CRAIG Whyte's deal to buy Rangers with the help of money from the rights to future season ticket sales was "one of the worst kept secrets going".
The claim was made in the High Court in Glasgow as Whyte's QC Donald Findlay quizzed former club secretary Gary Withey about the lead up to the takeover announcement on Friday, May 6, 2011.
Mr Withey, Whyte's solicitor, had said it was the only deal he had known where the seller Sir David Murray was pushing more than the purchaser.
And Mr Withey told the jury that Whyte "didn't care" whether the deal was concluded or not, and was prepared to walk away if a timetable to purchase fell through.
Prosecutors in Whyte's fraud trial allege Whyte helped fund his takeover by getting a £24 million loan from London-based agency Ticketus against rights to three to four years of future club season ticket sales.
Before Craig Whyte took over Rangers in May 2011, the Ibrox club was 85% owned by Sir David Murray - but was sold for £1 with conditions contained in a share purchase agreement.
Mr Withey had earlier said he was told by Whyte not to share information over the source of the cash to pay off Rangers’ debt to the Lloyds Banking Group, but said Mr Murray's people "didn't ask".
But when Mr Findlay asked if as the negotiations over the sale were getting underway, the Ticketus deal was a secret, the 52-year-old lawyer said: "No."
Mr Findlay responded: "In fact, was it one of the worst kept secrets going."
Mr Withey said: "It was impossible to keep a secret with too many people involved."
Whyte's QC went on to say that if someone from the Murray Group had asked about Whyte's ability to keep secret the Ticketus deal, the answer was "he couldn't and he didn't and it wasn't."
Mr Withey said: "I don't think he could."
Whyte, 46, denies the two charges against him, one of acquiring the club fraudulently in May 2011 and another of "financial assistance" under the Companies Act - which centres on a £18m payment, between Mr Whyte's Wavetower company and Rangers, using Ticketus, to clear the club's bank debt with Lloyds.
Part of the allegations against Whyte is that he pretended to Sir David Murray and others that “funds were available” to make all agreed-to payments.
These are said to include clearing the bank debt, £2.8m for the "small tax case" liability, a £1.7m health-and-safety liability and £5m for the playing squad.
Mr Withey, who was a partner at London lawyers Collyer Bristow, went on say that it was "very rare" for an individual to fund anything in a big money deal adding: "That's how they get rich."
The lawyer said Murray's team were "desperate to get the deal over the line".
The court was shown an email from Withey, sent to parties in the deal including Ticketus and dated May 3, 2011 – three days before the Rangers shares were transferred to Whyte.
In it, Mr Withey warned that Whyte wanted the deal completed the next day. The email continued: “It is expected that this deal will complete tomorrow. All sides have been told that if it does not, then Craig will walk away.”
Mr Findlay, defending Whyte, asked Withey: “Was that bluff or is that your understanding?” Mr Withey said: “That was my understanding.”
Gary Withey (second left) became company secretary of the Rangers board when the club was sold to Craig Whyte
The QC went on: "Who was desperate to conclude this deal?"
"Murray," said Mr Withey.
"Not Mr Whyte, but Murray," quizzed Mr Findlay.
"Mr Whyte didn't care," said the witness.
"If it came about, it came about, if it didn't, that was the way it was," queried Mr Findlay.
"That's correct, yes," said Mr Withey.
"On the other hand, your very clear impression was [Murray] was desperate to conclude this deal," asked Mr Findlay.
"Yes... which I found really odd," replied Mr Withey.
"Murray wanted to sell Rangers desperately?" asked Mr Findlay.
"Yes," Mr Withey replied.
"No doubt?" Whyte's QC continued.
"I have no doubt at all," insisted Mr Withey.
The jury also heard from Mr Withey that Mr Murray’s firm “didn’t seem to care” where Whyte was sourcing funds to take over Rangers.
On Tuesday, Michael McGill – a key adviser to Mr Murray and a former Rangers director - confirmed that former Rangers chief executive Martin Bain was paid £360,000 when the debt-ridden club was sold to Whyte.
Bain (above), now chief executive with English Premier League side Sunderland got the bonus despite his involvement in the sale being described as “limited”.
David Horne, the Murray Group’s legal chief also got a £160,000 payout.
The court also heard how handwritten notes by then chairman Alastair Johnston and Horne referred to Whyte possibly borrowing up to £15 million to fund his takeover of Rangers.
On Wednesday, Mr Withey took to the witness stand, and admitted he initially thought Whyte was part of the Whyte and Mackay whisky group when he first showed interest in buying Rangers.
Withey said the deal he was being asked to negotiate through the share purchase agreement was unusual because it contained clauses relating to the possibility of the club “going bust”.
Asked if he held funds to permit the purchase of the club on a unconditional basis to settle the deal on May 6, 2011, Withey said: “Yes, I believed I did, subject to completion.”
On Thursday, Mr Findlay went on to examine what the word "immediate" meant in terms of financial deals.
Withey said: "Now."
Mr Findlay asked: "So if I am doing a deal with you, and the contract says I will pay that £1m immediately, what is the one and only way I can pay that £1m, guaranteed, immediately."
"Looking at the specific word, your probably never can," said Mr Withey.
But Mr Findlay suggested in reality unless you are handing over "a wad of cash before the ink is dry" on a contract paper, 'immediately' doesn't mean 'now' but "the first practicable opportunity.
"Yes it does," added Mr Withey.
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