Subject: RE: GMST
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 10:06:24 +0100

Good Morning Nick
I hope you don’t feel I’m being forward by sending you this E-Mail. Obviously it was myself that put the figures together and despite the claims of your fellow committee members I can assure you that I didn’t steal £2890 from The Trust. 
This is the latest figure my lawyer has now received which will be the THIRD different amount stated since I left the police station in which both parties agreed on my original figures which show a deficit of just over £1400.
I’m prepared to take a gamble, the reason I say gamble is because you are on a committee of men that’s wanting to take me to court and at the moment both parties are communicating though lawyers. I’m therefore offering to meet with you and go throuigh the figures with you, explaining what I can.
Unfortunately tomorrow I’m unavailable as I’m on the social committee in my work and I’ve organised a family day on The Tall Ship, with 80 people in attendance.
I’m available anytime on Sunday, morning or afternoon, if you are.
Alternatively I can meet you next week sometime but Monday and Wednesday I’m unavailable.
It’s imperative that our meeting is kept strictly underwraps and under no circumstances can any of the trio know we’re meeting.
Please remember Nick I asked several times to meet with these guys and all my requests were refused, so if they find out we have a meeting planned they will pull the plug on it, however I think we’d both agree that it’d be better to get round a table and talk openly rather than through lawyers.
I look forward to your response.

Jim Gallacher received no response.

Instead Nick Robinson explained in a telephone call to Mortonjag that it might be ‘better if he didn’t meet Mr Gallacher’ as such a meeting ‘might compromise his position’.

As he had agreed to analyse all available information ‘independently of the old committee’, before reporting back to Paul Gill and Chris McCorkindale, (with whom Mortonjag was also in contact), that came as a ‘bit of a bombshell’!

Re: Change of email address

Ernie Newall 

“McCorkindale, Chris” 

Thanks Chris. If Paul doesn’t provide you with the relevant stuff, let me know by tomorrow afternoon and I’ll forward copies….
If justice is to be served on behalf of the Membership, it is MANDATORY that the new Trust Committee members INSIST that they are provided with every scrap of documentation which was made available to the Police, along with EVERY relevant email, and ALL legal correspondence. 

I ask you to put that to your Committee colleagues, as the critical issue which has facilitated deliberate procrastination is that people have been fed only selected information….  
Read out of context ‘THE EMAIL’ shows Jim Gallacher offering to ‘repay’ a substantial sum of money, and those who are unwilling to/incapable of thinking objectively have extrapolated from that a ‘guilty’ verdict.
Taken in the context of a series of emails and of the prevalent circumstances and pressures on him at the time, it is nothing more than a rhetorical question!… 
….You are legally qualified Chris. Please INSIST that you and your colleagues are shown ALL of the correspondence….
Keep in touch.

Back to Nick’s ‘phone call and the clear understanding had been that Paul, Nick, and Chris (together) planned to ‘sort out the ‘Stars’ business internally’ using new information to be supplied by Jim Gallacher, and questions which Mortonjag and Paul would together formulate for the forthcoming committee meeting.

Nick’s reluctance to meet Jim, the one person able to clarify the ‘grey areas’ of the Stars event, came as a surprise, and the concept of ‘conflicting interests’ immediately sprung to Mortonjag’s mind, but Nick had seemed genuinely anxious to have the matter resolved, and giving him the benefit of doubt, Mortonjag ‘accepted’ his position. 

Jim Gallacher too was surprised and disappointed. He had offered repeatedly to explain his side of events to Stuart Duncan and Co. and had consistently been ‘blanked’ by them. It smelled of ‘deja vu’ but, like Mortonjag, he decided to trust Nick’s judgement and the requested information and figures were duly supplied.

Proactive and amicable contact was maintained both with Nick and with Paul Gill – right up until the committee meeting on June 24th 2010 – as the following emails demonstrate.

From: mairidalglish []
Sent: 09 June 2010 09:55
To: Paul Gill
Subject: It’s all gone very quiet!

Hi Paul, apart from the ongoing crap on the message board, everything seems to have gone very quiet on the ‘negotiation’ front. I’m trying to be a ‘good boy’ on the blog ON THE BASIS THAT PROGRESS IS BEING MADE INTERNALLY. It’s difficult when I read some of the stuff. NewTon is FAR from the only offender.

I’m sure you know that I met Nick and gave him some stuff to chew over. That was four days ago and I’ve had no response so far. I imagine I’ll hear in due course.

It has now been suggested by a third party (NOT a Trust member) that you were discussing our meeting recently ‘in a crowded pub’! The same person suggests that the scheduled Trust Committee meeting on 24th will NOT take place.

I don’t for one minute believe that you have done anything wrong, but it just shows the lengths some folk will go to in an ever desperate attempt to block the truth coming out.

Anyway – what’s happening at your end?


From: Paul Gill []
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:50 AM
To: mairidalglish
Cc: ‘’
Subject: RE: It’s all gone very quiet!

HI Ernie,

I am well thanks, how are you and the good lady?

With regards to talking openly in a pub, that is utter rubbish whoever has said that.  I don’t even discuss any of this with my own missus let alone in a pub.  Everyone, including J Gallacher knew that I was out on Saturday with the likes of Sean, Alan, Jim Long etc so it is no surprise at all that someone would “suggest” that I was talking about it.  The truth is – each time the subject came up, I refused point blank to discuss anything in detail and attempted to move the conversation on.  Sure, people broached the subject, people made the odd wise crack but I can assure all who are involved in the skulduggery we talked about at our meeting, NOTHING was discussed in any detail whatsoever, certainly not on my part….

….As you can probably tell Ernie, I am starting to become extremely wary of the whole debacle.  Again, I am having my integrity challenged by certain people who seem hell bent on dishing dirt on many folk.  The same people who dish the dirt whilst hiding behind keyboards and aliases.  This is not what I joined the Trust for.  Quite simply, this is someone else’s shit that I am being lumbered with and I can well do without it….

….Is anybody trying to block the truth coming out?  I honestly do not know and quite probably will never know until I am party to all the evidence on both sides of the fence, in my opinion the sooner that day arrives the better.  Then and ONLY THEN will I ever be in a position to make an INFORMED decision.

My biggest personal concern Ernie in all of this and it is purely a selfish one is that I am being dragged into what I believe to be a pot of lies, corruption and as I have mentioned downright bloody skulduggery.  I am now being accused of “fraternising with the enemy” and it is not even my bloody war.  People forget that I am actually one of the victims in all of this, I paid £500 out of my own pocket to sponsor an event that went tits up!  Is it any wonder at all that I on a number of occasions now have come close to shoving two fingers up to the lot of it and walking away I ask?

Rant over.

Yours extremely frustrated


From: mairi []
Sent: 09 June 2010 12:15
To: Paul Gill
Subject: RE: It’s all gone very quiet!

Cheers for all of that Paul. We are well, and despite your current frustrations, I hope you and your family are also….

 ….As you know Paul, I have now gone to INORDINATE lengths to have the truth exposed. Without the message board questions, and subsequently my blog, I believe that the whole thing would have conveniently been laid to rest with JG branded as a thief in Inverclyde, and never able to vindicate himself.

My agenda has ALWAYS been to expose the truth and to let the Trust move on. What is still being said day and daily on about me is very offensive, and you and others now KNOW where I really stand. 

In that respect, another who has shown his true colours is ‘Bible John’ Black. I emailed him WAY back imagining that he might be the very man to mediate, but he has bought completely into what he was fed….

….I said from the outset of our discussions that the new Committee members are entitled to see ALL the evidence. That should include correspondence with the lawyer. I also said from the outset that those three have NO mandate from the membership for behaving as they have done and are continuing to do.

I CAN’T STOP THEM ALL BY MYSELF PAUL. As a Trust member I’m doing my level best to interact with the open minded Committee members and to ask for help. PLEASE help the membership. That’s your remit. Don’t cow tow to three out of fourteen elected members….

….There is NO Court case pending. The Trust’s last lawyer’s letter was FAR LESS bullish than the first – merely including a ‘spreadsheet’ which wouldn’t have done credit to a ten year old, and ’inviting proposals’ from JG to ‘repay’ a sum which (unless I’m totally befuddled) is overstated by £1000 even by THEIR calculations (and £1000 more than they asked for first time around).

There is ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL REASON for the matter not being discussed between Trust Committee members and Trust members.

Time for the ‘Newbies’ to ‘grow baws’ Paul – PLEASE don’t let them drag you down any further. You must all carefully consider your duties to the MEMBERSHIP.

As to Sean’s current condition. I would never wish illness on anybody. I say that sincerely.



Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:40 AM


I have reviewed the position as far as I can with the limited information I have. I have asked questions and await answers.  Once I have my answers, I am not sure what I can give you as I have a duty of confidentiality….

….The plus side for Jim Gallagher of me looking at it is that if it does seem to me that there is no real evidence, I will move on that inside the trust

That comment, of course applies to the whole trust board as the level of competence to run such an event was, to say the least, disappointing.

One comment I would make is that I am not sure whether your reference to Blair and Bryden was meant literally.  If it was, then that is wrong as they have clearly stated they are acting for GMST in correspondence and have taken their instructions from the chairman of that organisation. 

If you are implying that despite purporting to act for the trust, in reality they are acting for Stuart and Co, at this stage I have more sympathy with that view.

I am in a difficult position with this and I hope that you appreciate that.  On one hand, our chairman is absolutely confident that he has sufficient evidence to support the position.  On the other, there is your position and the points you make.  I am a board member and bound by confidentiality and I cannot breach that obligation no matter how tempting.

Finally, on a lighter note, if you would like the rest of that Acker/Humph album, let me know and I will send you it.


Unfortunately though, it was beginning to sound as though Nick was tying himself in knots. Having agreed to review the evidence independently of the ‘old guard’, and having said – Once I have completed this work, I will then consider my position and discuss it with Chris and Paul’ – he was now making noises about the ‘Chairman having sufficient evidence to support the position’. 

Having openly and frankly shared and discussed information with Mortonjag in the Admiral Bar, he was now making noises about being ‘bound by confidentiality’. 

Mortonjag did not feel encouraged, but still clung to the hope that Nick had a true desire to get the matter sorted internally according to Paul Gill’s plan to confront the ‘old guard’ on 24th June.

Mortonjag and Paul continued to discuss the issues which should be put at that meeting,  immediately prior to which the following emails were sent.

From: mairidalglish []
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 6:14 PM
To: ‘’

Attachments: financial details for committee meeting.doc; 6-21-2010 2;07;43 PM.JPG; 6-21-2010 2;08;04 PM.JPG

Good evening Nick and what a glorious one it is. I’ve taken the liberty of putting you in the frame with this email, although you will hopefully also receive a copy from Paul fairly soon.


From: mairidalglish []
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 5:19 PM
To: ‘’
Cc: ‘Paul Gill’; ‘ernienewall’

Dear Mr Gill,

Further to my previous correspondence with you, and as I requested, I assume that Trust committee members will be supplied with all of the financial details and evidence concerning the ‘Stars of ‘79’ event at the forthcoming meeting this Thursday.

I also assume that they will be shown all legal correspondence including the recent letter sent to Jim Gallacher’s solicitor by Messrs. Blair & Bryden which contained a spreadsheet purportedly demonstrating a debt due by him to the Trust of  £2,890. It will be evident that that figure exceeds their earlier demand of £1825 by more than one thousand pounds, and is now the third ‘official’ figure claimed to be owing to the Trust by Mr. Gallacher since the Police found no fault with his figures.

The spreadsheet appears to be riddled with inaccuracies, some of which can hardly have occurred by mistake, and in any event is substantially based on estimates.

I believe that it is essential that all Committee members understand that original accounts for the evening were submitted to the Police BY THE TRUST. That was after they had been prepared by Jim Gallacher to the best of his ability, and belief, and while under huge psychological pressure, because of a threat of losing his job should the Police become involved.

Not only was criminality dismissed (which is relevant to the currently separate matter of pending defamation actions), but ‘lack of a proper paper trail’ and ‘bad business practice’ were cited by the C.I.D,

I attach information and explanatory comments from Jim Gallacher, who has repeatedly offered to meet with members of the Trust Committee to explain his involvement in the evening – offers which have been consistently rejected. I also attach a sample from among several dozen emails I hold on file.

Furthermore, many items of expenditure by Mr Gallacher have been disallowed or in some instances wrongly attributed to others.

I strongly advise all committee members to carefully study the long and convoluted series of evidential emails, which I assume will be made available for inspection as they represent crucial ‘evidence’ concerning the ‘Stars’ event.  In that respect, it is worth commenting to the committee as a whole that Mr. Gallacher’s lawyer has described the content of certain emails as ‘attempted extortion and tantamount to blackmail’.

I recommend that the content and context of those emails is studied very carefully before any final decision is made on how best to move the Trust forward.

By way of final comment, it is common knowledge that the purported contents of certain emails (along with a set of ‘accounts’) were deliberately leaked and discussed by committee members (old and new) on public message boards. When the relevant emails are read in context, a totally different picture emerges from that widely and deliberately publicized to further certain individuals’ ends.

May I request that you forward copies of this email to all of your committee colleagues as soon as you can?

With kind regards,

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Ernie Newall.