Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Findlay notes Share Purchase Agreement guarantees £5m to be available to Rangers for players. "Who was the ownerof Rangers?" Mr Whyte.

Findlay: a "Pointless undertaking" as Whyte as owner could just not ask for the money. McGill: "I hear what you are saying"

Not asking yourself for money is very reminiscent of The Famous Diets' owing/borrowing money to/from yourself. And this was all well before the era of fake news and post-truth - Campbell Ogilvie was so far ahead of his time.

[Deansy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Reading this as it develops suggests to me that this is Murray trying to offload the blue elephant that is the football club and all of it's issues to the first patsy/fantasist that seemed to (who, on the surface at least looks respectable so they can say that they did due diligence) tick the boxes that they could dupe (we don't ask him too many hard questions in case he doesn't ask us any back!) so that he could get his hands back on the MIM business?

Or is that just the spin that Findlay is putting on it?

That's how I'm seeing it as well. I just wonder how our poor SMSM will be able to continue with the myth that their Lord & Master - knighted for his services to business - Sir David Murray was 'Duped'

[CraigHibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

McGill confirms agreement with bank thatthe metals business would "handed over" to David Murray with Lloyd'sstill holding a share
/FONT]

looks to me like mr murray was only concerned about his own financial status, murray international was his baby, he had to bin "the rangers" to get murray metals back.... tut tut

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

looks to me like mr murray was only concerned about his own financial status, murray international was his baby, he had to bin "the rangers" to get murray metals back.... tut tut

Indeed.

Afternoon session

Case continues with defence Advocate DonaldFindlay QC cross-examining Crown witness Michael McGill

Findlay opens by asking McGill about DaveKing and Murray Sports. McGill says King's company owned a stake in MurraySports

McGill says Murray Sports was"eliminated" in conjunction with King. Witness says can't recall ifthere was an issue between Murray and King

McGill shown email from King 11 Jan 2011 toHorn "this sounds irregular to me..David Murray is aware I haveconcerns"

Continues "There may also be taxissues" says has not been consulted "Metlika shares frozen"

Horn email on Dave King: "The lion hasawoken from its slumber" McGill replied he recalls receiving the email

McGill says Dave King had a"contractual right" to sit on the Rangers board.

Court now being shown a report"removal of RFC directors" created by Murray Lawyer Horn in 2010

Continues "This procedure could beused for the removal of Dave King and Paul Murray"

Findlay "was there a desire to removeMr King" McGill agrees "thought was given to it"

Email Dave King to David Horn, May 2011"Has the Murray group informed ' Craig Whyte of their undertaking to keepme on the board?"

Horn to McGill, "No obligation"to keep King on Board. Responds to King by email telling him this

McGill agrees King was "not overlyhappy about all this"

Findlay says he is on his "finalchapter"

Email: McGill to Horn, January 2011"Are we concerned if purchaser increases debt?...not really this would beworking capital"

McGill says debt fluctuated over the courseof the season

to be continued....

[Moulin Yarns]

Findlay: "The Independent boardcommittee had no power to block the deal?" McGill, yes, adds they were"unhelpful" at times

Email" the process would now slowdown..the battle lines are being drawn" discusses "clearing out theboard" McGill, "last resort"

Findlay "So you were consideringit"? McGill accepts was "possible"

McGill email "While we are all stillstriving to find a benefactor with unlimited funds to take the clubforward...this has not happened"

Findlay "The club was not beingactively marketed as there was no-one to market it to?" McGill"Yes"

Email 27 March 2011, McGill to Johnson"Debt to be converted to equity with no value..would allow club to borrowas no debt"

McGill email "We need to ensure thepurchaser doesnt get any surprises..I think we need to front up on the smalltax case"

McGill says the case had only recently wentfrom a potential liability and had not "crystallised" until recentlyDated 17 March 2011

Findlay "Murray was anxious that whenclub sold nothing bad would happen that would reflect badly" McGill"Yes"

McGill agrees looked to see where thingscould go wrong Shown handwritten note from Horn the lawyer. Discussion ofseason ticket marketing

Continues: The aim of engaging withIndependent committee is for PR reasons"

Findlay "The Independent committeeonly have to be on board for PR reasons?" McGill says was encouragingWhyte to engage

Email to witness from Lawyers, 20 April2011. "Independent committee anxious to find out no benefits to Murraythey didn't know about"

McGill says "That may relate to thedemerger" (of the metals business)

McGill confirms agreement​ between Lloydsand Murray over metals business pre-dated Craig Whyte bid (think this was denied earlier?)

Email says Lloyds worried about thisbecoming public as could lead to bad publicity,

McGill says Murray metals split into three,Murray got a section, another steel group took a part, rest wound down

Court takes a break

[Moulin Yarns]

Proceedings resume

Donald Findlay QC asks McGill if demergerof Murray metals was "connected with the sale of Rangers FootballClub?" Reply "yes"

December 2009 memo re "ProjectCharlotte" McGill says is a "teaser document" over sale ofRangers

Says "club has a sustainable businessplan to retain its competitiveness" Findlay "is this true"McGill "You could debate competitiveness"

McGill "Is a marketing document asmuch as anything else."

Document goes on to say Rangers not"reliant on Champions League revenue" Findlay "Hmm"

Continues "no capital spendingrequired" McGill repeats is a "marketing document"

Findlay "What is the point of puttingsomething in a document that isn't true" McGill "It's a marketingdocument"

Findlay "That's like saying the houseneeds an extension but you'll get it without spending money" (I was thinking of a car analogy based onemmissions = VW)

Letter from Bank of Scotland to Rangersfrom 2009, mentions £34m credit facility agreed in 2004.

Document goes on to say bank limited anyborrowing from Ticketus over £5m and must be repaid by June

Findlay says in any deal a time comes whenit should be set down in a "clear and unambiguous" way

McGill agrees the Share Purchase Agreement"is the bargain"

Findlay "the owner wanted to preservehis legacy...was his genuine desire..but no realistic buyer had camealong" Whyte "only show in town"

McGill "The only realistic show"

Horn Email "Despite process I am notsure Whyte is right for legacy..isn't it a shame there wasn't anyone else."

Continues that Murray had texted back"funny you should say that" suggests Martin Bain use "insiderinformation" for his own bid

Mail is dated 14 April 2011

Findlay says Bain never came forward with abid, "but got an pay benefit" Douglas Park also approached

Email 21 April 2011, discussed sale ofEdmiston house to "Acorn" McGill says may have been code name

McGill replies: ""Given that theuseless twits dont have the funds it appears somewhat academic"

Findlay "Murray was determined to sellRangers" McGill "no" Findlay "You sold the club to uselesstwits with no funds" Ends





LOL J







Advocate Depute rises to re-examine thewitness

[Moulin Yarns]

AD "What this case is about is theacquisition of the club by Mr Whyte" McGill says aim of sale was to clearbank debt and secure investment

McGill: "We were not interested inselling the club based on an IOU"

Advocate Depute notes Share PurchaseAgreement says purchaser must have funds "immediately available"McGill agrees

Advocate Depute shows agreement betweenTicketus and Whyte to sell £20m worth of season tickets, notes in previousseason RFC borrowed £8m

Agreement "Craig Whyte has private,but publically verifiable wealth" No release of funds until sharespurchased

McGill says season tickets were an asset ofthe club, and could only be sold by the owner.

McGill says Ticketus deal"inconsistent" with Share Purchase Agreement. Would also need boardapproval

McGill says you cannot use assets you donot own or control to purchase shares

McGill says he did not expect Whyte toarrive with a suitcase full of cash but expected him to have the funds

McGill says relied on Solicitorsundertaking that money laundering checks had been carried out on Whyte

McGill says Ticketus funds were only usedfor short term capital needs, would not have agreed to sale if he knew scale ofWhyte's borrowing

Advocate Depute Deal involved "Not asingle penny of Whyte's personal funds" McGill denies "he didn'tcare" about club

Advocate Depute ends, Lady Stacey tellswitness he can leave the court tells jury No sitting on Friday. Court adjourns

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

AD "What this case is about is theacquisition of the club by Mr Whyte" McGill says aim of sale was to clearbank debt and secure investment

McGill: "We were not interested inselling the club based on an IOU"

Advocate Depute notes Share PurchaseAgreement says purchaser must have funds "immediately available"McGill agrees

Advocate Depute shows agreement betweenTicketus and Whyte to sell £20m worth of season tickets, notes in previousseason RFC borrowed £8m

Agreement "Craig Whyte has private,but publically verifiable wealth" No release of funds until sharespurchased

McGill says season tickets were an asset ofthe club, and could only be sold by the owner.

McGill says Ticketus deal"inconsistent" with Share Purchase Agreement. Would also need boardapproval

McGill says you cannot use assets you donot own or control to purchase shares

McGill says he did not expect Whyte toarrive with a suitcase full of cash but expected him to have the funds

McGill says relied on Solicitorsundertaking that money laundering checks had been carried out on Whyte

McGill says Ticketus funds were only usedfor short term capital needs, would not have agreed to sale if he knew scale ofWhyte's borrowing

Advocate Depute Deal involved "Not asingle penny of Whyte's personal funds" McGill denies "he didn'tcare" about club

Advocate Depute ends, Lady Stacey tellswitness he can leave the court tells jury No sitting on Friday. Court adjourns

Thanks for the updates

Despite Findlay's smoke-blowing exercise, this particular exchange is actually what the case is about.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thanks for the updates

Despite Findlay's smoke-blowing exercise, this particular exchange is actually what the case is about.

It is indeed about how Whyte 'bought' the football club, but I think something more might come out of it as the defence digs at the prosecution witnesses. No?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It is indeed about how Whyte 'bought' the football club, but I think something more might come out of it as the defence digs at the prosecution witnesses. No?

Yeah, hopefully.....

I'm still thinking that the Duff & Phelps guys (and Gary Withey) will be the most interesting witnesses. They'll likely have the smoking gun to bring CW down, but DF will hammer them for their part in it all... and that's where we might see some popcorn stuff.

[Jack Hackett]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It is indeed about how Whyte 'bought' the football club, but I think something more might come out of it as the defence digs at the prosecution witnesses. No?

... but not holding breath.

Updates appreciated

[Seveno]

Why can't this be on Netflix?

[PatHead]

Murray not coming out of this well. Still won't matter to man though.

[Ozyhibby]

So far it's only been witnesses for the prosecution. The real fun might come when the witnesses for the defence are called.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[seanshow]

"David Murray sacrificed Rangers to save his own skin!" expect to see headlines like this in all your local newspapers























.............possibly, If you live in Vanuatu

[Moulin Yarns]

Proceedings resume, the Advocate Deputesays agreement has been reached on a new "joint minute"
A "joint minute of agreement"contains facts agreed by both sides as proved, these are read out so evidencedoes not need to be called
Joint minute now being read out, consistsof a list of financial transactions, ie £24m transferred to Whyte's company byTicketus etc

(Might shorten proceedings)



Crown now calls next witness, Gary Withey

[Iain G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Proceedings resume, the Advocate Deputesays agreement has been reached on a new "joint minute"
A "joint minute of agreement"contains facts agreed by both sides as proved, these are read out so evidencedoes not need to be called
Joint minute now being read out, consistsof a list of financial transactions, ie £24m transferred to Whyte's company byTicketus etc

(Might shorten proceedings)



Crown now calls next witness, Gary Withey

Who is this Gary Withey character?

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who is this Gary Withey character?

Ex solicitor, Collyer Bristow. Represented Whyte in the 'purchase' of SEVCO

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who is this Gary Withey character?

Allegedly one of the co-conspirators. Was originally charged, but the charges were dropped.

One wonders if he has been flipped.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Allegedly one of the co-conspirators. Was originally charged, but the charges were dropped.

One wonders if he has been flipped.

Cheers, CWG, might put some answers in context

[Moulin Yarns]

Withey says he was introduced to Whyte inlate summer in 2010 by a long term client, "because Craig Whyte waslooking to do deals"

Withey, "I'm not sure where we aregoing, what do you want me to say?"

Withey says there was an awards dinner inLondon at which he could invite 10 guests. Invited Craig Whyte

Advocate Depute, "What happened afterthe dinner" Withey "nothing" He later found out Whyte's plan forRangers and phoned offering services

Withey says Whyte was "reallyvague" about the takeover during first phone call. Called him again afterholiday in Majorca.

Withey "football Clubs are always anightmare, you never know what is there until you start picking away"

Withey says there was confusion in October2010 over which legal firm was handling the takeover for Whyte.

Says he called Whyte to as "What wasgoing on, I thought I was handling this deal"

Withey says he was told to "backoff" by another company, "All Swains" They told him "justdo your little bit" (All Swains, did they have a hit with “Never ever”)

Withey says a few weeks later All Swains"walked away" from the deal and Colloyer Bristow where theninstructed to act for Whyte

Advocate Depute to Withey, "What didyou do?" Lady Stacey "That's a colossal question" asks him tobreak it up into sections

Withey: "I'm not trying to be dim, butI don't know what you are asking me." Agrees he helped negotiate the SharePurchase Agreement.

Withey says wasn't happy that Craig Whyte​had set up a company in Guernsey, didn't like "offshore tax havens"used UK company instead

Withey says "many many people wereworking on this transaction" says he can't pronounce the second name ofone

Withey says he had no information on howdeal was to be financed Total was "28 million ish"

Withey was a "blue book takeover"as before computers came in a blue book. Lady Stacey thanks witness"That's the sort of detail we need"

Withey accuses Advocate Depute of being"too simplistic" Donald Findlay objects to line of questioning onsame grounds, says AD is confusing

Last Stacey tells AD this is not a Scottishconveyancing case,

Withey says people in the city thoughtWhyte had funding , at one point he thought he was part of Whyte and Mackay(LOL)

Withey insists he was not instructed byWhyte but by the company Wavetower. Agrees Whyte was sole-shareholder and itwas him he spoke to

[

[Moulin Yarns]

Withey asked about "proof offunds" letter if his name was on a letter "you should look at theletter" says he didn't even draft it

AD "It was signed by you" Withey"I saw it as a comfort letter" Asks to see the letter, AD says he iscoming to it

Withey says a "comfort letter givesthe other party a degree of comfort" AD "Can you expand onthat?"

Withey says proof of funds can only comefrom a corporate adviser adds "anyone can write a comfort letter"

Court now being shown "letter offunding availability" signed by Merchant Capital ltd Withey says he hasnever seen this

Letter says £33m available for funding.Withey says he saw a later version of this letter and emailed

Email from Withey to Dundas Wilson 17 Oct2010 shown. Says £33m funds available at Liberty Capital

Was also copied into Mike McGill at MurrayGroup

Says funding comes from a "UKfinancial group"

Findlay objects and asks to address judgeon a matter of law. Witness and jury leave court

For those who don't know, we are notallowed to tweet what happens when jury not present


to be continued

[Moulin Yarns]

Advocate Depute continues his examinationin chief of Crown witness Gary Withey

AD begins by showing the court a letter onColloyer Bristow headed paper. Witness says he doesn't recall sending butagrees is his letter

Dated 21 Oct 2010, headed ProjectCharlotte. Was sent to solicitors representing Murray

Letter says Withey would be forming a"Newco" to carry through the transaction

Withey confirms "Newco" would beWavetower, a "bidding vehicle" for the proposed transaction.

Withey says letter was an expression ofinterest "we only want to have a look under the bonnet"

Continues Andrew Ellis Chris Akers andCraig Whyte directors of Newco Withey says he was only acting as a"conduit"

Continues "Liberty Capital has £33m tocontinue transaction"

Withey says deal had to be keptconfidential so as not to drive up share price "We had to keep ittight"

AD asks about "insider dealing"Lady Stacey intervenes asking "do we really need to know about this?"AD moves on.

Withey says position on offer was"slightly odd" due to Rangers being a listed company.

Another letter shown on court screens,Withey confirms is his signature and was sent to Murray 8 Nov 2010

In part "Funds are available tocomplete the transaction" AD "Was that truthful" "Shouldsay funds will be available" AD "But it doesn't"

AD "Was it true" Withey "Itwas true we had a letter saying that" Were you personally satisfied Yes,by the letter

Letter now goes on to details of who isrepresenting which company in the proposed transaction

[Moulin Yarns]

Withey confirms that, at this point, theestimated cost of the takeover would be £33m "That was what would beavailable"

Withey agrees repayment of money owed to thebank was a "key element" of the takeover deal.

Withey says he did believe Whyte had thefunds or he wouldn't have said so in the letter adds: "I don't lie"

Letter "This cash is immediatelyavailable..nothing to prevent release of funds.."

"none of the finance provided will besecured against the assets of target" (Rangers)

Witness given copy of 27 page SharePurchase Agreement. Says deal was "almost over-negotiated" adds he"didn't trust" Murray Group

Adds there was a lot of discussion aboutclub going into administration, which he had never seen in an agreement before

AD shows clause in Share Purchase Agreementwhich states funds "immediately available" Withey says ColloyerBristow held the funds

AD "Were the immediately available tosettle on the Friday?" Withey "Subject to completion" came from"Ticketus, Merchant and some pension"

AD "Was money in a client account or adeposit account?" Withey: "At the time I thought they were thesame" AD "You were a partner"

AD "This was not money you could useon the 6th May" Withey "I believed I could"

AD "who could draw on the money priorto 6 May?" Withey, "No-one" AD "Surely Ticketuscould?" Withey: "Possibly"

Withey "The Ticketus contracts weremostly dealt with by my assistant"

AD "The SPA says funds have to beimmediately available' Withey "no it's not, if you read it again sayssubject to completion"

Adds "All there would to be would be aquick board meeting would take a scintilla of time"


Court rises for lunch, witness asked toreturn at 2pm

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Withey confirms that, at this point, theestimated cost of the takeover would be £33m "That was what would beavailable"

Withey agrees repayment of money owed to thebank was a "key element" of the takeover deal.

Withey says he did believe Whyte had thefunds or he wouldn't have said so in the letter adds: "I don't lie"

Letter "This cash is immediatelyavailable..nothing to prevent release of funds.."

"none of the finance provided will besecured against the assets of target" (Rangers)

Witness given copy of 27 page SharePurchase Agreement. Says deal was "almost over-negotiated" adds he"didn't trust" Murray Group

Adds there was a lot of discussion aboutclub going into administration, which he had never seen in an agreement before

AD shows clause in Share Purchase Agreementwhich states funds "immediately available" Withey says ColloyerBristow held the funds

AD "Were the immediately available tosettle on the Friday?" Withey "Subject to completion" came from"Ticketus, Merchant and some pension"

AD "Was money in a client account or adeposit account?" Withey: "At the time I thought they were thesame" AD "You were a partner"

AD "This was not money you could useon the 6th May" Withey "I believed I could"

AD "who could draw on the money priorto 6 May?" Withey, "No-one" AD "Surely Ticketuscould?" Withey: "Possibly"

Withey "The Ticketus contracts weremostly dealt with by my assistant"

AD "The SPA says funds have to beimmediately available' Withey "no it's not, if you read it again sayssubject to completion"

Adds "All there would to be would be aquick board meeting would take a scintilla of time"


Court rises for lunch, witness asked toreturn at 2pm

Oh, **** off. There's no need for lunch. Get on with it.

So...GW knew that some of the money came from Ticketus. Go for him, Donald.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh, **** off. There's no need for lunch. Get on with it.

So...GW knew that some of the money came from Ticketus. Go for him, Donald.

Thank goodness for lunch, I can get some work done

Yes seems a bit strange that one. It is much more fun when the Donald is cross examining

[Moulin Yarns]

Afternoon

The Advocate Depute, Alex Prentice QCbegins the afternoon by showing the court a "deposit account mandate"21 April 2011

Asks bank to open an account called"project Charlotte"

Authorised signatories for Colloyer Bristowis Gary Withey and Paul Sillis,

Bank is C Hoare and Co

Withey confirms account is "for theTicketus money"

Withey confirms both he and Ticketus'lawyers would have to agree before funds taken from account​

Next document, email from James Earl(Ticketus lawyer) to Withey CC'd to Craig Whyte. 9 May 2011,l. AuthorisesWithey to "use funds"

Advocate Depute notes that before this 9May email funds were not available to be used. Withey agrees

Court now being shown "agreement forsale and purchase of season tickets" between RFC "Ticketus LLP"and "Ticketus 2 LLP"

Agreement lists all season tickets to besold by stand and seat number. Signed by Paul Latham of Ticketus and CraigWhyte.

Advocate Depute notes Whyte had noauthority over the season ticket money until takeover complete. Lady Stacey"Season tickets"

Advocate Depute now going through detailsof season ticket sale document. Mr Findlay objects only 45% of season ticketsfor sale.

Lady Stacey says clear only some of seasontickets. Withey "they already had some anyway" AD "That's aseparate matter"

AD, money could only be released aftertakeover? Withey: "Not quite, deal was signed earlier' AD but only clubowner could sell tickets

Findlay objects, notes this is a 275 pagedocument but "execution pages are undated"

AD agrees to rephrase the question.

AD notes date is 9 May asks is that rightLady Stacey "That's a bit unfair on the witness" notes he had not hadopportunity to read document

Document is dated 9 May on front cover butno date on Craig Whyte signature.

Withey asked if he was holding the money,Responds "is that a question for me?" Confirms was held in jointaccount.

AD asks about other sources of funds"Merchant Capital and Jerome pensions" Withey replies Can't recall ifhe held the Merchant money

Merchant contributed £1m to takeover courttold


Findlay raises an objection, jury andwitness leave the court

[Moulin Yarns]

Advocate Depute resumes questioning of GaryWithey. Asks about £1m from Merchant Turnaround. Withey says can't recallconditions

AD "You have a million pounds, whatwere you going to do with it?" Withey "Can't recall conditions"

AD "Who were Merchant TurnaroundWithey "Part of the Merchant Group" AD "what happened to themoney?" Withey "It just sat there"

AD "Did you know of any connectionbetween Whyte and Merchant ?" Withey "At the time no' found out laterhe had been company secretary

Withey "All I recall is being told themoney would arrive and it arrived"

Withey, "Merchant were not myclient" on ownership of the £1m "I don't know whose money itwas"

AD "Who would you take instructionsfrom on what to do with the money" Withey "Craig Whyte" AD: Wasit still there in December? "Don't know"

AD shows letter to Merchant Turnaround,witness says it looks like his signature but doesn't think he wrote it as"too clumsy"

AD "Who would have signed it otherthan you?" Withey "I'm not 100% certain that's my signature"

Withey agrees letter is accurate in partswhile still not accepting he wrote it

AD "Did you cause that to betyped" Withey "I don't recall it, I wouldn't start a [bullet] pointwith a lower case t"

AD "is it your letter or not?"Withey "I can't be sure" AD notes his initial are on it

Lady Stacey notes reference on this letteris in a different form from others shown to the court

Withey "It just seems odd to ask meabout something that may not be mine" AD moves on

AD "on 7 April £2.7m received from apension company, Jerome" Withey says he remembers the money but can'trecall if put in client account

Withey, "I'm not trying to be evasive'AD "When were you told you were going to get the money?" Withey:"Before

AD: Any conditions on the money Withey"can I refer to a precognition I made" AD "No" " Ifyou'd asked me two days ago answer would be no"

AD "You've lost me there"

Withey "I accept now there wereconditions" AD "Were you aware at the time" Withey "Notsure when conditions were attached"

AD "What happened to the money?"Withey "It just sat there, I think for over a year"

Withey mentions "rollover" AD"What does that means" Withey thinks something to do with previousTicketus deal not being repaid.

Withey "It's terribly complicated butthe money went out then came right back in"

Withey "£6m had to be repaid toOctopus, was an odd arrangement"

Withey "So much was happening with thedeal I took my eye off it."

Withey "I was slightly surprised theycould influence a pension fund" Didn't realise it was a pension fund untilmuch later


Findlay objects to question as"hearsay" judge agrees

Withey "I only recalled it two daysago so my recollection is two days old"

[Moulin Yarns]

Withey "Is that not the same questionjust asked in a different way" Lady Stacey "Can you help usout?"

AD shows court an email from Withey to asolicitor representing Jerome pensions Reads in part "at this moment intime no monies can be sent


Donald Findlay rises to object to thedocument, Lady Stacey sends jury home "Experience tells me this is goingto take more than 5 mins.








If I had realised that woud happen I wouldn’t have sent theafternoon in two blocks

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Withey "Is that not the same questionjust asked in a different way" Lady Stacey "Can you help usout?"

AD shows court an email from Withey to asolicitor representing Jerome pensions Reads in part "at this moment intime no monies can be sent


Donald Findlay rises to object to thedocument, Lady Stacey sends jury home "Experience tells me this is goingto take more than 5 mins.








If I had realised that woud happen I wouldn’t have sent theafternoon in two blocks

As ever, thanks for the updates.

My reading (and, without being in the Court, it's difficult to know) is that the AD is being harder on GW than he has been on the earlier witnesses. Maybe because, in different circumstances, GW himself would have been in the dock.... and therefore has some of the evidence to sink CW.

DF's cross-examination is going to be fun.