« Reply #4601 on: November 14, 2023, 09:47:08 PM »
THREATS PROBE LAWYER IS CONVICTED ROBBER - 29th April 2012 by Russell Findlay
“A lawyer probed by police over threats made to his boss has been revealed as a violent ex con who was jailed for robbery.
Scott Forbes, 46, is accused of sending menacing texts to Graham Mann, 43.
After police were called in it emerged that Forbes has previous convictions for robbery, assault and possessing an offensive weapon.
Stirling University graduate Forbes was a trainee with Mann Solicitors but Mann refused to sign off the first year of his two year traineeship.
A series of texts to Mann's mobile from several numbers followed that decision.
One stated that "ruin would be met with ruin" and described Mann's legal colleague Jim Kelly as "your fat partner".
Another thought to be a reference to the refusal to sign off Forbes's first year read: "Now for the last time, shut the f*** up and move on and you have until next week to do the right thing."
Mann reported the alleged threats to Central Scotland Police, who are investigating.
Meanwhile, Kelly has raised a civil action against Forbes at Stirling Sheriff Court.
Sheriff William Gilchrist granted an interim interdict which bans Forbes from contacting or threatening Kelly and making false statements about him.
The bust up led to revelations about Forbes's convictions.
They include a five year jail sentence, later reduced to 30 months, for robbery in 1992. Others included an assault and robbery conviction in 1989 and possession of an offensive weapon in 2001.
A Law Society of Scotland committee voted by majority to grant his entrance certificate into the profession in 2010 despite his past.
A source said: "It's quite right that people should be given the chance of rehabilitation but is it really appropriate that a violent ex con should be considered an appropriate person to become a lawyer?
"Members of the public would have been completely oblivious about this man's criminality."
Another text received by Mann threatened that information would be passed to police, HM Revenue & Customs, the Scottish Legal Aid Board and Law Society.
It stated: "Listen you, will you not take a telling? Your emails copied, phone downloaded, files copied. Where you like us to start, police, taxman, legal aid or Society?"
The writ lodged by Kelly accused Forbes of having an "extensive network of criminal associates" and that he is "not a fit and proper person" to be a solicitor.
Forbes, who lives in Stirling, said: "Be careful what you print because Mr Kelly is prone to exaggeration."
Central Scotland Police said: "We are investigating allegations under the Communications Act involving a 46 year old man."
The Law Society said: "We have rigorous procedures which are applied to those entering the profession. Each case is decided on its own merits."
Allegations made by Scott Forbes re: Jim Kelly (reproduced for evidential, educational & research purposes only)
“
Solicitor Jim Kelly said that the family’s lawyer, Nigel Beaumont, should have strongly advised against it, but he was aware that when the family looked for advice, Nigel was often inebriated and incapable. He would call up the Mitchell's late at night after drinking, talking nonsense. He was known to tell some of Edinburgh's criminals that Mitchell was 100% innocent while telling others that Luke Mitchell was a “duplicitous little b........”. Yet Sandra Lean said Corinne Mitchell had issues with alcohol?
“
Around 2011, when we were looking into the case for a fresh appeal, we were contacted by a solicitor who had worked on the case, Jim Kelly. Graham Mann and I met Kelly at a basement cafe in Carlton Place in Glasgow. I admired his honesty when he said he had been like others and had put his nose in the trough and had been part of an “experiment” with dogs at the locus. He went on to describe how himself, a solicitor from Beaumont and Co., Donald Findlay QC, Findlay’s partner Jane Farquharson, and another junior counsel, staged a reconstruction with dogs of all breeds, to see how they would react. This was all to be filmed. Mr Kelly stated, “the prosecution’s case was that Mitchell must have committed the murder because he found the body, even though he argued that he had been taken there by his dog”. Mr Kelly was involved in this reconstruction, as he supplied some the working dogs
“The Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal has since struck Jim Kelly’s name from the Roll of Solicitors in Scotland for unrelated professional misconduct complaints.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2023, 09:56:07 PM by Nicholas »
Logged
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation
