Two more plead guilty in UK election betting case
On Thursday, the UK Gambling Commission reported that two senior figures formerly associated with the Conservative Party had pleaded guilty to offences linked to betting on the 2024 General Election date.
Anthony Lee, who served as the Conservative Party’s director of campaigning, pleaded guilty to two counts of cheating under sections 42(1)(a) and 42(1)(b) of the Gambling Act 2005.
Meanwhile, Laura Lee (formerly Saunders), his wife and former head of international for the party, who also stood as the Conservative candidate in Bristol North-West at the 2024 election, pleaded guilty to one offence under section 42(1)(a).
The two join Amy Hind and Craig Williams, who pleaded guilty to these offences on 29 June 2026.
Sentencing for Lee, Lee and Hind is set for 23 October 2026 at Southwark Crown Court. Williams will be sentenced at a later date. The Gambling Commission has said trials for the remaining ten defendants will take place in September 2027 and January 2028.
How the election betting scheme unfolded
The Commission launched its investigation into various reports of insider betting on the election date in June 2024 after Ladbrokes flagged a bet placed by Williams, who was recorded as a politically exposed person.
Further bets flagged by operators involved other politically sensitive individuals, including Metropolitan Police officers and political advisers. The Commission charged 15 people total in April 2025. Four have now pleaded guilty.
The offences relate to special betting markets that let customers wager on the exact date of the general election.
The then-prime minister, Rishi Sunak, announced 4 July 2024 as the election date on 22 May 2024. However, internal planning for that date had already begun at 10 Downing Street and Conservative Campaign Headquarters before the announcement.
Anthony Lee’s senior campaigning role gave him access to confidential discussions about the election timing. Rather than keeping that information confidential, he placed bets and passed it to his wife. She then used the information to place her own bets.
PEP status alone does not stop someone from betting
UK operators already carry out enhanced checks on politically exposed persons (PEPs), but this case shows the limits of those safeguards, Bethan Lloyd, partner at law firm Wiggin, recently told iGB.
“PEP status does not prevent someone from gambling,” Lloyd explained. She said PEPs are entitled to bet, but not on events where inside information gives them an unfair advantage.
A low ranking MP or parliamentary aide is unlikely to meet the threshold for PEP status. She argued it would place an onerous burden on operators to verify every customer’s occupation.