:40:03. > :40:06.materialised thereafter I was duped. I think the shareholders were, the
:40:06. > :40:09.media were. And the information that has come out since then has
:40:10. > :40:14.proven that it was a mistake that I made. And I accept my
:40:14. > :40:19.responsibility. I got it wrong. I've been very critical of David
:40:19. > :40:22.Murray for years but I believe him. I think he was duped. He was duped
:40:22. > :40:26.partly I think because he was desperate. He wanted rid of Rangers.
:40:26. > :40:31.He was fed up with it. He'd long since given up the family dynasty
:40:31. > :40:35.idea. I take what David Murray says at face value. I think he was duped
:40:35. > :40:39.by Whyte. David Murray's not the sort of person to be duped by
:40:39. > :40:43.anyone. I think David would have spotted him a mile off. So yes, the
:40:43. > :40:46.answer is, it is surprising that he didn't see Craig Whyte coming. On
:40:46. > :40:50.the other hand it may have been such a flea bite in relation to the
:40:50. > :41:00.totality of the situation. He just said, "Thank God somebody's paying
:41:00. > :41:09.
:41:09. > :41:12.18 million to the bank. I can close Did Sir David Murray do enough to
:41:12. > :41:16.preserve the club's 140-year timeline before he walked away? For
:41:16. > :41:18.the next part of our investigation its back to the data room. We've
:41:19. > :41:24.obtained nearly 100 leaked emails between Whyte, his takeover team
:41:24. > :41:27.and the Murray Group. They give a fascinating insight into the
:41:27. > :41:37.takeover negotiations and provide some real clues about the men sold
:41:37. > :41:39.
:41:39. > :41:42.the jerseys. It's time to introduce a new character, David Grier.
:41:42. > :41:46.was employed by Whyte to help smooth the transaction - that meant
:41:46. > :41:49.negotiating with the Murray group. If I move on from Rangers then I
:41:50. > :41:54.will leave it in the hands of people who have the best interests
:41:54. > :41:58.of the club. But was Sir David Murray so keen to sell the club
:41:58. > :42:03.that he was willing to abandon the notion of due diligence and give a
:42:03. > :42:06.prospective buyer a helping hand? In this e-mail from Whyte to Grier
:42:06. > :42:09.it looks as if his team is given inside information from Murray
:42:09. > :42:16.Group's Mike McGill about how to get the Rangers board onside but
:42:16. > :42:19.Whyte's no intention of sticking to his promises. "I have forwarded the
:42:19. > :42:22.attached working capital projections to Mike McGill. This is
:42:22. > :42:25.not the plan we are going to work to, as it is clearly not
:42:25. > :42:31.sustainable but according to Mike it is what the independent
:42:31. > :42:34.committee expect to see." Sir David Murray told the BBC that Mr McGill:
:42:34. > :42:42."Discharged his role as finance director in a perfectly ordinary
:42:42. > :42:45.David Grier helped get the deal done, and we'll hear more about
:42:46. > :42:55.Grier later. And at first the fans were happy - it didn't hurt that
:42:56. > :43:18.
:43:18. > :43:22.What did you think when Craig Whyte walked into Ibrox that day? I
:43:22. > :43:25.wanted to give the guy a chance because he's on paper or in the
:43:25. > :43:28.newspapers. He seemed to have the right credentials. Fans care about
:43:28. > :43:31.trophies. But what was on Craig Whyte's mind? Remember he had a
:43:31. > :43:34.history of asset stripping - did he intend to take this business model
:43:34. > :43:37.to Ibrox? Behind the scenes, some clues were emerging and would lead
:43:37. > :43:47.me all the way to Surrey to investigate the curious case of the
:43:47. > :43:53.missing �250,000. This is the home of the non-league minnows Banstead
:43:53. > :43:56.Athletic. It could hardly be further from the atmosphere and
:43:56. > :43:58.glamour of Ibrox Stadium. But apparently, Craig Whyte had decided
:43:58. > :44:08.to give this tiny amateur club �250,000 from Rangers' client
:44:08. > :44:11.account. The problem is nobody here knows anything about it. The
:44:11. > :44:16.chairman of the club has told the BBC that he's never seen the money
:44:16. > :44:26.- nor does he expect to. So what was that cash really for and where
:44:26. > :44:31.
:44:31. > :44:34.did it end up? The trail would take me to one of Craig Whyte's old pals
:44:34. > :44:37.- Aidan Earley, a twice bankrupted born-again Christian. There are
:44:37. > :44:47.some serious questions Rangers fans might want put to AE and that's
:44:47. > :44:59.
:44:59. > :45:02.what I intend to do. -- to Aiden Earley. To be fair to Aidan Earley,
:45:02. > :45:12.he just spent 20 mins at the door with me. He categorically denies
:45:12. > :45:15.doing anything wrong. He was insistent that he had not
:45:15. > :45:18.personally received this money, but every time I asked I asked him
:45:18. > :45:22.where the money is, "Just to put the Rangers and me at ease - just
:45:22. > :45:25.tell me where the money is," he just would not tell me. Aidan
:45:26. > :45:28.Earley later provided a statement. "The �250k that you refer to did
:45:29. > :45:33.not come from Rangers but because of Craig's involvement with RFC it
:45:33. > :45:37.was conceded that Rangers could have an interest. It is none of
:45:37. > :45:41.anyone's business how the money was deployed. I did not receive a penny,
:45:41. > :45:50.nor did Craig. In the politest possible way, I would very much
:45:50. > :45:53.like never to hear from you again in the context of Rangers." We may
:45:53. > :46:03.never know where that money went. And in an email, Craig Whyte told
:46:03. > :46:08.
:46:08. > :46:12.us: "I am not aware of any payment From what I could gather, it was
:46:12. > :46:16.his own money from his own businesses and I thought he was
:46:16. > :46:22.putting up money up front from his own labours. Did it worry you that
:46:22. > :46:26.he would not tell us exactly how he had made his money? At businesses,
:46:26. > :46:31.yes, but he would not say exactly where these so-called millions were
:46:31. > :46:36.coming from? Smoke and mirrors, using choice phrases to reassure us
:46:36. > :46:42.without telling us where his money came from but the new enough of a
:46:42. > :46:46.hint to think it was all above Rangers fans were still giving
:46:46. > :46:49.Craig Whyte the benefit of the doubt. The turning point, though,
:46:49. > :46:53.was the revelation that he had mortgaged off three years of season
:46:53. > :46:56.ticket money to fund the purchase of the club. Finance firm Ticketus,
:46:56. > :47:03.based here at the Old Bailey in London, were flung into the
:47:03. > :47:06.spotlight over what was a very curious business decision indeed.
:47:07. > :47:09.This, to Rangers fans, was the ultimate act of selling the jerseys.
:47:10. > :47:13.He didn't just mislead fans about where the money to fund the
:47:13. > :47:17.purchase came from - he'd sliced off a huge chunk of future revenue
:47:17. > :47:20.- potentially cutting off the lifeline of the club. The public
:47:20. > :47:23.reaction to Craig Whyte, it definitely was going to change when
:47:23. > :47:26.he was going to do something to the club and I got that totally. So,
:47:26. > :47:30.selling jerseys, but more than anything else, coming out and being
:47:30. > :47:40.proved to be a blatant liar, saying that it was his money that took out
:47:40. > :47:43.the loan was huge. At the end of the day, what he's done is stolen
:47:43. > :47:45.my money and thousands of other Rangers fans' money for the next
:47:46. > :47:48.four years with our season ticket books. Even the most blinkered
:47:49. > :47:52.Rangers fans who wanted to believe in Craig Whyte, the white knight,
:47:52. > :48:02.the man with wealth off the radar, even that group of Rangers fans had
:48:02. > :48:02.
:48:02. > :48:12.to concede really bad news is The bad news came on Valentine's
:48:12. > :48:13.
:48:13. > :48:23.Day. What we have done today, it is the most practical way to
:48:23. > :48:29.
:48:29. > :48:39.safeguard... A respected the manager... We will
:48:39. > :48:41.
:48:41. > :48:44.It's sad, shocking, makes me angry, you know, because it is 140 years
:48:44. > :48:54.of history, Scottish history, an institution, one of the biggest
:48:54. > :48:54.
:48:54. > :48:57.names in football on the planet and we're reduced to this. Craig was
:48:57. > :49:02.not the white knight Rangers fans had hoped for, plunging the club
:49:02. > :49:05.into administration with a trail of debt. The fate of Rangers was put
:49:05. > :49:15.in the hands of the administrators and we're about to reveal what
:49:15. > :49:18.
:49:18. > :49:21.every Rangers fan needs to know This administration will be carried
:49:21. > :49:28.out under the most rigorous public scrutiny and it will be conducted
:49:28. > :49:31.to the highest professional Craig Whyte had been determined to
:49:31. > :49:34.have his choice of administrator appointed but given what we know
:49:34. > :49:37.about him, should that have raised alarm bells? Well, remember David
:49:37. > :49:42.Grier, the guy who helped Whyte buy Rangers? He is a senior partner at
:49:42. > :49:52.Duff and Phelps, which used to be called MCR. They were on the
:49:52. > :50:01.
:50:01. > :50:04.defence almost immediately. It is not unusual, in my view. The Duff
:50:04. > :50:08.and Phelps say Grier only played a limited role in the takeover but
:50:08. > :50:12.here side by side with Whyte on the day he took up the reins at Ibrox.
:50:12. > :50:15.I wanted to ask our insolvency expert how important it was for a
:50:15. > :50:17.company to have clean hands before they take up an appointment?
:50:17. > :50:19.insolvency practitioner should ever accept an appointment in
:50:19. > :50:24.circumstances where there is a conflict of interest or even could
:50:24. > :50:26.be seen to be a conflict of interest. What is the test?
:50:26. > :50:36.utmost honesty. Utmost professionalism, utmost good faith,
:50:36. > :50:39.Hang on a minute. Duff and Phelps man Grier was involved with Whyte's
:50:39. > :50:42.takeover. I wanted to know whether that involvement went as far as
:50:42. > :50:46.helping to put together or even having knowledge of the Ticketus
:50:46. > :50:49.transaction. Let's put it simply - if you were owed money by Rangers
:50:49. > :50:53.or if you are a Rangers fan, would you trust administrators who had
:50:53. > :51:03.been involved with the very deal that had put the club's future on
:51:03. > :51:06.
:51:06. > :51:09.the line? I asked them. In a briefing, Paul Clark told me he
:51:09. > :51:13.knew nothing about how Ticketus had funded the deal until four months
:51:13. > :51:21.after Whyte bought the club. To double check, I then phoned David
:51:21. > :51:24.Grier, who said he'd only found out about the Ticketus deal in August.
:51:24. > :51:27.The BBC has been given a series of emails involving David Grier and
:51:27. > :51:37.the Ticketus deal which expose Grier's initial claims to have no
:51:37. > :51:47.
:51:47. > :51:50.knowledge of the Ticketus This is an email from Gary Withey
:51:50. > :51:53.to Whyte and David Grier sent on 19 April 2011, two weeks before the
:51:53. > :51:57.deal is completed. It is entitled "Ticketus Draft" and concerns the
:51:57. > :52:01.completion of the takeover. Note the statement about when Whyte's
:52:01. > :52:04.company takes control. "The assignation documents will be
:52:04. > :52:08.released by the bank and the Ticketus agreements will become
:52:08. > :52:11.unconditional." Well, on the face of it this email seems to suggest
:52:11. > :52:14.that David Grier knew about the Ticketus arrangement, and therefore,
:52:14. > :52:16.in those circumstances, given that he was a partner of Duff and Phelps,
:52:16. > :52:19.I'm surprised that that involvement wasn't firstly disclosed, and
:52:20. > :52:22.secondly doesn't give rise to the sort of conflict of interest that I
:52:22. > :52:32.would have expected would have precluded Duff and Phelps from
:52:32. > :52:33.
:52:33. > :52:36.accepting the appointment as administrators. But there's more.
:52:36. > :52:38.Duff and Phelps have launched a legal action at the High Court in
:52:38. > :52:48.London, claiming Craig Whyte and his lawyers, Collyer-Bristow,
:52:48. > :52:49.
:52:49. > :52:54.engaged in a conspiracy to defraud the club of �25m. Bear case is
:52:54. > :52:58.based on a claim that Craig Whyte and Gary Withey deliberately misled
:52:58. > :53:03.the rages independent committee at a meeting on 24th April, less than
:53:03. > :53:05.two weeks before the deal was signed. The court papers state they
:53:05. > :53:08.knew the offer was a false representation - laymans terms,
:53:08. > :53:18.fraudulent - because the money of course was not coming from Whyte,
:53:18. > :53:25.
:53:25. > :53:28.but from Ticketus, and Whyte's team: -- so Duff and Phelps sake
:53:28. > :53:31.that Whyte's team... "Took no steps to rectify the situation and
:53:31. > :53:39.allowed the committee to proceed to consider the merits of the
:53:39. > :53:43.takeover." We've obtained the minutes from that very meeting on
:53:43. > :53:48.the 24th April. Take a close look at who was there, alongside Whyte
:53:48. > :53:51.and Withey. None other than David Grier. As the emails have shown,
:53:51. > :53:56.Grier appeared to know how the deal was being funded and therefore also
:53:56. > :54:01."took no steps to rectify" the situation. Maybe Duff and Phelps
:54:01. > :54:04.are going to sue themselves next. So this suggests that David Grier
:54:04. > :54:07.was in attendance at the very meeting in relation to which his
:54:07. > :54:17.partners are now taking legal action which, if true, is one of
:54:17. > :54:25.
:54:25. > :54:33.the starkest conflicts of interest I've ever seen. It was time to call
:54:33. > :54:36.Duff and Phelps. Their PR man said that despite what they told me
:54:36. > :54:39.previously, they did know about a Ticketus deal - but not the
:54:39. > :54:43.Ticketus deal that was used to buy the club. Last Friday, David Grier
:54:43. > :54:47.and Paul Clark were coming to be interviewed to tell me how wrong I
:54:47. > :54:50.was. We were all set. Then I got a call from the PR man. So here I am,
:54:50. > :54:55.at the BBC, half an hour after our scheduled start time for our
:54:55. > :54:58.interview. We've gone and got a crew for the day, because you
:54:58. > :55:02.phoned me up at eight o'clock this morning, first thing this morning,
:55:02. > :55:07.and told me that you would bring your guys in to do an interview.
:55:07. > :55:10.They had nothing to hide. You were going to bring these guys in and
:55:10. > :55:12.tell me, the BBC, and the thousands of Rangers fans, why they've got
:55:12. > :55:20.nothing to worry about, about their continued position as
:55:20. > :55:23.administrators. So here I am, here I am waiting for you. Do you know
:55:23. > :55:28.what that looks like, Ramsay? You're only prepared to talk to me
:55:28. > :55:31.off the record. They're in charge of the future of one of Scotland's
:55:31. > :55:33.greatest institutions. We have extremely serious allegations which
:55:33. > :55:36.relate to their integrity and their continued position as
:55:36. > :55:46.administrators of Rangers, and all you can offer is an off-the-record
:55:46. > :55:47.
:55:47. > :55:52.briefing. Ramsay, that is not good enough. We're going round in
:55:52. > :55:55.circles. But I trust that you will have a go with your clients in the
:55:55. > :55:58.next hour to see whether they might in fact, since they're here, be
:55:58. > :56:08.prepared to come and sit down with me and explain to Scotland and
:56:08. > :56:11.Rangers what they've been up to. So they might yet come. Good,
:56:11. > :56:14.because I didn't just believe that Grier knew about the Ticketus deal
:56:14. > :56:24.before it happened - I had evidence which showed he was involved in
:56:24. > :56:27.
:56:27. > :56:29.sending them an invoice. In these emails, he has been asked to raise
:56:29. > :56:33.an invoice to Ticketus. Grier replies: "Will arrange to get the
:56:33. > :56:36.invoice to you ASAP." So he's writing invoices in June for a deal
:56:36. > :56:40.he says he knows nothing about until August. If the conflict of
:56:40. > :56:43.interest is as it appears to be, then I would expect Duff and Phelps
:56:43. > :56:53.to stand down as administrators, or to be replaced forcibly by some
:56:53. > :56:57.other practitioner. They didn't come. But David Grier provided this
:56:57. > :56:59.statement: "I categorically deny that at the time of the Craig Whyte
:56:59. > :57:04.takeover of Rangers, I had any knowledge that funds from Ticketus
:57:04. > :57:06.were being used to acquire the club. However, we were party to
:57:06. > :57:16.discussions regarding Ticketus as a recognised source of short-term
:57:16. > :57:22.
:57:22. > :57:26.In a separate statement, Paul Clark said: "I thought that MCR became
:57:26. > :57:30.aware of the full scale of Ticketus funding in July or August. I gave
:57:30. > :57:33.an honest answer to the best of my recollection as I had not been
:57:33. > :57:35.closely involved in the Rangers takeover work at the time. There is
:57:35. > :57:38.a world of difference between knowing that Ticketus was a
:57:38. > :57:41.potential source of working capital funding for the club and knowing
:57:41. > :57:50.that funding from ticket sales had been effectively used to purchase
:57:51. > :57:53.Our evidence paints a murky picture of a tax scheme which lined the
:57:53. > :57:57.pockets of dozens of players and directors with millions of tax-free
:57:57. > :58:01.pounds. Sir David Murray failed to safeguard the future of Rangers.
:58:01. > :58:04.His successor, Craig Whyte, brought shame on its 140-year history. Duff
:58:04. > :58:10.and Phelps were supposed to be the men who saved the jerseys - but
:58:10. > :58:14.they were part of the cabal who sold them. Charles Green is the