Statements - Thomson , Gary MacKay and the Mafia (Merged Jongleurs Content)

[Benny Brazil]

One more thing - with these statements from Hearts about their full investigation into this - are they trying to say they have seen all the evidence? Did they speak to the VICTIMS of Thomson to hear what they had to say, did they see everything the courts did. Not a chance in hell they did.

So they have taken the word of a convicted child sex offender who lied to them 6months ago when he was challenged about it after a parent complained to the club.

Heart of Midlothian FC employing and supporting Child Sex Offenders since 1874.

[sunshine1875]

:rolleyes: is this not how BIG teams operate?

The report in the Scotsman, who it must be reminded have an anti-Hertz agenda, if you are to believe the Vladsheep. :rolleyes:

http://sport.scotsman.com/football/Hearts-clear-player-after-sexual.6790969.jp?articlepage=2

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Can't wait!
I don't get the outrage on here over Hearts' decision, I only see this as terrific news, and provides ammunition and endless varieties of entertaining derby day songs for years to come.
What's not to like...?

Grow up man!

[HibeeMcGinn1]

Can't wait!
I don't get the outrage on here over Hearts' decision, I only see this as terrific news, and provides ammunition and endless varieties of entertaining derby day songs for years to come.
What's not to like...?

The guy sent picture of his bits to a 12 year old child and your happy enough cause we can sing songs. Jesus.

[Hibbyradge]

All this Gary Mackay/Mafia nonsense is Vlad's attempt to divert attention away from his decision to continue employing a convicted sex offender, imo.

It won't work though.

If showing your dangly bits to children who you know to be 12 and 14 years old, then lying to try to cover it up, isn't gross misconduct, I really don't know what is.

Maybe Steven Pressley or Paul Hartley could answer that one.

[Antifa Hibs]

TBH i'll be surprised if Thomson actually kicks a ball for Hearts.

Deep down, both will want to part company I think. How will his team mates take to him after this? Then off course there's Thomson's safety. If he's daft enough to be seen out and about Edinburgh, the clubs etc, there's every chance he'll get *** leathered!

[Badge]

Up until 2005 Hearts were our rivals. Their superiority delusions have now in effect come home and yes, they are so far removed from us as not to be considered a similar entity.

The organisation has become increasingly entrenched in iniquity at the behest of their dear leader 'Mister' Romanov and now it seems they have, en masse left the building all normal people inhabit.

Before Romanov's presence, Hearts played on the same field as the rest of us, no bigger, no better, no smaller, no worse but since his ways became acceptable, they have plumbed hitherto uncharted depths. The so called 'heart and soul' has allowed this to happen on their watch and now by association, I posit that from heron in, until such time as Tynecastle is deloused from top to bottom, everyone connected with that abberation in EH11 is tolerant of one of the most heinous offences (both criminally and morally) in the book.
Every strip, scarf, ticket or other sundry paraphernalia sold from today onwards by Hearts is an endorsement of the lowest values in our society. They cannot stand by and allow this to continue; surely better to run Romanov out of town, suck up the financial penalties and, if need be, start all over again. Its called integrity - they should try it sometime. Soon!

Anything less and it demonstrates clearly and unequivocally what the rest of us believe and that is that HMFC is a nasty, vile reprehensible apology of a football club. And while I will always love the rivalry this particular episode added to the 'Heroics' of the Rix appointment, leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth. There is no place in football, or in life itself, for the endorsement or sympathy of paedophiles.

Tragic day for our game. Over to you yams - sort it or take all that's coming. I hope your 'big cup' win was worth it!!!

Absloutely spot on. Well done.

[poolman]

TBH i'll be surprised if Thomson actually kicks a ball for Hearts.

Deep down, both will want to part company I think. How will his team mates take to him after this? Then off course there's Thomson's safety. If he's daft enough to be seen out and about Edinburgh, the clubs etc, there's every chance he'll get *** leathered!


I wouldn't be surprised if Mad Vlad told FJK to pick him :agree:

[Gala Foxes]

Hearts have done a lot of dodgy things since Romanov took them over, not paying bills, ridiculous press statements but continuing to employ a convicted sex offender is shameful, particularly given some 40% of their season ticket holders are children

[The Falcon]

TBH i'll be surprised if Thomson actually kicks a ball for Hearts.

Deep down, both will want to part company I think. How will his team mates take to him after this? Then off course there's Thomson's safety. If he's daft enough to be seen out and about Edinburgh, the clubs etc, there's every chance he'll get *** leathered!

I think most of the away games are pretty much out of bounds. He will get pelters and I am not sure how his team mates will react. Often it galvanizes and unify's a team in support of their colleague who is getting the abuse but I suspect that this might be different.

[marinello59]

Can't wait!
I don't get the outrage on here over Hearts' decision, I only see this as terrific news, and provides ammunition and endless varieties of entertaining derby day songs for years to come.
What's not to like...?

Dunno. Maybe the families two young victims who will have provided the source of your eagerly anticipated entertainment would disapprove.

If he is still at Hearts when they come to Easter Road next season then I will be giving the game a miss. Stuff trying to explain the 'hilarious' songs to my wee lad.

[Removed]

I think most of the away games are pretty much out of bounds. He will get pelters and I am not sure how his team mates will react. Often it galvanizes and unify's a team in support of their colleague who is getting the abuse but I suspect that this might be different.

Some folk will do anything for the cash though. Vast majority of those hearts players would get nowhere near the same wages at any normal club and common sense and decency may have gone out the window for them to preserve their income.

[IndieHibby]

The Scotsman have really tied Southern and Jeffiries' colours to the mast by making it clear that it was their investigation, "in consultation with Hearts owner, Vladimir Romanov".

It is entirely legitimate to expect the following:
1. GM to institute defamation of character proceedings, after being accused of responsibility over CT's crimes.
2. SFA to fine the club for dragging the reputation of Scottish Football through the mud (on a global scale none-the-less - Sky, BBC Scotland, World Service, Twitter etc)
3. Sponsors to walk away (now would be the time to get the best value out of it)
4. Journalists to have a complete field day with JJ - it was his investigation, remember.
5. Hearts fans who realise that a business that makes so much money out of children should have nothing to do with them.

Even if they sack him now, this will colour their reputation for a long time.

I'd be fuming if I had just bought my season ticket.

[IndieHibby]

Dunno. Maybe the families two young victims who will have provided the source of your eagerly anticipated entertainment would disapprove.

If he is still at Hearts when they come to Easter Road next season then I will be giving the game a miss. Stuff trying to explain the 'hilarious' songs to my wee lad.

This is why it is (Scottish) society's problem - a company making money and influencing children has no business puttting people through this.

[Aldo]

Wot was the outcome of the SSN announcement???


Dont have Sky and I am wondering wot they are trying to say now.

They need to make the right decision and fast IMHO. Imagine sitting next to the guy in the changing room and you have a couple of kids....WTF is going on at the PBS.

I will be really surprised if Jumbo Jim is happy with the ongoings but will he say anything to vlad if he is told he must either play him or put in the squad.

[johnrebus]

If Jim Jeffries does not resign in the next few hours, I think he can look forward to being attacked in the street.


He is no better than any of the Russian loonies.

:taxi

[Camo]

I don't see in any way why he was kept on, but for the club to reach this decision logic says (And I know that's the sticking point) there has to be something there otherwise all credibility for Vlad, the club and all its employees will come further under scrutiny for years to come.

The nonsensical ramblings of a mad man.

It's so illogical and incoherent that even analysing it line by line is extremely difficult.

It's a confusing statement and one that will be forgot in a month or so (GM probably won't forget it) as with every other piece of rubbish he has come out with, but the fact remains that NO ONE will forget about Thomson still being employed by the club.

If I was him i'd tear my contract up and hide out the public eye for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see how the club can turn anything positive over the next few weeks, they should have booted him out while they had the opportunity.

[HibeeMcGinn1]

I don't see in any way why he was kept on, but for the club to reach this decision logic says (And I know that's the sticking point) there has to be something there otherwise all credibility for Vlad, the club and all its employees will come further under scrutiny for years to come.

The nonsensical ramblings of a mad man.

It's so illogical and incoherent that even analysing it line by line is extremely difficult.

It's a confusing statement and one that will be forgot in a month or so (GM probably won't forget it) as with every other piece of rubbish he has come out with, but the fact remains that NO ONE will forget about Thomson still being employed by the club.

If I was him i'd tear my contract up and hide out the public eye for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see how the club can turn anything positive over the next few weeks, they should have booted him out while they had the opportunity.

Nut Nut

[Barney McGrew]

The Scotsman have really tied Southern and Jeffiries' colours to the mast by making it clear that it was their investigation, "in consultation with Hearts owner, Vladimir Romanov".

That changes the whole perspective of it. Hertz fans are currently dismissing everything that goes on as the ramblings of Mad Vlad, when (if the Scotsman report is accurate, and I've no reason to doubt it isn't) it's FJK and Southern that are guilty of the whitewash and failure to punt him. So they're culpable for the decision to keep a convicted sex offender on the payroll.

FJK should be asked some serious questions at the next press conference, let's see if the journalists can step up to the plate and have the bottle to ask them.

[degenerated]

I don't see in any way why he was kept on, but for the club to reach this decision logic says (And I know that's the sticking point) there has to be something there otherwise all credibility for Vlad, the club and all its employees will come further under scrutiny for years to come.

The nonsensical ramblings of a mad man.

It's so illogical and incoherent that even analysing it line by line is extremely difficult.

It's a confusing statement and one that will be forgot in a month or so (GM probably won't forget it) as with every other piece of rubbish he has come out with, but the fact remains that NO ONE will forget about Thomson still being employed by the club.

If I was him i'd tear my contract up and hide out the public eye for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see how the club can turn anything positive over the next few weeks, they should have booted him out while they had the opportunity.

couple of schoolboy errors in there i'm afraid. Vlad, the club and all its employees have no credibility at all, i could include the fans in that too.

if you think that these statements from romanov and that other lithuanian roaster are going to be forgotten about in a month or so you are very much mistaken :hilarious

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Been one or two incidents where player's actions have lead to them being sacked because of the impact on the reputation of the club. Says a lot about the reputation of HOMFC if the owners don't think that having a convicted sex offender on the books will have a detrimental impact.

[IndieHibby]

Been one or two incidents where player's actions have lead to them being sacked because of the impact on the reputation of the club. Says a lot about the reputation of HOMFC if the owners don't think that having a convicted sex offender on the books will have a detrimental impact.

Good point.

[DaveF]

I don't see in any way why he was kept on, but for the club to reach this decision logic says (And I know that's the sticking point) there has to be something there otherwise all credibility for Vlad, the club and all its employees will come further under scrutiny for years to come.

The nonsensical ramblings of a mad man.

It's so illogical and incoherent that even analysing it line by line is extremely difficult.

It's a confusing statement and one that will be forgot in a month or so (GM probably won't forget it) as with every other piece of rubbish he has come out with, but the fact remains that NO ONE will forget about Thomson still being employed by the club.

If I was him i'd tear my contract up and hide out the public eye for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see how the club can turn anything positive over the next few weeks, they should have booted him out while they had the opportunity.

Sorry, but do you really think that vlad, your club or it's employees has any credibility left?

Honestly?

[IndieHibby]

I don't see in any way why he was kept on, but for the club to reach this decision logic says (And I know that's the sticking point) there has to be something there otherwise all credibility for Vlad, the club and all its employees will come further under scrutiny for years to come.

The nonsensical ramblings of a mad man.

It's so illogical and incoherent that even analysing it line by line is extremely difficult.

It's a confusing statement and one that will be forgot in a month or so (GM probably won't forget it) as with every other piece of rubbish he has come out with, but the fact remains that NO ONE will forget about Thomson still being employed by the club.

If I was him i'd tear my contract up and hide out the public eye for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see how the club can turn anything positive over the next few weeks, they should have booted him out while they had the opportunity.

Somone in-the-know from your end needs to find out what these "mitigating" factors are. Not that there can be any given he pleaded guilty.

When they do, be sure to let us know. Maybe then the rest of Scottish society can judge for themselves whether the club have any morals left at all.

Unfortunate as it is, anyone who is employed by the club has been put in a tight situation by this. I mean, how do you face kids every day, in your employment by the club, with the thought in your mind that "If you work at Hearts, it's ok to treat kids as sexual entities"

What decent human being wants to be associated with that?

[Makaveli]

It's insane... but TBH why are we so surprised that Hearts have kept on a convicted sex offender? Remember they went out of their way to employ Rix when nobody else would touch him. It's as if the Lithuanians actually see Hearts as a big private joke.

The structure over there must be so autocratic it's almost unreal. For these guys to have direct access to the site with their dodgy grasp of the English language (never mind the real world) is f'n mental.

[Saorsa]

BTW, I see the guy who's in charge of the Hertz supporters trust has continued the trend of mentalist statements:

What a pathetic weasel :agree: anyone who backs that decision is almost as bad as the person who committed the offence because they are as good as condoning it IMO. Nothing should surprise anybody about that shower of ***** though.

[Camo]

Been one or two incidents where player's actions have lead to them being sacked because of the impact on the reputation of the club. Says a lot about the reputation of HOMFC if the owners don't think that having a convicted sex offender on the books will have a detrimental impact.
I can't imagine Wonga being the new sponsors will be entirely happy either. Of course it's going to have a detrimental impact on the club. It's possibly the most detrimental thing that has ever happened to the club.


Sorry, but do you really think that vlad, your club or it's employees has any credibility left?

Honestly?
After yesterdays announcements, No.

[Carheenlea]

Let's be realistic here. Thomson has been convicted and of said offence, and has been punished in a way that the courts feel is appropriate for an offence of this nature. Obviously the courts feel confident that he does not pose a threat to anyones children and that he hopefully has learned his lesson and is unlikely to reoffend. What Hearts do about it, well thats up to them. As distasteful as Thomsons crime was, he is no Ian Brady, and has been dealt with accordingly.
The hysteria on this thread is exactly what Chris Morris based his infamous Brass Eye special on..

[degenerated]

I can't imagine Wonga being the new sponsors will be entirely happy either. Of course it's going to have a detrimental impact on the club. It's possibly the most detrimental thing that has ever happened to the club.


After yesterdays announcements, No.

you're not suggesting that he had any credibility when he claimed rix to be a hero and blaimed it on the wee lassie, are you?

[Jay]

Let's be realistic here. Thomson has been convicted and of said offence, and has been punished in a way that the courts feel is appropriate for an offence of this nature. Obviously the courts feel confident that he does not pose a threat to anyones children and that he hopefully has learned his lesson and is unlikely to reoffend. What Hearts do about it, well thats up to them. As distasteful as Thomsons crime was, he is no Ian Brady, and has been dealt with accordingly.
The hysteria on this thread is exactly what Chris Morris based his infamous Brass Eye special on..

The courts feel he is not a threat yet he is on the sex offenders register which I presume means he cannot work with children?:confused:

[Springbank]

Let's be realistic here. Thomson has been convicted and of said offence, and has been punished in a way that the courts feel is appropriate for an offence of this nature. Obviously the courts feel confident that he does not pose a threat to anyones children and that he hopefully has learned his lesson and is unlikely to reoffend. What Hearts do about it, well thats up to them. As distasteful as Thomsons crime was, he is no Ian Brady, and has been dealt with accordingly.
The hysteria on this thread is exactly what Chris Morris based his infamous Brass Eye special on..

I spotted the flaw for you

You place way too much faith in the courts when it comes to this kind of thing

You sound like you know a thing or two (meant as a compliment) so my question is, what are the highest risk offenders in terms of repeat offending? My understanding is it will be acquisitive crime (especially among addicts) and sex offences.

I don't think the courts get this stuff right at all.

[WindyMiller]

Let's be realistic here. Thomson has been convicted and of said offence, and has been punished in a way that the courts feel is appropriate for an offence of this nature. Obviously the courts feel confident that he does not pose a threat to anyones children and that he hopefully has learned his lesson and is unlikely to reoffend. What Hearts do about it, well thats up to them. As distasteful as Thomsons crime was, he is no Ian Brady, and has been dealt with accordingly.
The hysteria on this thread is exactly what Chris Morris based his infamous Brass Eye special on..


His sentence would have been reduced due to the fact that he pleaded guilty and saved his victims from appearing in court.

What would Thomson have done if the girls had agreed to his requests?

[Carheenlea]

The courts feel he is not a threat yet he is on the sex offenders register which I presume means he cannot work with children?:confused:

I was meaning more along the lines of if he posed an immediate danger to children, he would be locked up.

[Allant1981]

FAO carheenlea, if your 12 yr old girl was a mascot for the club and this guy played for hibs wud you be happy for him to be speaking to her? If he was captain(cant see it but you never know) would you be happy for him to take her hand and walk out on the park, i know i wouldnt be to happy if it was my kid

[CropleyWasGod]

I spotted the flaw for you

You place way too much faith in the courts when it comes to this kind of thing

You sound like you know a thing or two (meant as a compliment) so my question is, what are the highest risk offenders in terms of repeat offending? My understanding is it will be acquisitive crime (especially among addicts) and sex offences.

I don't think the courts get this stuff right at all.

My problem with the Court decision is that I think they should have prescribed some sort of counselling, as an attempt to minimise the risk of re-offending. Had they done that, I would have had no argument with Hearts standing by Thomson.

[DC_Hibs]

I can't imagine Wonga being the new sponsors will be entirely happy either.


I'm pretty sure they have had a few emails from "concerned citizens"

https://www.wonga.com/Statics/Wonga/contact.aspx

[CRAZYHIBBY]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.

[truehibernian]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.

You have actually raised quite an important issue, namely that security in grounds, which already needs tightened due to the Lennon incident, will now have to take into account fans' wishing to exact their own brand of summary justice on a player who many a football fan will want to 'lamp'.

At every single Scottish ground he goes to Thomson and Hearts now run the risk of seeing nasty incidents occur, and Scottish football's name is dragged further into the gutter.

An absolutely shocking decision by Hearts and one which will haunt them for many years to come. It gets deep into the core of a football club this decision. It will effect team morale/spirit, fans will be divided, sponsors will be ever more wary, the moral message sent out to fans and young players is wrong, and parents who have young players on Hearts books will be very very reluctant to have their son being part of a club that is supposedly a 'family club'. The Hearts fans I have spoken to, to a man, are appalled and truly dismayed at this decision.

[Carheenlea]

:not worth
I spotted the flaw for you

You place way too much faith in the courts when it comes to this kind of thing

You sound like you know a thing or two (meant as a compliment) so my question is, what are the highest risk offenders in terms of repeat offending? My understanding is it will be acquisitive crime (especially among addicts) and sex offences.

I don't think the courts get this stuff right at all.

I certainly don't have any great understanding of the


workings of courts in these instances, and you are probably justified in doubting that the courts always punish appropriately.
My point is simply that I don't share the same outrage, and the funny thing is, there now seems to be more outrage directed at Hearts for their decision to continue employment than at Thomson himself?

[Carheenlea]

FAO carheenlea, if your 12 yr old girl was a mascot for the club and this guy played for hibs wud you be happy for him to be speaking to her? If he was captain(cant see it but you never know) would you be happy for him to take her hand and walk out on the park, i know i wouldnt be to happy if it was my kid

I would be pretty confident that in the public eye of a football stadium my daughter would be safe enough walking out with Craig Thomson.

Of course, goes without saying, wouldn't let her be his friend on facebook though..!

[Aldo]

Let's be realistic here. Thomson has been convicted and of said offence, and has been punished in a way that the courts feel is appropriate for an offence of this nature. Obviously the courts feel confident that he does not pose a threat to anyones children and that he hopefully has learned his lesson and is unlikely to reoffend. What Hearts do about it, well thats up to them. As distasteful as Thomsons crime was, he is no Ian Brady, and has been dealt with accordingly.
The hysteria on this thread is exactly what Chris Morris based his infamous Brass Eye special on..

Tell you wot matey you and your teenage girls aged 12 & 14
Go and live next door to the guy. Yeah he poses no threat
And no he's not eyeing them up everytime they leave the house.

No threat the guy has been convicted yes convicted of the crime
And it was against 2 teenage girls aged 12 and 14. The guy is
V v lucky and will be branded this and that and IMHO rightly
So.

There will be a lot more to come from loads of folk so the guy
Better be ready for a torrent of abuse cos wot he did was unacceptable

Fwiw do you have any kids?

[ancient hibee]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.
Publicly of course.

[Jamesie]

On entering a guilty plea Thomson's solicitor would have had opportunity to make a plea in mitigation - in essence, a statement advising the court why he shouldn't go to jail.

If these mitigating factors alluded to by Vlad were as crucial as he infers the solicitor would have brought these out and the press would have reported it.

[McIntosh]

Tell you wot matey you and your teenage girls aged 12 & 14
Go and live next door to the guy. Yeah he poses no threat
And no he's not eyeing them up everytime they leave the house.

No threat the guy has been convicted yes convicted of the crime
And it was against 2 teenage girls aged 12 and 14. The guy is
V v lucky and will be branded this and that and IMHO rightly
So.

There will be a lot more to come from loads of folk so the guy
Better be ready for a torrent of abuse cos wot he did was unacceptable

Fwiw do you have any kids?


Get a grip - it is not at all relevant if this poster has children. The posters comments were not at all unreasonable. You response is a wee bit over the top.

[Kevvy1875]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.

Amen.

Too much 'tolerance' in our society which IMO breeds the exact behaviour the do-gooders think they can stop with good intentions and 'rehabilitation'. I personally believe the best deterrent to these vermins potential crimes is to give the ultimate punishment. I would go even more extreme and give them a sustained period of excruciating painful torture before they are sent to the big fire. This way they are more likely to think twice before engaging in the practice of grooming children. These people are driven and a piece of paper they have to sign and a poxy fine will not make them think twice. Zero Tolerance and back-at-ya attitude is whats required for people who abuse/want to abuse children.

I don't really give a toss if anyone thinks I am some sort of caveman for holding this view. I have two children myself and am concerned that Clubs such as HMFC appear to be dismissing this as if it was nothing. Lets be thankful for the victims and their families that this actually was stopped before CT could actually carry our what he was obviously planning to do.

[NAE NOOKIE]

As an employer Hearts can make the decision to stand by their employee if they wish, that is up to them, perhaps it could even have been looked upon as a brave decision given the possible backlash from sponsors and supporters.

But to even hint ( never mind straight out say ) that the victims in this sorry episode were in any way culpable is so downright offensive, not to mention insane, that it beggers belief.

On the subject of the club statement regarding Gary McKay, Mafia etc. That has got to be the most bizarre statement ever released by any football club ever anywhere. In that one single statement they have turned what was already a club on the edge into the laughing stock of European football.

Not to mention the blizzard of litigation which surely must follow.

Any Hearts fan who attempts to defend either statement needs their bloody head looked.

Mad Vlad has surely signalled the death knell of HMFC. The sponsors will walk and any chance he ever had of offloading the club to someone with the financial clout to be able to save it has gone.

Sorry Yams ................. Its the end.

[hibee92]

they really are the most vile club in the land.

[ArabHibee]

You have actually raised quite an important issue, namely that security in grounds, which already needs tightened due to the Lennon incident, will now have to take into account fans' wishing to exact their own brand of summary justice on a player who many a football fan will want to 'lamp'.

At every single Scottish ground he goes to Thomson and Hearts now run the risk of seeing nasty incidents occur, and Scottish football's name is dragged further into the gutter.

An absolutely shocking decision by Hearts and one which will haunt them for many years to come. It gets deep into the core of a football club this decision. It will effect team morale/spirit, fans will be divided, sponsors will be ever more wary, the moral message sent out to fans and young players is wrong, and parents who have young players on Hearts books will be very very reluctant to have their son being part of a club that is supposedly a 'family club'. The Hearts fans I have spoken to, to a man, are appalled and truly dismayed at this decision.

I'm pretty confident we won't see Thomson play in the first team again.

[McIntosh]

These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

[Albion Hibs]

Get a grip - it is not at all relevant if this poster has children. The posters comments were not at all unreasonable. You response is a wee bit over the top.

Comments may not have been unreasonable, but I dont think you can say someones response was over the top. If we were debating a red card that was or was not then fine, but this is an issue which everyone feels strongly about, I daren't say those with children may feel stronger. I know if I was faced with the prospect of having to take my child to a football ground with CT was playing I would feel pretty strongly about the matter.

[Removed]

I'm pretty confident we won't see Thomson play in the first team again.

Beans?

[fishybeaver]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

Are you serious?

[Greentinted]

The courts feel he is not a threat yet he is on the sex offenders register which I presume means he cannot work with children?:confused:

Not necessarily. Bearing in mind, not all sex offences involve children. Specific sanctions are imposed by the courts and employers.

http://www.prisonersfamilies.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Family_Zone/sex%20offenders%20register.pdf

[Beefster]

Whilst it's admirable that Scotzine are boycotting PBS and the rest of the media should follow, away fans should be boycotting Hearts too. I don't particularly want my money going towards paying Thomson's wages, tbh.

Edit: Just seen the poll. Apologies for just repeating what is already said elsewhere.

[McIntosh]

Comments may not have been unreasonable, but I dont think you can say someones response was over the top. If we were debating a red card that was or was not then fine, but this is an issue which everyone feels strongly about, I daren't say those with children may feel stronger. I know if I was faced with the prospect of having to take my child to a football ground with CT was playing I would feel pretty strongly about the matter.

Hold on, what relevance has a posters familial status got? Does having children provide a greater understanding of the issue at hand - of course not. In respect to your own child, you have the right/duty as a parent not to take them if you see fit. I would make this point some players have been convicted of manslaughter, some players have been involved in serious assaults and some players are involved in dealing drugs - so within your logic, why are you raising the bar so low, if you really wish to protect your child?

[Removed]

Think Edinburgh Council should withdraw any support for Hearts Breakfast Club in view of recent events. Dont think any parents would wish this organisation to be presenting itself within an educational establishment that their children are attending until they show they have the required amount of moral and ethical fibre.

Aegon should as well :agree:

[McIntosh]

Are you serious? Perfectly or are you leading me to believe that every poster here is snow white. The prevalence of under-age sex is widely reported. The wider point is that every case needs to be examined on its merit.

[Beefster]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

Utterly bizarre to:

- compare two 15 years old having consensual sex to a 19 year old grooming a 12 year and

- assume that consensual underage sex is common and

- assume that non-consensual sex is common and acceptable

[Steve-O]

Comments may not have been unreasonable, but I dont think you can say someones response was over the top. If we were debating a red card that was or was not then fine, but this is an issue which everyone feels strongly about, I daren't say those with children may feel stronger. I know if I was faced with the prospect of having to take my child to a football ground with CT was playing I would feel pretty strongly about the matter.

Can someone please explain to me why their child, sitting in the stand with them, would be at ANY RISK WHATSOEVER from a player on the park? Really?

You probably walk past ex-cons every single day, as does your child, but you just don't know it.

[Removed]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders.

How many have then :confused: I know for a fact I have had neither. That is a truly bizarre post imo.

[ArabHibee]

Can someone please explain to me why their child, sitting in the stand with them, would be at ANY RISK WHATSOEVER from a player on the park? Really?

You probably walk past ex-cons every single day, as does your child, but you just don't know it.

I might be wrong but I think some folk don't want to take their kids because of what will be sung and shouted at him? Try explaining to a 8 year old what a beast is? Maybe someone with kids can come on and confirm? :wink:

[dalkeith stu]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

What? Rape!!! You are a ******in clown!!!

[Steve-O]

I might be wrong but I think some folk don't want to take their kids because of what will be sung and shouted at him? Try explaining to a 8 year old what a beast is? Maybe someone with kids can come on and confirm? :wink:

Well doesn't this say more about those fans than Thomson?

Anyway, nothing they probably haven't heard before. Heard it all with Rix, and even going back to the Richard Gough days as well.

[Removed]

I might be wrong but I think some folk don't want to take their kids because of what will be sung and shouted at him? Try explaining to a 8 year old what a beast is? Maybe someone with kids can come on and confirm? :wink:

Probably true but I've already explained to my 12 and 10 year old boys as they saw it on the news and asked me what he had done. They told me they had a video about that sort of thing at school and to be careful on the pc.

I doubt I could have had a sensible conversation about it with them if 8 or younger. In terms of the songs at games, particularly away there is a lot I have to explain to them, some way harder than the Thomson situation.

[CropleyWasGod]

Well doesn't this say more about those fans than Thomson?

Anyway, nothing they probably haven't heard before. Heard it all with Rix, and even going back to the Richard Gough days as well.

Agreed. Just as likely to get the difficult questions about " what's gay, Daddy? What's a fenian? What's a ******?".

[Dunbar Hibee]

What? Rape!!! You are a ******in clown!!!

:agree:

[Kevvy1875]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.


You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

Pretentious bell-end IMO. Why ridicule the guy because he made his point? Also...I have never had sex with a minor so don't include me in your overview.

It is perfectly black & white when it comes to people grooming children.....unless you are a pretentious bell-end who believe's they are so clever they can 'rehabilitate' them. Its planet earth we live on...not ****ing Utopia! Some people forget this.


***** Thomson...I would take Her Majesty's cash to wield the axe myself if it were allowed. Beasts like that on any level deserve the harshest punishment.

[McIntosh]

Utterly bizarre to:

- compare two 15 years old having consensual sex to a 19 year old grooming a 12 year and

- assume that consensual underage sex is common and

- assume that non-consensual sex is common and acceptable

Excuse me:

I gave no comparisons
I never gave age qualifications
Underage sex is common
As for non-consensual sex it is equally common However, I never stated it was acceptable.
The bizarreness here is you ability to qualify and add to my comments.

[itchy07]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

If you know someone on this forum who is guilty of raping someone then you have a duty to society to report that person to the police. They are most definitely sex offenders not just "technically". Is that black and white enough for you? Or are you just talking pish?

[McIntosh]

How many have then :confused: I know for a fact I have had neither. That is a truly bizarre post imo.

If you go by the estiminations of the office of national statistics 28% of the population have had sex with a young person below the age of consent. The naivety and self-righteousness of some of these comments are beyond bizarre.

[Westie1875]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.


Call it what it is, rape. :bitchy:

[rubber mal]

Been one or two incidents where player's actions have lead to them being sacked because of the impact on the reputation of the club. Says a lot about the reputation of HOMFC if the owners don't think that having a convicted sex offender on the books will have a detrimental impact.

:agree: I think that is the key point here, NH. Thomson was found guilty of a despicable crime, of that there can be no doubt. But I think any right-thinking football fan can accept that that is not something the club (in this case, Hearts) could be held responsible for, and that indeed it is something that could happen at any club.

It's how the club deal with the matter that is crucial. Hearts had the opportunity to take a stand by sacking the player and releasing a statement along the lines of "we will not tolerate that kind of behaviour at this football club."

However, not only have they welcomed Thomson back, they've gone beyond that by trying to make excuses for his actions to the point that (if I'm reading between the lines correctly) he was set up!

If I'm gobsmacked reading that statement, I can't imagine how the families of the young girls involved must be feeling.

[Removed]

If you go by the estiminations of the office of national statistics 28% of the population have had sex with a young person below the age of consent. The naivety and self-righteousness of some of these comments are beyond bizarre.

What Is the % for an adult having sex with a 12 year old?

[McIntosh]

If you know someone on this forum who is guilty of raping someone then you have a duty to society to report that person to the police. They are most definitely sex offenders not just "technically". Is that black and white enough for you? Or are you just talking pish?

Here are some questions for you. The sixteen and half year old boyfriend has sex with his fifteen and half year old girlfriend. He is undoubtedly committing a crime. Would you have me twenty-five years later report this now happily married couple to the police?

These issues are little bit more complicated than this naive world of black and white.

[McIntosh]

What? Rape!!! You are a ******in clown!!!

Look son and I am going to have to patronise you here but you deserve it. The term you used is different legally than the terms I have used, don't be lazy and just check it up.

[Hibs07p]

On entering a guilty plea Thomson's solicitor would have had opportunity to make a plea in mitigation - in essence, a statement advising the court why he shouldn't go to jail.

If these mitigating factors alluded to by Vlad were as crucial as he infers the solicitor would have brought these out and the press would have reported it.

Agree 100%.
And on the other side, if Thomson pled not guilty, further evidence from the witnesses could have proved a lot more damaging. The charges could have been a lot more serious to start with, but watered down to facilitate a guilty plea. Pleading guilty also allowed him to provide mitigating circumstances as you say, which may or may not be accurate or true.

Some things are indefensible, and Vlad's take on things prove he's not fit to run a professional football club and should be hounded out along with CT.
I personally think he's looking for a fans revolt so he can walk away, but the yams have been fed so much ****, and bent over a barrel so many times, I can't see them not accepting this rogering, the same as every other time. Even Vlad must be thinking, how much will this lot take before they start to fight back?

[McIntosh]

Pretentious bell-end IMO. Why ridicule the guy because he made his point? Also...I have never had sex with a minor so don't include me in your overview.

It is perfectly black & white when it comes to people grooming children.....unless you are a pretentious bell-end who believe's they are so clever they can 'rehabilitate' them. Its planet earth we live on...not ****ing Utopia! Some people forget this.


***** Thomson...I would take Her Majesty's cash to wield the axe myself if it were allowed. Beasts like that on any level deserve the harshest punishment.

Well what do you suggest we do with drug dealers then? Play them in the team?

[silverhibee]

Hmmmm.... perhaps something to do with employment laws, or legal issues to sack him over it?

I forsee a good bit of gardening leave for him like. I very much doubt hearts is a club run by Beast sympathisers.

You were saying. :rolleyes:

[Beefster]

Excuse me:

I gave no comparisons
I never gave age qualifications
Underage sex is common
As for non-consensual sex it is equally common However, I never stated it was acceptable.
The bizarreness here is you ability to qualify and add to my comments.

- If there was no intention to compare, why were they mentioned?

- If you weren't talking about 15 year olds, what age were you talking about exactly?

- Underage sex may be a problem that needs to be tackled but whether I'm not sure that I'd agree that it is common.

- Non-consensual sex (i.e. rape) is definitely not common under any measure. Apologies for thinking you were saying it was acceptable, when you weren't.

[YehButNoBut]

Seemingly the statement below has been posted on Hearts facebook from Serge, some strange comments coming from Hearts at the moment.

SERGE ON HEARTS FACEBOOK

'Believe me, I understand all concerns, but yet again I want to stress - if there would be a real danger we would take a different decision.
Do you believe it would be different if we terminate the player? Yes, the club could escape the situation of arguing with uncomfortable supporters. What supporters would gain from that - the pers...on would be still among us, perhaps angry at himself and the rest of the world. Whether that would lead to better outcome for all of us - I am sure it would not. If we consider ourself a society of a 21st century then people do not get kicked outside the gate and forgotten.'

[Twa Cairpets]

Excuse me:

I gave no comparisons
I never gave age qualifications
Underage sex is common
As for non-consensual sex it is equally common However, I never stated it was acceptable.
The bizarreness here is you ability to qualify and add to my comments.

I do not understand why you feel you need to defend this guy in any way, shape of form.

I'm not in the hang 'em and torture them brigade, but pretty much all the arguments beng made in his defence are unsuportable.

He pled guilty to a nasty offence. Yes people do worse things, but that doesnt lessen the fundamental wrongness of his actions, which he pled guilty to. This much is black and white, unless you swallow the Romanov bull of "other evidence".

He is a young man who is employed by a very public organisation who profess to have family friendly credentials. The decision to continue to employ a registered sex offender is truly obscene and massively wrong given the nature of his work.

Yes we will unknowingly come into contact with people with much worse convictions without knowing, yes there will be people at games and on this board who will have done criminal things and are pretty unpleasant, but that is utterly irrelevant, and it's not double standards to be appalled at the behaviour of Thompson and the behaviour or Hearts in equal measure.

It's not a question of child safety for kids going to games, because that is, I would suggest, zero risk. It is however a question of the ethical standards of a previously respected institution. I couldnt care less about Thomson - his life is effectively screwed because people won't forget, and I won't lose sleep over it. Yes, he needs monitored and counselled to ensure he doesnt re-offend, but he shouldnt be in any way whatsoever be a seen as any element of a victim in this, because he isn't. I'm sure this isn't what youre suggesting, but its bloody hard to read it in any other way.

I don't like Hearts because I'm a Hibs fan. Until Romanov took over, the rivalry was entirely football based. They are now repellant on any number of levels, and if it was Hibs, I would have stopped going years ago. Romanov and his decisions have completely removed any trace of decency from the club, and I do fell somewhat sorry for the genuine Jambos out there.

[McIntosh]

What Is the % for an adult having sex with a 12 year old?

As you have asked a serious question, it deserves a serious reply. The key margin of analysis is puberty. The prevalence of sex with children pre-puberty is so small as to have no "statistical significance" though this is no comfort for these unfortunate victims.

[Kevvy1875]

Pretentious bell-end IMO. Why ridicule the guy because he made his point? Also...I have never had sex with a minor so don't include me in your overview.

It is perfectly black & white when it comes to people grooming children.....unless you are a pretentious bell-end who believe's they are so clever they can 'rehabilitate' them. Its planet earth we live on...not ****ing Utopia! Some people forget this.


***** Thomson...I would take Her Majesty's cash to wield the axe myself if it were allowed. Beasts like that on any level deserve the harshest punishment.


Well what do you suggest we do with drug dealers then? Play them in the team?

WTF? Who on this thread suggested that drug dealers had anything to do with the CT issue? Are you Vlad?

[Twa Cairpets]

As you have asked a serious question, it deserves a serious reply. The key margin of analysis is puberty. The prevalence of sex with children pre-puberty is so small as to have no "statistical significance" though this is no comfort for these unfortunate victims.

No, its not. The "key margin of analysis" whatever that means, is how many 19 year olds intentionally act lewdly and inappropriately with the goal of having sex with a minor. Are you seriously suggesting that if the 12 year old was physically more mature then it would be less of an issue?

Good grief man, your posts read like the worst kind of caricatured social worker.

[Removed]

As you have asked a serious question, it deserves a serious reply. The key margin of analysis is puberty. The prevalence of sex with children pre-puberty is so small as to have no "statistical significance" though this is no comfort for these unfortunate victims.

I understand the term statistical significance and I'm not surprised with that. I suspect that there will be a fair percentage of 14/15 year old kids experimenting/having sex with each other or with slightly older boy/girlfriends, and yes, a lot on here will have been in that position, but to equate that with Thomson's situation even indirectly is wrong imo.

[Hibs On Tour]

Excuse me:

I gave no comparisons
I never gave age qualifications
Underage sex is common
As for non-consensual sex it is equally common However, I never stated it was acceptable.
The bizarreness here is you ability to qualify and add to my comments.
Pish. Feel free to provide some evidence of this or just admit you're trying to be a smartarse.

This isn't a happy couple who are just over the boundaries of right and wrong you smarmy get, this is a grown man sending photos of his cock to a wee lassie of 12. That's what he was charged with, that's what he pled guilty to, that's what he was convicted of. Beast. Endof.

No excuses, no grey areas, no hypocrisy or other such pish. Just a beast who is being allowed to keep his no-doubt well-paid job against the wishes of the vast majority of fans from ALL teams and certain smartarses like you playing games with words and phrases.

Give it a rest. No one is interested. Really. :bye:

[McIntosh]

I do not understand why you feel you need to defend this guy in any way, shape of form.

I'm not in the hang 'em and torture them brigade, but pretty much all the arguments beng made in his defence are unsuportable.

He pled guilty to a nasty offence. Yes people do worse things, but that doesnt lessen the fundamental wrongness of his actions, which he pled guilty to. This much is black and white, unless you swallow the Romanov bull of "other evidence".

He is a young man who is employed by a very public organisation who profess to have family friendly credentials. The decision to continue to employ a registered sex offender is truly obscene and massively wrong given the nature of his work.

Yes we will unknowingly come into contact with people with much worse convictions without knowing, yes there will be people at games and on this board who will have done criminal things and are pretty unpleasant, but that is utterly irrelevant, and it's not double standards to be appalled at the behaviour of Thompson and the behaviour or Hearts in equal measure.

It's not a question of child safety for kids going to games, because that is, I would suggest, zero risk. It is however a question of the ethical standards of a previously respected institution. I couldnt care less about Thomson - his life is effectively screwed because people won't forget, and I won't lose sleep over it. Yes, he needs monitored and counselled to ensure he doesnt re-offend, but he shouldnt be in any way whatsoever be a seen as any element of a victim in this, because he isn't. I'm sure this isn't what youre suggesting, but its bloody hard to read it in any other way.

I don't like Hearts because I'm a Hibs fan. Until Romanov took over, the rivalry was entirely football based. They are now repellant on any number of levels, and if it was Hibs, I would have stopped going years ago. Romanov and his decisions have completely removed any trace of decency from the club, and I do fell somewhat sorry for the genuine Jambos out there.

Thank you for you reasoned comments. I am sure your appreciate in all my comments I have strived for objectivity and fairness.

This young man and he still is a young man has committed a serious crime and he has been duly convicted by the state. I have no doubt that the publicity and shame of this offence will have seriously effected his life and the lives of his wider family. Paramount in my mind are the direct victims and the indirect victims.

I have never believed in double punishments, let alone triple punishments. Dismissing this man from his employment would not just be a short-term punishment but the removal of hope for him. Hope that he can contribute meaningfully to society. Hope that there is the possibility of redemption. I believe people deserve second chances, there are ways back. We have a Hibs player who could be facing conviction for dealing drugs, not a pretty conviction. I hope that if this sadly comes to pass that we as a club will stick by him.

I was accused earlier of being pretentious but if what I have just said is this, then I must be guilty as charged.

[McIntosh]

No, its not. The "key margin of analysis" whatever that means, is how many 19 year olds intentionally act lewdly and inappropriately with the goal of having sex with a minor. Are you seriously suggesting that if the 12 year old was physically more mature then it would be less of an issue?

Good grief man, your posts read like the worst kind of caricatured social worker.

With the upmost respect you are conflating a number of issues. I was replying to a very specific question.

[IndieHibby]

Pish. Feel free to provide some evidence of this or just admit you're trying to be a smartarse.

This isn't a happy couple who are just over the boundaries of right and wrong you smarmy get, this is a grown man sending photos of his cock to a wee lassie of 12. That's what he was charged with, that's what he pled guilty to, that's what he was convicted of. Beast. Endof.

No excuses, no grey areas, no hypocrisy or other such pish. Just a beast who is being allowed to keep his no-doubt well-paid job against the wishes of the vast majority of fans from ALL teams and certain smartarses like you playing games with words and phrases.

Give it a rest. No one is interested. Really. :bye:

This.

McIntosh, you are making yourself look like a complete arse.

All the nit-picking that the thread has descended into since you posted is irrelevant and disctracting. CT should be emptied for the same reason that Gary Glitter wouldn't be Guest of Honour on Blue Peter.

And for that reason, Hearts' defending the retention of his services, when they could so easily have got rid of him, is beyond parody. It's actually disgusting.

[Greentinted]

:agree: I think that is the key point here, NH. Thomson was found guilty of a despicable crime, of that there can be no doubt. But I think any right-thinking football fan can accept that that is not something the club (in this case, Hearts) could be held responsible for, and that indeed it is something that could happen at any club.

It's how the club deal with the matter that is crucial. Hearts had the opportunity to take a stand by sacking the player and releasing a statement along the lines of "we will not tolerate that kind of behaviour at this football club."

However, not only have they welcomed Thomson back, they've gone beyond that by trying to make excuses for his actions to the point that (if I'm reading between the lines correctly) he was set up!

If I'm gobsmacked reading that statement, I can't imagine how the families of the young girls involved must be feeling.

And there, buried deep in the heart of an ever extending internet message board discussion is the core of the thing.

Not once has any HMFC spokesperson expressed empathy, sympathy or even acknowledgement here. Its all about the peadophile, all about how he is on a steep 'learning curve', all about his 'mistake', all about an online predatory sex-offender with a predilection for young teenage girls, all about a criminal whose employers have, effectively rewarded. Let him get help, counselling, whatever it takes...aye very nice, but what about the victims???

A shameful yet a clear indictment at some of the skewed attitudes that prevail at the core of certain elements of our society (yes Hearts, that's you) in the early 21st century.

[lucky]

Thank you for you reasoned comments. I am sure your appreciate in all my comments I have strived for objectivity and fairness.

This young man and he still is a young man has committed a serious crime and he has been duly convicted by the state. I have no doubt that the publicity and shame of this offence will have seriously effected his life and the lives of his wider family. Paramount in my mind are the direct victims and the indirect victims.

I have never believed in double punishments, let alone triple punishments. Dismissing this man from his employment would not just be a short-term punishment but the removal of hope for him. Hope that he can contribute meaningfully to society. Hope that there is the possibility of redemption. I believe people deserve second chances, there are ways back. We have a Hibs player who could be facing conviction for dealing drugs, not a pretty conviction. I hope that if this sadly comes to pass that we as a club will stick by him.

I was accused earlier of being pretentious but if what I have just said is this, then I must be guilty as charged.

absolute rubbish. If he was dismissed it is not a double punishment. The courts take care of his crime and his employer must take care of employment issue. The two whilst connected are not seen as add ons.

What Hibs player is facing drug dealing charges?

[McIntosh]

I understand the term statistical significance and I'm not surprised with that. I suspect that there will be a fair percentage of 14/15 year old kids experimenting/having sex with each other or with slightly older boy/girlfriends, and yes, a lot on here will have been in that position, but to equate that with Thomson's situation even indirectly is wrong imo.

Thanks for your reply. I wasn't equating the two they are not comparable. The point I was trying to make was in relation to socially acceptable practice and the Law. Some things can be acceptable but equally illegal.

[Hibs07p]

Pish. Feel free to provide some evidence of this or just admit you're trying to be a smartarse.

This isn't a happy couple who are just over the boundaries of right and wrong you smarmy get, this is a grown man sending photos of his cock to a wee lassie of 12. That's what he was charged with, that's what he pled guilty to, that's what he was convicted of. Beast. Endof.

No excuses, no grey areas, no hypocrisy or other such pish. Just a beast who is being allowed to keep his no-doubt well-paid job against the wishes of the vast majority of fans from ALL teams and certain smartarses like you playing games with words and phrases.

Give it a rest. No one is interested. Really. :bye:

Don't sit on the fence now, say what you mean FFS.

[Gatecrasher]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13915721.stm

SFA are going to investigate,

[McIntosh]

Pish. Feel free to provide some evidence of this or just admit you're trying to be a smartarse.

This isn't a happy couple who are just over the boundaries of right and wrong you smarmy get, this is a grown man sending photos of his cock to a wee lassie of 12. That's what he was charged with, that's what he pled guilty to, that's what he was convicted of. Beast. Endof.

No excuses, no grey areas, no hypocrisy or other such pish. Just a beast who is being allowed to keep his no-doubt well-paid job against the wishes of the vast majority of fans from ALL teams and certain smartarses like you playing games with words and phrases.

Give it a rest. No one is interested. Really. :bye:

You made me laugh and here is a right smartarsed comment.You seem to be really interested. :wink:

[IndieHibby]

Hope that there is the possibility of redemption. I believe people deserve second chances, there are ways back. We have a Hibs player who could be facing conviction for dealing drugs, not a pretty conviction. I hope that if this sadly comes to pass that we as a club will stick by him.

I was accused earlier of being pretentious but if what I have just said is this, then I must be guilty as charged.

This is becoming indecent.

Children are highly brand-sensitive. A football club, just like advertisers to children, have a responsibility to ensure that they do not promote indecent messages.

What message does it send to retain a player (nobody has the right to a job) who is a convicted child sex offender?

What message?

If he was a teacher - would you consider his sacking a 'double-punishment' or is that a term you use to suit you when you want to play devils-advocate?

Unless of course you believe this tripe that you are writing?

:rolleyes:

[silverhibee]

BTW, I see the guy who's in charge of the Hertz supporters trust has continued the trend of mentalist statements:




****ing crazy.

[McIntosh]

This is becoming indecent.

Children are highly brand-sensitive. A football club, just like advertisers to children, have a responsibility to ensure that they do not promote indecent messages.

What message does it send to retain a player (nobody has the right to a job) who is a convicted child sex offender?

What message?

If he was a teacher - would you consider his sacking a 'double-punishment' or is that a term you use to suit you when you want to play devils-advocate?

Unless of course you believe this tripe that you are writing?

:rolleyes:

Teaching I believe is governed by a rafter of legal regulations. Football is not governed by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act of 1974.

[YehButNoBut]

Hearts face SFA investigation over tirade

The Scottish Football Association is likely to examine an outburst from Hearts about external influences.

Hope they throw the book at them. :agree:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13915721.stm

[IndieHibby]

Teaching I believe is governed by a rafter of legal regulations. Football is not governed by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act of 1974.

Anyway, what has that got to with access to children or the decision to retain a child sex offender at a FOOTBALL CLUB (not just any old business)?

And you're not helping your case with the sarcastic nature of your posts.

EDIT - please don't pretend not to know what I meant by sarcastic. The comment "I believe" (feigning layman-esque ignorance) followed by direct quotation of relevant regulations.

[Twa Cairpets]

With the upmost respect you are conflating a number of issues. I was replying to a very specific question.

No, I'm really not. You didnt answer the specific question, and tried to wriggle out of it with irrelevant nonsense.


This young man and he still is a young man has committed a serious crime and he has been duly convicted by the state. I have no doubt that the publicity and shame of this offence will have seriously effected his life and the lives of his wider family. Paramount in my mind are the direct victims and the indirect victims.

I have never believed in double punishments, let alone triple punishments. Dismissing this man from his employment would not just be a short-term punishment but the removal of hope for him. Hope that he can contribute meaningfully to society. Hope that there is the possibility of redemption. I believe people deserve second chances, there are ways back. We have a Hibs player who could be facing conviction for dealing drugs, not a pretty conviction. I hope that if this sadly comes to pass that we as a club will stick by him.

The logical errors in this post are laughable - have a look at IndieHibbies posts to see why.

Frankly, if he had "hope removed" as you rather melodramatically put it, then that was his look out. I doubt very much if he was unaware of the opprobrium that woul dbe heaped upon hom for his actions if he was caught. If he was working in any other employment or for any other company with pretentions to decency, then he would have been out on his ear, no question at all for gross misconduct.

The utterly bizarre pronouncements defending him from the Bus Shelter are, as well as being bonkers, very deeply unpleasant, and miss the point spectacularly.

[hibiedude]

Radio Scotland has Charlie Mann stating Romanov is on a KGB blacklist that’s why he see’s conspiracies everywhere hence the crazy statement the club made. :faf:

[McIntosh]

Pish. Feel free to provide some evidence of this or just admit you're trying to be a smartarse.

This isn't a happy couple who are just over the boundaries of right and wrong you smarmy get, this is a grown man sending photos of his cock to a wee lassie of 12. That's what he was charged with, that's what he pled guilty to, that's what he was convicted of. Beast. Endof.

No excuses, no grey areas, no hypocrisy or other such pish. Just a beast who is being allowed to keep his no-doubt well-paid job against the wishes of the vast majority of fans from ALL teams and certain smartarses like you playing games with words and phrases.

Give it a rest. No one is interested. Really. :bye:

Ps What kind of signal are you giving out with the picture which is your avatar? Two steps ahead - don't make me laugh.

[McIntosh]

Anyway, what has that got to with access to children or the decision to retain a child sex offender at a FOOTBALL CLUB (not just any old business)?

And you're not helping your case with the sarcastic nature of your posts.

EDIT - please don't pretend not to know what I meant by sarcastic. The comment "I believe" (feigning layman-esque ignorance) followed by direct quotation of relevant regulations.

First thing, I am not a school teacher but I am perfectly aware of these regulations. I complete them often enough. I was trying to be civil, if it came across as sarcasm that was not how it was intended.

[McIntosh]

pretentions to decency

A telling phrase indeed. God forbid that we have a striker who scores twenty goals and gets convicted of a serious crime.

[IndieHibby]

First thing, I am not a school teacher but I am perfectly aware of these regulations. I complete often enough. I was trying to be civil, if it came across as sarcasm that was not how it was intended.

Fair do's. Withdrawn and apologies for getting it wrong.

So where do you stand on:
1. The notion that the termination of his contract is the decision (therefore the responsibility) of the club and has nothing to do with an idea of 'double punishment'
2. A club like Hearts (or any F.C.) has a responsiblity (given a large part of it's market are children) to protect them from the indecency of adult life.
3. Like I said, Gary Glitter wouldn't be invited on Blue Peter, so why would CT be entitled to the benefits of being a professional footballer, given he views a 12 year old girl as an acceptable sexual partner?

[IndieHibby]

A telling phrase indeed. God forbid that we have a striker who scores twenty goals and gets convicted of a serious crime.

:rolleyes:

[Beefster]

A telling phrase indeed. God forbid that we have a striker who scores twenty goals and gets convicted of a serious crime.

If this is reference to O'Connor, possessing drugs (of which O'Connor is presumed innocent anyway) isn't comparable to grooming 12 years olds, I'm afraid.

If a Hibs player was convicted of a sex offence involving minors, I'd be reacting in exactly the same way.

[Twa Cairpets]

A telling phrase indeed. God forbid that we have a striker who scores twenty goals and gets convicted of a serious crime.

And who would that be then?

I'm guessing you're now purring with the success of your fishing mission, but in case you're not, here's the reasoned response.

Not every crime is equal, not every crime generates the same level of anger and disgust. I wouldnt expect a player with a speeding ticket to be sacked by the club, I wouldnt expect a player necessarily with an assault charge to be sacked by the club. I would expect a player who has been charged and convicted of paedophile activities to be sacked, without question and without equivocation.

[jakki]

I have read every post on here and having first hand experience of children being in care for no fault of their own but were linked with paedophilia, I am so disappointed with some remarks on here.

Children were sexually abused either physically or mentally or that their parent had married a paedophile .

On one occassion, the courts decided that a paedophile on counselling could visit his child under supervision of me. The social works dept. deemed that they didn't want the other foster children to be near this man and were going to pay for them to have an afternoon out at the cinema and a swimming session.

I was talking to a police sergeant before the event, and he advised me to give my children the same opportunity to get out of his eye shot.His words "Once a paedophile, always a paedophile!"Although I disagree with this (if suitable counselling is given), I made sure that my children were well away for the visit.

I would like to add that not all paedophiles are men!

[stokesmessiah]

Thank you for you reasoned comments. I am sure your appreciate in all my comments I have strived for objectivity and fairness.

This young man and he still is a young man has committed a serious crime and he has been duly convicted by the state. I have no doubt that the publicity and shame of this offence will have seriously effected his life and the lives of his wider family. Paramount in my mind are the direct victims and the indirect victims.

I have never believed in double punishments, let alone triple punishments. Dismissing this man from his employment would not just be a short-term punishment but the removal of hope for him. Hope that he can contribute meaningfully to society. Hope that there is the possibility of redemption. I believe people deserve second chances, there are ways back. We have a Hibs player who could be facing conviction for dealing drugs, not a pretty conviction. I hope that if this sadly comes to pass that we as a club will stick by him.

I was accused earlier of being pretentious but if what I have just said is this, then I must be guilty as charged.

Who???

[Kevvy1875]

Ps What kind of signal are you giving out with the picture which is your avatar? Two steps ahead - don't make me laugh.

Er that he fancies Ke$ha a pop star who is the object of many young guys affections? She isn't my cup of tea...I prefer Kylie.

Also....you never answered to my reply to your question earlier.

IMO...you are a wind-up merchant or....you just believe you are smarter than everyone else and are here to 'educate' us all. Newsflash....we don't need to be educated. I hate beasts and trust my own instincts and that is that they should be eradicated from society as soon as they are caught.

Here is my take on CT.....He is a beast. He doesn't deserve rehabilitation as he never will be. He gets turned on by wee lassies. How do you switch that off exactly genius?

My missus turns me on......I know for a fact that no one re-educate my plodger to think otherwise.

Point is...you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un. Don't know the exact numbers but Sex offenders repeat offending isn't exactly uncommon.

Of course in today's society we are forced to tolerate beasts so saints like you full of their own self importance can work in the Pedo fixing business and justify themselves a wage for talking sh*te.

[McIntosh]

Fair do's. Withdrawn and apologies for getting it wrong.

So where do you stand on:
1. The notion that the termination of his contract is the decision (therefore the responsibility) of the club and has nothing to do with an idea of 'double punishment'
2. A club like Hearts (or any F.C.) has a responsiblity (given a large part of it's market are children) to protect them from the indecency of adult life.
3. Like I said, Gary Glitter wouldn't be invited on Blue Peter, so why would CT be entitled to the benefits of being a professional footballer, given he views a 12 year old girl as an acceptable sexual partner?

1. Hearts have taken the view that he is not in breach of his contact, they have exercised their right to retain him in employment.
2. Society let alone a Football club should be protecting young people from racism, sexism and the sexual commodification of young people.
3. All clubs will have players who have views that are socially unacceptable, if CT had a sexual partner aged twelve he would be rightly in prison and unemployed.

[McIntosh]

If this is reference to O'Connor, possessing drugs (of which O'Connor is presumed innocent anyway) isn't comparable to grooming 12 years olds, I'm afraid.

If a Hibs player was convicted of a sex offence involving minors, I'd be reacting in exactly the same way.

They are not comparable but that not the point, the point is role models would a convicted drug dealers in the team be acceptable to the club? Particularly in light of our "pretentions to decency".

[McIntosh]

And who would that be then?

I'm guessing you're now purring with the success of your fishing mission, but in case you're not, here's the reasoned response.

Not every crime is equal, not every crime generates the same level of anger and disgust. I wouldnt expect a player with a speeding ticket to be sacked by the club, I wouldnt expect a player necessarily with an assault charge to be sacked by the club. I would expect a player who has been charged and convicted of paedophile activities to be sacked, without question and without equivocation.

What about drug offences, should they be sacked if convicted?

[silverhibee]

They are not comparable but that not the point, the point is role models would a convicted drug dealers in the team be acceptable to the club? Particularly in light of our "pretentions to decency".


He was charged with possesion of a class A drug and obstructing the police carrying out there search.

Where do you get this drug dealing nonsense.

[Woody1985]

BaaHahahaHahahaHahaha

I said the other day the only reason they wouldn't get rid is likely to be for financial reasons. Not that anyone would buy the beast.

[jakki]

1. Hearts have taken the view that he is not in breach of his contact, they have exercised their right to retain him in employment.
2. Society let alone a Football club should be protecting young people from racism, sexism and the sexual commodification of young people.
3. All clubs will have players who have views that are socially unacceptable, if CT had a sexual partner aged twelve he would be rightly in prison and unemployed.

Sorry but you disgust me.

No.1 . He in my view has discredited his club (by his lewd behavour) and I imagine that would be a clause in his contract.

No 2. Hearts are not protecting young people by condoning CG's behaviour and laying the blame elsewhere.

No 3. He did not have a sexual parner aged 12 but he was grooming her and the 14 yo.

If this was a Hibs player and the scenario was the same,I would be throwing my season ticket at Petrie's face!

[marinello59]

They are not comparable but that not the point, the point is role models would a convicted drug dealers in the team be acceptable to the club? Particularly in light of our "pretentions to decency".

Since when was a football player you only see kicking a ball about for 90 minutes every weekend a role model? It's a ridiculous concept. Role models would include parents, extended family and friends. My wee lad may have footballing heroes but in now way are they 'role models.'

There IS a world of difference between continuing to employ somebody who dabbles in drugs than employing a convicted sex offender. Especially when Hearts, like most clubs these days. portray themselves as a family club.

[Twa Cairpets]

What about drug offences, should they be sacked if convicted?

Depends on what they are. Broadly speaking, posession/use: no, not necessarily, dealing, yes,sack them.

You're still trying to deflect from the points raised.

You believe it is right and fair for Hearts to both continue to employ (and indeed justfiy that continuation in a deeply unpleasant manner - "learning curve").

I think you are 100%, black and white, completely wrong in this, and your attempts to justify it are nauseating.

[McIntosh]

Er that he fancies Ke$ha a pop star who is the object of many young guys affections? She isn't my cup of tea...I prefer Kylie.

Also....you never answered to my reply to your question earlier.

IMO...you are a wind-up merchant or....you just believe you are smarter than everyone else and are here to 'educate' us all. Newsflash....we don't need to be educated. I hate beasts and trust my own instincts and that is that they should be eradicated from society as soon as they are caught.

Here is my take on CT.....He is a beast. He doesn't deserve rehabilitation as he never will be. He gets turned on by wee lassies. How do you switch that off exactly genius?

My missus turns me on......I know for a fact that no one re-educate my plodger to think otherwise.

Point is...you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un. Don't know the exact numbers but Sex offenders repeat offending isn't exactly uncommon.

Of course in today's society we are forced to tolerate beasts so saints like you full of their own self importance can work in the Pedo fixing business and justify themselves a wage for talking sh*te.

Well Kev, I treated it with the contempt it deserved though I did allude to it later.

As for your comments "you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un" it rings like something out of the Sweeney. Freud and Jung should just have visited Lochend clearly the home of psychiatry. As for sexualy identity it often changes, e.g. in prison. As for educating you, if you are ever at King's College London I will willing give you a tour but don't ask me to pay the fees.

[IndieHibby]

1. Hearts have taken the view that he is not in breach of his contact, they have exercised their right to retain him in employment.

I think we all get that - it's half the reason people are annoyed with them (to put it lightly). But you haven't answered my question (I think). Why shouldn't they sack him? Is it a double-punishment to do so?


2. Society let alone a Football club should be protecting young people from racism, sexism and the sexual commodification of young people.

How does that equate to allowing a peadophile to work for you? Would you employ one? Would you be happy to pay him to visit a primary school, in your name, and take responsibility if he abused a child, or worse?


3. All clubs will have players who have views that are socially unacceptable, if CT had a sexual partner aged twelve he would be rightly in prison and unemployed.

I wasn't talking about his unpalatable opinions (I don't believe for a second you are that thick, so you really are on the wind up now). When I used the term "CT views" I meant it as in "sees" - he considers a 12 year old girl to be an acceptable sexual partner.

Stop making me spell it out and answer the sodding questions!

I'm begining to wonder whether you have the spine to continue your trolling...

[Woody1985]

I have read every post on here and having first hand experience of children being in care for no fault of their own but were linked with paedophilia, I am so disappointed with some remarks on here.

Children were sexually abused either physically or mentally or that their parent had married a paedophile .

On one occassion, the courts decided that a paedophile on counselling could visit his child under supervision of me. The social works dept. deemed that they didn't want the other foster children to be near this man and were going to pay for them to have an afternoon out at the cinema and a swimming session.

I was talking to a police sergeant before the event, and he advised me to give my children the same opportunity to get out of his eye shot.His words "Once a paedophile, always a paedophile!"Although I disagree with this (if suitable counselling is given), I made sure that my children were well away for the visit.

I would like to add that not all paedophiles are men!

They can't be cured. Beasts will always fancy kids, straight people and gays will be attracted accordingly. You don't just change into a beast, you're either a beast or not.

Ct should be kept away from kids.

How many times has he seen kids in the stand and thought 'I would'. Sicko.

:jamboak:

[McIntosh]

Depends on what they are. Broadly speaking, posession/use: no, not necessarily, dealing, yes,sack them.

You're still trying to deflect from the points raised.

You believe it is right and fair for Hearts to both continue to employ (and indeed justfiy that continuation in a deeply unpleasant manner - "learning curve").

I think you are 100%, black and white, completely wrong in this, and your attempts to justify it are nauseating.

Goodness man, read back what you are writing it's going way beyond self-righteous. You are sounding like the hang em high brigade which I believe you are not. What way back is there for this man or do you believe that this man's life is over, no chance of rehabilitation.

[McIntosh]

Sorry but you disgust me.

No.1 . He in my view has discredited his club (by his lewd behavour) and I imagine that would be a clause in his contract.

No 2. Hearts are not protecting young people by condoning CG's behaviour and laying the blame elsewhere.

No 3. He did not have a sexual parner aged 12 but he was grooming her and the 14 yo.

If this was a Hibs player and the scenario was the same,I would be throwing my season ticket at Petrie's face!


Well, well you are easily shocked.

[McIntosh]

Since when was a football player you only see kicking a ball about for 90 minutes every weekend a role model? It's a ridiculous concept. Role models would include parents, extended family and friends. My wee lad may have footballing heroes but in now way are they 'role models.'

There IS a world of difference between continuing to employ somebody who dabbles in drugs than employing a convicted sex offender. Especially when Hearts, like most clubs these days. portray themselves as a family club.

Agree totally with you first point but read the posts here.

[Woody1985]

Well Kev, I treated it with the contempt it deserved though I did allude to it later.

As for your comments "you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un" it rings like something out of the Sweeney. Freud and Jung should just have visited Lochend clearly the home of psychiatry. As for sexualy identity it often changes, e.g. in prison. As for educating you, if you are every at King's College London I will willing give you a tour but don't ask me to pay the fees.

Hahaha is this really an 'I've got more money and am therefore more clever than you' post? I've only read a few of your posts on this thread. I'm scared to read back in case I end up throwing up a little bit of sick in my mouth.

So you're happy to be employed Craig?

[IndieHibby]

Well Kev, I treated it with the contempt it deserved though I did allude to it later.

As for your comments "you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un" it rings like something out of the Sweeney. Freud and Jung should just have visited Lochend clearly the home of psychiatry. As for sexualy identity it often changes, e.g. in prison. As for educating you, if you are every at King's College London I will willing give you a tour but don't ask me to pay the fees.

Research in Canada has shown that, in two out of every three cases they assess,
psychiatrists are wrong in their predictions of whether or not an individual
poses a risk to the public. Most of the people who assess paedophiles would do
better by flipping a coin.



The fact of the matter remains that, even with improvements, risk assessment will continue to be educated guesswork. The implications of a risk assessment to an offender are serious and in Canada, could even result in incarceration for an indefinite period. The use of risk assessment to deprive an individual of his or her liberty, based on future conduct, is an issue that needs to be addressed. The public demands to be protected from individuals who will commit more offences, yet the justice system cannot accurately predict whether or not an offender will recidivate. Is it right, then, to incarcerate a person for a
longer time than can be justified by their offence, to ensure that he or she
does not recidivate? Risk prediction is fallible and so the principle of
proportionality- that the severity of a sentence should fit the seriousness of
the crime- must not be forgotten.

http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/pub/C21.htm

So spare us the 'smarter-than-thou' paternalistic bull****. Peadophiles are, by the nature of their motivation (sexual), highly likely to re-offend, do not see what they think is wrong, cannot be treated, and target the most vulnerable and impressionable members of society.

[IndieHibby]

Since when was a football player you only see kicking a ball about for 90 minutes every weekend a role model? It's a ridiculous concept. Role models would include parents, extended family and friends. My wee lad may have footballing heroes but in now way are they 'role models.'

There IS a world of difference between continuing to employ somebody who dabbles in drugs than employing a convicted sex offender. Especially when Hearts, like most clubs these days. portray themselves as a family club.

It really isn't. Children copy Footballers, hence they are role models. Ask any PE teacher who takes the football teams.

[jakki]

Well, well you are easily shocked.

No I am not. I was not easily shocked with working with the abused children I have fostered, but still shocked with your postings.

I'll give you the benefit of doubt that you're playing Devil's Advocate here but it is a serious subject and not to be played with.

If you want to know more about child abuse, PM me and I can give you horrible details that would turn your stomache, if you had any morals.

[McIntosh]

I think we all get that - it's half the reason people are annoyed with them (to put it lightly). But you haven't answered my question (I think). Why shouldn't they sack him? Is it a double-punishment to do so?



How does that equate to allowing a peadophile to work for you? Would you employ one? Would you be happy to pay him to visit a primary school, in your name, and take responsibility if he abused a child, or worse?



I wasn't talking about his unpalatable opinions (I don't believe for a second you are that thick, so you really are on the wind up now). When I used the term "CT views" I meant it as in "sees" - he considers a 12 year old girl to be an acceptable sexual partner.

Stop making me spell it out and answer the sodding questions!

I'm begining to wonder whether you have the spine to continue your trolling...

1. It would be a triple punishment - the sentence must fit the crime.
2. I was actually agreeing with a point you made!!!
3. There is a leap between intent and action.

As for trolling I contribute irregularly on a number of issues.

[IndieHibby]

Well, well you are easily shocked.

What's more shocking than peadophilia?

[McIntosh]

Has mcintosh not been punted for his paedo sympathy yet?

Be careful what you say there because that is defamation. If you repeat something like that it won't be me thats leaving. Even an old school veteran like you.

[McIntosh]

Hahaha is this really an 'I've got more money and am therefore more clever than you' post? I've only read a few of your posts on this thread. I'm scared to read back in case I end up throwing up a little bit of sick in my mouth.

So you're happy to be employed Craig?

Enough money to see you in court for your previous remark.

[CmoantheHibs]

Just seen this posted on keekback if anyone is interested.



We are looking for as many people, from as many different clubs from all over the UK to march with us, and make a united stand against registered sex offenders being allowed to play football in "community clubs"

The protest, and possible march, is provisionally set for the Antwerp Friendly at Tyncastle stadium, Edinburgh, on the 17th July.

This is set to be a PEACEFUL demonstration of how football fans feel about this matter, and we will be liasing with Lothian And Borders Police to make sure no violence happens.

Please feel free to spread the word, and turn up in the shirt of your football club, but please remember, VIOLENCE AND/OR UNRULY BEHAVIOUR WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, THIS IS A PROTEST, NOT A LYNCHING....

Below is the link to the facebook group, with more information regarding the march and protest:

http://www.facebook....139181966156236 (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_139181966156236)

[IndieHibby]

1. It would be a triple punishment - the sentence must fit the crime.
2. I was actually agreeing with a point you made!!!
3. There is a leap between intent and action.

As for trolling I contribute irregularly on a number of issues.

1. Wrong. The state has given the punishment (in law). What 'life' dishes out isn't the concern of the law. Whether he loses his job or not has got nothing to do with it at all.
2. Maybe you were, but that wasn't clear. It still isn't - should the club sack him - yes or no?
3. True, hence why no-one is suggesting the criminal punishment should have been more severe - most realise the law was limited by the fact that the kids reported it before anything else happened. However, would you be happy to send your kids along to be supervised by a peadophile on on the basis that they did not make the leap from intent to action?

Thought not.

And if you're not trolling, then you shouldn't admit it. Defending Hearts continuing to employ him and the bag of worms that opens up is worse.

[McIntosh]

What's more shocking than peadophilia?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGLrdjkcLdM&feature=related

[IndieHibby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGLrdjkcLdM&feature=related

Thanks for that. I really wanted to be reminded of the torture of the Holocaust.

Anyway, so Jakki is "easily shocked" because the Holocaust happened and that should numb her to the horror of peadophilia?

You are a cold and brutal individual (written without a hint of sarcasm). In my opinion.

[MyJo]

Goodness man, read back what you are writing it's going way beyond self-righteous. You are sounding like the hang em high brigade which I believe you are not. What way back is there for this man or do you believe that this man's life is over, no chance of rehabilitation.

How can peadophiles be "rehabilitated" to not consider children as sexual objects yet homosexuals cant be "rehabilitated" to not be attracted to people of the same sex?

not trying to get into another debate about the rights and wrongs of human sexuality but im interested in why efforts to stop homosexuals from being the way they are have been derided and vilified as backwards and draconian given that homosexuality is "not a lifestyle choice" yet paedophilia is still, to this day, considered something that is treatable and reversable in people?

[McIntosh]

1. Wrong. The state has given the punishment (in law). What 'life' dishes out isn't the concern of the law. Whether he loses his job or not has got nothing to do with it at all.
2. Maybe you were, but that wasn't clear. It still isn't - should the club sack him - yes or no?
3. True, hence why no-one is suggesting the criminal punishment should have been more severe - most realise the law was limited by the fact that the kids reported it before anything else happened. However, would you be happy to send your kids along to be supervised by a peadophile on on the basis that they did not make the leap from intent to action?

Thought not.

And if you're not trolling, then you shouldn't admit it. Defending Hearts continuing to employ him and the bag of worms that opens up is worse.

To answer you questions:

1. Your opinion
2. Yes
3. I have dealt with worse, much much worse.

Your last remark is mad, accusing someone of trolling and using their denial as evidence of trolling is unbelievable.

[McIntosh]

Thanks for that. I really wanted to be reminded of the torture of the Holocaust.

Anyway, so Jakki is "easily shocked" because the Holocaust happened and that should numb her to the horror of peadophilia?

You are a cold and brutal individual (written without a hint of sarcasm). In my opinion.


Anyone that knows me would be amazed at your last remark and you don't but maybe thats my blessing. As for you remark that there is nothing worse, well there is and thats called life.

[IndieHibby]

To answer you questions:

1. Your opinion
2. Yes
3. I have dealt with worse, much much worse.

Your last remark is mad, accusing someone of trolling and using their denial as evidence of trolling is unbelievable.

I'm beginning to think it is you who is mad, as it happens:

Please, please answer a question with an answer. I didn't ask you whether 'you had dealt with worse' (you have my sympathy if this is true). I asked you if you would be happy to send your kids to an event that you didn't know a convicted peadophile was to be present at? Again, you evade the question.

And, you are wrong again. I didn't use your denial as evidence. I merely said that, presuming you aren't trolling, then you shouldn't admit to it. Because, in my opinion, if you hold the view that it is acceptable to employ a peadophile in an organisation that works with children, it would be better to pretend to be a troll. At least then I would only think you are on the wind-up.

It's tiring chasing you around.

[Sprouleflyer]

I have read through this thread and agree with 99.9% of posters.

Hearts should have ripped up Thomson’s contract and that would have been pretty much the end of things, however this ridiculous stance of backing and to a large extent defending the player is beyond words.

In fact this whole thing appears to me to have been a done deal weeks ago. It would not surprise me if Hearts offered Thomson their full backing and his place in the squad if he pleaded guilty, knowing he would not get a jail sentence. Were Hearts desperate to keep this out of the courts? Something inside of me feels there is much, much more to this than meets the eye.

[McIntosh]

Old school, Haha I spend too much time on here. Usually on the bus or sitting on the bog laughing at paedo sympathy groups.

Sue me if you want, I've got **** all to sue for. And I think that your sympathy is clear so I'd probably win and counter your paedo sympathising ass.:greengrin

Well kid there a challenge, one I think I am going to take. Just give your permission for the admins to release your contact details. I think you don't have a pot to piss in but a defemation case is not a walk in the park. :wink:

Come on just release them.

[IndieHibby]

Anyone that knows me would be amazed at your last remark and you don't but maybe thats my blessing. As for you remark that there is nothing worse, well there is and thats called life.

Maybe the people who know you:
1. Haven't been slapped down as being "easily shocked", when registering their disapproval of peadophilia (ref "cold")
2. Haven't been tricked into watching images of torture (ref "brutal").

And believe me, there is no-one more content with the lack of our aquaintance than I.

[Woody1985]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!

[IndieHibby]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!

:faf:

[McIntosh]

I'm beginning to think it is you who is mad, as it happens:

Please, please answer a question with an answer. I didn't ask you whether 'you had dealt with worse' (you have my sympathy if this is true). I asked you if you would be happy to send your kids to an event that you didn't know a convicted peadophile was to be present at? Again, you evade the question.

And, you are wrong again. I didn't use your denial as evidence. I merely said that, presuming you aren't trolling, then you shouldn't admit to it. Because, in my opinion, if you hold the view that it is acceptable to employ a peadophile in an organisation that works with children, it would be better to pretend to be a troll. At least then I would only think you are on the wind-up.

It's tiring chasing you around.

1. I would send my children to an event that a convicted sex offender was present.
2. Hearts are not an organisation that works with children it is a football club!!!

Stamina, remember I have had to reply to havea dozen of you.

[jakki]

To answer you questions:

1. Your opinion
2. Yes
3. I have dealt with worse, much much worse.

Your last remark is mad, accusing someone of trolling and using their denial as evidence of trolling is unbelievable.

no 3 please inform us how you have dealt with worse and in what capacity?

I expect that I have have dealt with worse but you haven't taken up my invitiaton to PM me. If you have seen worse child abuse than I have encountered,speak out now.

I and assume that many on here wouldn't cry if you left " by mutual consent"

[Gatecrasher]

Enough money to see you in court for your previous remark.

Prat

[Dirkster23]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!

:greengrin :not worth

[MyJo]

2. Hearts are not an organisation that works with children it is a football club!

I, and Hearts themselves, would beg to differ.

http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/page/CommunityTrust/0,,10289,00.html


Use football and Hearts as a motivator to tackle antisocial behaviour and promote acceptable conduct in our communities.

Support youth clubs and organisations that work with young people by lending the expertise that Hearts staff possess along with access to facilities, opportunities and equipment.

Maintain and develop Heart of Midlothian's reputation as a 'true' community club by being a best practice model and leader in the field of community development.

Be a valued community partner with local authorities to develop programmes that cater for the needs of our community.

To promote Heart of Midlothian Football Club in a positive light, promote the Hearts brand, create tangible links with existing and potential supporters and to encourage increased attendances at home and away matches, thus creating a fan base for the future.

http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20080416/onside_2246066_1291232
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20100606/tynie-kickers_2246067_1205220
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20100604/girls-only-skill-skool_2246067_1504580
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20100602/primary-school-initiatives-sporting-hearts_2246067_1504593
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20100531/high-school-coaching_2246067_1504601
http://www.aegonbreakfastclub.org/

[McIntosh]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!


That pot must be buzy!!! I don't you address. As the admins will tell you as you've defamed me in writing my solicitors can request sequestration from Hibs net. The admins should have removed it for your own good.

[Dashing Bob S]

This debate has become a bit personalised, as generally happens with such an emotive subject.

The crux of it seems to hinge on the extent that paedophilles can be rehabilitated. I'm not an expert on this by any means, but what I have read seems to indicate that in most instances this is not the case, and it is, as some have suggested, a deeply-rooted sexual pathology. However, as I understand it, there has been progress made in empathy counselling/sensitivity awareness training, which can be effective, depending on the individual's particular case history.

Again, I know nothing of Thomson's background, or as to whether he himself might have been a victim of such abuse in his past.

Such counselling/training is only said to be effective when the individual recognizes their crimes and the extent of their problem and drops their mantle of arrogance. While treatment might not be effective if they are cast aside, the dilemma in terms of his employment is that this hardly likely to work either if his employer are treating this issue as lightly 'business as usual' as HMFC appear to be.

On the other hand, McIntosh has (fairly) asked the question, what do you do with him for the rest of his life? Not to address this means you probably have a broken-down jakey nonce wandering the streets, as opposed to a troubled young man in employment. I wonder which is most likely to be the biggest danger to children?

If HMFC/Thomson were showing the attitude that he is a young man who has done a terrible thing but has deep personal/psychological problems, which the club is actively working with the appropriate authorities to address, then, while still finding this difficult to stomach, I'd at least have some modicum of understanding for both parties.

I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but I certainly don't get the impression from what I've heard, that this is the case. The official statement from the club beggars belief, and itself borders on such a level of mental illness, its small wonder that the club is seen (probably wrongly) as a save haven for the Thomsons/Rix's/Wee Airdrie Jambo's of this world.

All I see is a clueless club devoid of moral leadership who just want to sweep this under the carpet and get a decent young player back in the team, and/or sold on for a profit, while trying to provide a bizarre smokescreen encompassing the mafia and Gary MacKay. It's like the behavour of a child who is trying to deflect some some wrongdoing.

I feel Thomson cannot fail, as a young, impressionable guy, to be very much of the same mindset as the club. He comes over as an arrogant young man, ignorant of his condition, and basically just wanting the hassle to blow over and the 'learning curve' to miraculously straighten out by itself, while he can gets on with his 'life'.

If Hearts want to keep him on (and on balance I still think they are wrong to do so, for the reasons the posters have mentioned above) then the very least they owe the community is an explanation of how they and Thomson are working with the relevant authorities/agencies, and how young people will be protected/effected.

[McIntosh]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!


That pot must be buzy!!! I don't need you address. As the admins will tell you as you've defamed me in writing my solicitors can request sequestration from Hibs net. The admins should have removed it for your own good.

[Barman Stanton]

One persons comments on this thread have actually shocked and disgused me. I wont mention his name though, or he might try and sue me!? Hopefully he is on the wind up.

Still cant believe that Hearts are sticking by him. He surely wont be able to play, the abuse he is going to get will be worse than anything seen before. This one wont just be forgotten about.

[The_Todd]

2. Hearts are not an organisation that works with children it is a football club!!!


Youth teams (as far as Under 9s). Breakfast Clubs.

Ahem.

[Barman Stanton]

Prat

:agree:

[Woody1985]

I await my citation, a few days off work. Yay.

Can't wait to tell my boss I'm off work cos some rich arse from the internet is taking me to court because I called him what he is.

Hahaha

What a knob jockey.

[McIntosh]

I and assume that many on here wouldn't cry if you left " by mutual consent"


I don't think that will happen as I have not broken any rules. I have treated you with courtsey and respect. I will pm you shortly.

[Twa Cairpets]

Goodness man, read back what you are writing it's going way beyond self-righteous. You are sounding like the hang em high brigade which I believe you are not. What way back is there for this man or do you believe that this man's life is over, no chance of rehabilitation.

I must admit I rather though that I was being fairly rational in putting forward reasons why your stance is objectionable, but you feel free to view at self righteous. Maybe you should take a wee break and recuperate from your irony bypass operation?

And to answer your question - I don't really care what happens to Thomson. I don't think he should be attacked, or harmed, or assulted, but I don't think he should have his actions publicly defended by his employer, and specifically not in the manner in whch they have. I do tend toward the opinion that the risk of recidivist activity for paedophiles is pretty high, but there is of course a chance that he may not.

As for a way back, he has entirely brough this on himself. Why would he be deserving of any pity or special treatment just because he happens to be a footballer. If I was in a position to employ someone, I would not employ a sex offender. Part of the punishmnet meted out by the court in being placed on the register is surely (either directly or as a direct consequence of being on the list) to restict life opportunities. Again, just so you understand completely, he is the one who has done wrong, he is the one who has to take the immediate and long term consequences.

[McIntosh]

I await my citation, a few days off work. Yay.

Can't wait to tell my boss I'm off work cos some rich arse from the internet is taking me to court because I called him what he is.

Hahaha

What a knob jockey.

Keep it coming. I am amazed you've got a job. :wink:

[jakki]

1. I would send my children to an event that a convicted sex offender was present.
2. Hearts are not an organisation that works with children it is a football club!!!

Stamina, remember I have had to reply to havea dozen of you.

No 1 I'm glad I'm not a child of yours
No 2 I thought they were a COMMUNITY club serving out breakfastes to deprived children, helping in sports in schools etc or was that a load of lies.

Me I'm glad that my grandkids are educated in Warrington and dunfermline, far away from this pervert

[McIntosh]

This debate has become a bit personalised, as generally happens with such an emotive subject.

The crux of it seems to hinge on the extent that paedophilles can be rehabilitated. I'm not an expert on this by any means, but what I have read seems to indicate that in most instances this is not the case, and it is, as some have suggested, a deeply-rooted sexual pathology. However, as I understand it, there has been progress made in empathy counselling/sensitivity awareness training, which can be effective, depending on the individual's particular case history.

Again, I know nothing of Thomson's background, or as to whether he himself might have been a victim of such abuse in his past.

Such counselling/training is only said to be effective when the individual recognizes their crimes and the extent of their problem and drops their mantle of arrogance. While treatment might not be effective if they are cast aside, the dilemma in terms of his employment is that this hardly likely to work either if his employer are treating this issue as lightly 'business as usual' as HMFC appear to be.

On the other hand, McIntosh has (fairly) asked the question, what do you do with him for the rest of his life? Not to address this means you probably have a broken-down jakey nonce wandering the streets, as opposed to a troubled young man in employment. I wonder which is most likely to be the biggest danger to children?

If HMFC/Thomson were showing the attitude that he is a young man who has done a terrible thing but has deep personal/psychological problems, which the club is actively working with the appropriate authorities to address, then, while still finding this difficult to stomach, I'd at least have some modicum of understanding for both parties.

I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but I certainly don't get the impression from what I've heard, that this is the case. The official statement from the club beggars belief, and itself borders on such a level of mental illness, its small wonder that the club is seen (probably wrongly) as a such haven for the Thomsons/Rix's/Wee Airdrie Jambo's of this world.

All I see is a clueless club devoid of moral leadership who just want to sweep this under the carpet and get a decent young player back in the team, and/or sold on for a profit, while trying to provide a bizarre smokescreen encompassing the mafia and Gary MacKay. It's like the behavour of a child who is trying to deflect some some wrongdoing.

I feel Thomson cannot fail, as a young, impressionable guy, to be very much of the same mindset as the club. He comes over as an arrogant young man, ignorant of his condition, and basically just wanting the hassle to blow over and the 'learning curve' to miraculously straighten out by itself, while he can gets on with his 'life'.

If Hearts want to keep him on (and on balance I still think they are wrong to do so, for the reasons the posters have mentioned above) then the very least they owe the community is an explanation of how they are working


:top marksA great post, well balanced and fair.

[Woody1985]

Keep it coming. I am amazed you've got a job. :wink:

Yes, because minions like me couldn't possibly work because we dislike peado sympathisers.

I don't know if that was a thinly veiled threat or you're just a winker all the time.

[Removed]

Me I'm glad that my grandkids are educated in Warrington and dunfermline, far away from this pervert

Are there no perverts in Warrington or Dunfermline Jakki?

[McIntosh]

No 1 I'm glad I'm not a child of yours
No 2 I thought they were a COMMUNITY club serving out breakfastes to deprived children, helping in sports in schools etc or was that a load of lies.

Me I'm glad that my grandkids are educated in Warrington and dunfermline, far away from this pervert

Jakki, you are clearly being a bit emotional. I think calling anyone here a pervert is beyond over the top. Have a wee think about what you are saying. .

[McIntosh]

Yes, because minions like me couldn't possibly work because we dislike peado sympathisers.

I don't know if that was a thinly veiled threat or you're just a winker all the time.

You're letting it get to you. :wink:

[cjhibee1]

You're letting it get to you. :wink:

I think you're letting it get to you a lot more considering you're threatening legal action.

[McIntosh]

I think you're letting it get to you a lot more considering you're threatening legal action.


Par for the course that why I pay my MDU subs.

[CRAZYHIBBY]

You are living down to your name with this comment. Think about this, how many people on this forum have had sex underage or have ever had non-consensual sex, they are technically sex offenders. Life is a lot more complicated than the black and white world that you appear to be inhabiting on this forum. CropleywasGod is correct Thomson needs counselling and rehabilitating.

Are you as stupid as you sound?? ...non consensual sex is rape. There is a massive gulf between underage kids experimenting in sex together compared to a 20 year old man actively grooming a 12 year old child for sex.

[Woody1985]

You're letting it get to you. :wink:

Hahaha

I'm chilling out with a dominos pizza watching Columbo (itv3+1 dashing bob) laughing at some arse with a superiority complex.

Gimps on the internet don't get to me in the way the probably 'get' to you.:wink:

Ooooo winking does make you feel superior.:wink: :wink: :wink:

[Woody1985]

Par for the course that why I pay my MDU subs.

My darling underagers?

[Dashing Bob S]

Hahaha

I'm chilling out with a dominos pizza watching Columbo (itv3+1 dashing bob) laughing at some arse with a superiority complex.

Gimps on the internet don't get to me in the way the probably 'get' to you.:wink:

Ooooo winking does make you feel superior.:wink: :wink: :wink:

Stuck in the USA right now, Woody, just going to surf the cable channels in search of a Faulk fix. Should imagine they'll be up with game over here. "Just one more thing before I go, Mister MacKay..."

[jakki]

Are there no perverts in Warrington or Dunfermline Jakki?

might be but not named as CT and condoned by his club.

[Kevvy1875]

Well Kev, I treated it with the contempt it deserved though I did allude to it later.

As for your comments "you fancy what you fancy and once a wrong un...always a wrong un" it rings like something out of the Sweeney. Freud and Jung should just have visited Lochend clearly the home of psychiatry. As for sexualy identity it often changes, e.g. in prison. As for educating you, if you are ever at King's College London I will willing give you a tour but don't ask me to pay the fees.

Sorry that's pish. I asked you what drug dealing had to do with CT and you ignored the question. Reason being as that there is no answer. You were just rambling as you have done this whole thread sitting on here fishing all day which is a bit disturbing.

And you can attempt to mock me with your words but like I said earlier you are just a pretentious pr*ck and I can see right through it. You try and belittle people on the internet with words.....clever.....

I speak the way I speak or type the way I type because I choose to and not because I lack a grasp on the english language. I am not coming on the internet to pretend to be some kind of world saving genius with the literate power of Shakespeare....I will leave that to the pretentious brigade.

And I never asked to be educated by you and never in my life would I. You really are so far up your own ars* you don't even read people's post properly and interpret them as you see fit which also exposes you to not being as clever as you clearly think you are.

Like I said before...Wind up merchant.

[jakki]

Jakki, you are clearly being a bit emotional. I think calling anyone here a pervert is beyond over the top. Have a wee think about what you are saying. .

This pervert was CT. I don't have to think about it. he is a PERVERT. If you thought I was calling it you, maybe you should read back your posts and ask why should a normal male defend this PERVERT?

[Removed]

might be but not named as CT and condoned by his club.

Is it not safer that they are named :confused:

[gringojoe]

If you pleaded guilty to sending pictures of your cock to 12 and 14 year old girls and asked then them to strip off would your employer sack you?

Heart of Midlothian Football Club support sex offenders. "If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next"

[Removed]

If you pleaded guilty to sending pictures of your cock to 12 and 14 year old girls and asked then them to strip off would your emplyer sack you?


Mine would for that I think if I got caught. In fact I reckon I might get sacked even if I got a breach of the peace :dunno:

[Big Frank]

I will refuse to engage in any Scottish Football chat with Hertz fans whilst they have this "person" on their books.

[jakki]

Is it not safer that they are named :confused:

don't know a player near them them that has been convicted of a sex crime and their club condonining it :thumbsup:

Are you happy for your boys going to a hearts game and seeing CT playing?

[ronaldo7]

(Don't feed the raincoat smiley)

[magpie1892]

I await my citation, a few days off work. Yay.

Can't wait to tell my boss I'm off work cos some rich arse from the internet is taking me to court because I called him what he is.

Hahaha

What a knob jockey.

I don't think McIntosh is doing a particularly good job of defending his position but there's no need for this.

[Removed]

Are you happy for your boys going to a hearts game and seeing CT playing?

It honestly wouldn't worry me. He will have no effect on my boys. I have spoken to them about it when they asked me. He has been punished according to the laws of this country. It is up to his employers what sanctions they take against him or not.

He is a football player, not a teacher, doctor or scout leader. If I worried about what football players did and the effect on my kids I wouldn't take them anywhere near ER or to any away games.

[Woody1985]

I don't think McIntosh is doing a particularly good job of defending his position but there's no need for this.

I'm sorry you feel like that but the guys an idiot. I'll probably end up with a warning or a ban but he's still an erse.

[Phil D. Rolls]

If you pleaded guilty to sending pictures of your cock to 12 and 14 year old girls and asked then them to strip off would your employer sack you?

Heart of Midlothian Football Club support sex offenders. "If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next"

Nah. Hearts are wrong here, but I don't think their actions are going to unleash an army of sexual predators.

I don't think the Manics were singing about Thomson either.

This whole thread is becoming a series of soundbites.

[magpie1892]

I'm sorry you feel like that but the guys an idiot. I'll probably end up with a warning or a ban but he's still an erse.

A while back I got into a very heated debate on the Holy Ground with another poster and, in losing my temper and getting personal, I made a total dick of myself. I'd spare you that embarrassment and suggest you rein it in a little!

[silverhibee]

Are you Thomson's lawyer? Hahaha

If you had showed an ounce of any sort of morals I would. I'm not giving you my address, I've got kids in the house!


:faf:

[hibsbollah]

Sorry McIntosh but this sort of moral relativism is total nonsense. It IS a 'black and white issue' when you are talking about breaching a childs' safety. If you are making the point that Thomson needs medical care thats one thing but you have started to defend the indefensible which is quite another.

And the legal threats and financial bragging were not clever at all.

[silverhibee]

That pot must be buzy!!! I don't you address. As the admins will tell you as you've defamed me in writing my solicitors can request sequestration from Hibs net. The admins should have removed it for your own good.


Are you for real Mr high n mighty.

You are coming across as a bit of a twat. :aok:

[jakki]

It honestly wouldn't worry me. He will have no effect on my boys. I have spoken to them about it when they asked me. He has been punished according to the laws of this country. It is up to his employers what sanctions they take against him or not.

He is a football player, not a teacher, doctor or scout leader. If I worried about what football players did and the effect on my kids I wouldn't take them anywhere near ER or to any away games.

Would you feel happy if CT was to take a sports section at your boys' school?
If not,Do you have to condone him as a sex predector.You are allowing CT to having access to children throughout the lothians albeit not you personally but your attitude

[hibsbollah]

My daughter, who is seven and attends an Edinburgh primary school, had some Hearts coaches and players take coaching sessions with the kids as part of their community programme.

Make no mistake, this decision re- Thomson will have an impact far wider than just on the pitch. A club does loads more things than you expwct (our Hibs Community Foundation is a good example). I cant see edinburgh councils education dept. Wanting to continue with arrangements with hearts after this.

[Dashing Bob S]

I'm perhaps naive but but I'd like to believe that everyone on this board agrees:

1) Paedophillia is disgusting, evil and wrong.

2) Craig Thomson is a genuine paedophille - it's more serious than being a 'silly wee laddie.'

3) Hearts, as an employer, have behaved in a thoroughly despicable manner. They've shown no grasp of the complexities of the issue and have shamefully and bizarrely tried to deflect the attention to a mafioso Gary MacKay, their longest serving player, for the bigger crime of working as a footballers agent. (I know...)

4) that, while people will want to vent their understandable bloodlust, in the final analysis, this should be secondary to determining the best ways of protecting children and our society in general, from the activities of these people.


5) There are a lot of victims from Thomson's actions. The girls in question, and there family. No doubt the parents will be anxious to see if there has been any long-term behavioural issues with their daughters as the result of being subjected to this. Even if there hasn't, it still puts added stress on growing up in a family at a very difficult and turbulent age. Thomson's own family are also victims; they were probably very proud when their boy made it as a professional player. Now they have to suffer public humiliation on daily basis, when they've done nothing wrong. As parents they'll be looking at their own behaviour and beating themselves up, wondering what they could have done differently etc, etc.


With this in mind, I don't think insulting other posters, no matter how badly thought out, stupid or even offensive you believe their position to be, really gets us anywhere.

[Woody1985]

A while back I got into a very heated debate on the Holy Ground with another poster and, in losing my temper and getting personal, I made a total dick of myself. I'd spare you that embarrassment and suggest you rein it in a little!

I know I can be a bit of a ****, both in real life and on here, but I'll survive.

I think it clear what I've said about the superior intellectual.

I wonder if I can counter sue and get him to pay off the grands on my credit card since he's loaded.:greengrin

[Removed]

Would you feel happy if CT was to take a sports section at your boys' school?
If not,Do you have to condone him as a sex predector.You are allowing CT to having access to children throughout the lothians albeit not you personally but your attitude

That is not what you asked me though. Is it 20 questions till you get an answer you like?

CT will not be allowed to take any kids, boys or girls for training now so the question is irrelevant.

I am not allowing CT to do anything by my attitude. He has been dealt with by the courts has he not? So he hasn't been locked up and hearts haven't sacked him. There is no law that I know that says they have to. I am struggling to see your point.

[Removed]

I know I can be a bit of a ****, both in real life and on here

Probably about the only post on this thread that will get unanimous agreement :greengrin

[Pedantic_Hibee]

I've reneged on posting on this thread so far mainly due to being inebriated last night, being busy this morning and holding counsel with my own thoughts on the subject.

There's not much more I need to add to this subject that hasn't already been said before........but for what it's worth;

Hearts are a disgusting, morally and financially bankrupt club whose once proud name is used as a vehicle for an absolute flamer to gain publicity and flaunt his dubious business wares.

They've given us some belly-aching laughs over the years; Eddie Malofeev, the sacking of Burley, the busload of Lithuanians infiltrating Riccarton and many, many more.

But this, this is beyond the pale.

Vladimir Romanov is actively backing and endorsing the fiddling of kids. By retaining the registration of Craig Thomson and far worse, incomprehensibly defending him and deflecting the attention onto innocent parties, he himself is almost as guilty as Thomson.

I'm all for innocent until proven guilty, but there is no smoke without fire and when a letter from an angry parent reaches the powers that be at HMFC alluding to alleged misdemeanours by Craig Thomson in respect of his actions with minors, common sense would suspend him with pay until a full investigation is carried out. But no, that's not how Hearts do it these days, they work differently to every other club you can think of. Just falling short of rewarding him with a five year deal, a new laptop and an industrial sized box of Haribo, they allow him to liaise with Barnardo's and administer training sessions with schoolchildren. Bravo.

Regardless of whether he comes into contact with kids or not in his role as a footballer, Hearts are effectively telling you that it is ok to ask 12 year olds their a/s/l on the internet and ask them to have sex with you.

Should we expect better morals and principles from a club that hired a convicted sex offender and championed him as a hero? A club that withholds payment to den mothers, your everyday contractor and part-time football teams? Nah, probably not.

But I genuinely thought this time they would grow a backbone and gain a modicum of respectability from the footballing and social world. I am staggered that they have not only kept him on, but instead turned on an innocent Gary MacKay (although you're not an angel yourself ya goon-faced medal-shy racist) in order to justify Thomson's actions and have you believe he was told to groom children.

And for every Hearts fan that buys a strip, a season ticket or opens up a current account with Ukio Bankas, you are contributing towards the weekly wage of a convicted paedophile. Yes, paedophile. Lets not dress this up in any other way, he is a paedophile.

If I had sodomised a woman against her will, it would be rape. I couldn't dress it up as "surprise sex" or anything less damning, I'd be a rapist pure and simple.

So when you log onto the internet in your Ukio Bankas briefs and groom young children, you are a paedophile. Rest assured, there'd be no apology from him if he didn't get caught. Thankfully these kids were savvy enough to report it before he carried through any of his wishes.

It's been intriguing to read Hearts fans profess that Hearts are losing credibility over this.........newsflash - you haven't got any. You haven't had any for a while, since 2005 in fact.

And all this talk from the genuine Jambos about protesting and not going back to Tynecastle, get over yourselves. You're seriously considering boycotting because your full-back was trying to engage in sexual acts with two minors?

"Mr Romanov" has been shafting 400,000 of you for the past 6 years and you haven't raised a collective eyebrow about it. Indeed, a percentage of you still keep knee-pads in your maroon closet in case he turns up at your door so you can pay homage to your master.

You're no longer a football team, you used to be, but you're no more. You are nationwide news for all the wrong reasons, much like you have been for the past 6 years (go on, throw your Scottish Cup win and 2nd place finish back at me).

But truth be told, from the bottom of my soul, I'd far rather support my team than one that jettisons heroes, employs, maintains and defends convicted sex offenders, sheds any moral fibre it once had and does not look back as it systematically rids itself of any dignity, credibility and pride it's once-heralded name you used to carry with distinction.

HMFC - Rotten to the core.

Wee Airdrie Jambo, most definitely, does not agree.

[Removed]

Well said Pedantic :agree:

[Supraninja]

I'm perhaps naive but but I'd like to believe that everyone on this board agrees:

2) Craig Thomson is a genuine paedophille - it's more serious than being a 'silly wee laddie.'



I know this is pedantic... but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephilia

[Woody1985]

Probably about the only post on this thread that will get unanimous agreement :greengrin

Haha I was only kidding earlier, I couldn't get on here. Pictured you shouting at the laptop.:greengrin

[Removed]

Haha I was only kidding earlier, I couldn't get on here. Pictured you shouting at the laptop.:greengrin

:grr:

It was on my phone.

Look at that text I sent you at 5:32 and repeat :wink:

[Woody1985]

Told you I could be one of those.:faf:

[McIntosh]

Hahaha

I'm chilling out with a dominos pizza watching Columbo (itv3+1 dashing bob) laughing at some arse with a superiority complex.

Gimps on the internet don't get to me in the way the probably 'get' to you.:wink:

Ooooo winking does make you feel superior.:wink: :wink: :wink:

Is the TV besides the pot? The job must be paying well!!!:wink::wink::wink::wink:

[Mikey]

Can we all just calm down a wee bit folks or it'll be more than posts that are being removed :wink:

[McIntosh]

I'm sorry you feel like that but the guys an idiot. I'll probably end up with a warning or a ban but he's still an erse.

In psychology there is terms for this, its called projection.

[ArabHibee]

I know this is pedantic... but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephilia

Well, there you go, never knew that.
Every day's a school day!

[McIntosh]

Sorry McIntosh but this sort of moral relativism is total nonsense. It IS a 'black and white issue' when you are talking about breaching a childs' safety. If you are making the point that Thomson needs medical care thats one thing but you have started to defend the indefensible which is quite another.

And the legal threats and financial bragging were not clever at all.

I couldn't send you a private message as you have to many emails in your inbox. I don't like lynching as for the legal action I mean to pursue that person. I haven't worked all my life to see my professional reputation defamed. As for the financial aspect they mentioned it not myself.

I just wished the moderators had removed the personal comments.

[Woody1985]

Is the TV besides the pot? The job must be paying well!!!:wink::wink::wink::wink:

It does actually. Thanks for your concern professor.

What's your obsession with how much I get paid? Creepy.

Can someone defame a person they don't know and who uses an alias?

[McIntosh]

I'm perhaps naive but but I'd like to believe that everyone on this board agrees:

1) Paedophillia is disgusting, evil and wrong.

2) Craig Thomson is a genuine paedophille - it's more serious than being a 'silly wee laddie.'

3) Hearts, as an employer, have behaved in a thoroughly despicable manner. They've shown no grasp of the complexities of the issue and have shamefully and bizarrely tried to deflect the attention to a mafioso Gary MacKay, their longest serving player, for the bigger crime of working as a footballers agent. (I know...)

4) that, while people will want to vent their understandable bloodlust, in the final analysis, this should be secondary to determining the best ways of protecting children and our society in general, from the activities of these people.


5) There are a lot of victims from Thomson's actions. The girls in question, and there family. No doubt the parents will be anxious to see if there has been any long-term behavioural issues with their daughters as the result of being subjected to this. Even if there hasn't, it still puts added stress on growing up in a family at a very difficult and turbulent age. Thomson's own family are also victims; they were probably very proud when their boy made it as a professional player. Now they have to suffer public humiliation on daily basis, when they've done nothing wrong. As parents they'll be looking at their own behaviour and beating themselves up, wondering what they could have done differently etc, etc.


With this in mind, I don't think insulting other posters, no matter how badly thought out, stupid or even offensive you believe their position to be, really gets us anywhere.

Another :top marks

[Dirkster23]

I couldn't send you a private message as you have to many emails in your inbox. I don't like lynching as for the legal action I mean to pursue that person. I haven't worked all my life to see my professional reputation defamed. As for the financial aspect they mentioned it not myself.

I just wished the moderators had removed the personal comments.

Comedy gold :faf:

Surely for your professional reputation to defamed, people would need to know who you are?!? Good luck with the lawyer on Monday :aok:

[Woody1985]

Exhibit A your honour. Post #217 by woody1985.:faf:

[ronaldo7]

Comedy gold :faf:

Surely for your professional reputation to defamed, people would need to know who you are?!? Good luck with the lawyer on Monday :aok:

What was that Womble who wore the tartan called?

[bighairyfaeleith]

I will refuse to engage in any Scottish Football chat with Hertz fans whilst they have this "person" on their books.

I've been refusing to do it for years:wink:

[Gatecrasher]

I couldn't send you a private message as you have to many emails in your inbox. I don't like lynching as for the legal action I mean to pursue that person. I haven't worked all my life to see my professional reputation defamed. As for the financial aspect they mentioned it not myself.

I just wished the moderators had removed the personal comments.

:violin:

[Pedantic_Hibee]

I don't need to come on here to have my professional reputation defamed, everyone in work already thinks I'm a complete cant. :agree:

[McIntosh]

It does actually. Thanks for your concern professor.

What's your obsession with how much I get paid? Creepy.

Can someone defame a person they don't know and who uses an alias?

You keep your money, you will need it. You are such a fool, you haven't even altered or removed any of your comments. You are responsible for your comments. Do you think any of the moderators are going to protect your sorry ass when push come to shove, you are out there on your own.

[McIntosh]

Comedy gold :faf:

Surely for your professional reputation to defamed, people would need to know who you are?!? Good luck with the lawyer on Monday :aok:

Already spoke to him this afternoon. Look at the name it is my own.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

You keep your money, you will need it. You are such a fool, you haven't even altered or removed any of your comments. You are responsible for your comments. Do you think any of the moderators are going to protect your sorry ass when push come to shove, you are out there on your own.

Fella, I like you on here, you've made some very reasoned and sensible posts regarding Hibs in the past and I've always looked out for your comments on all things Hibs.

This has gone too far on this particular thread. It's clear there's an extreme difference of opinion between you and Woody and a couple of others.

Lets just step away from the keyboard for ten minutes, sink a brandy, take a few deep breaths and avoid this particular thread for the rest of the evening.

Respect difference, enjoy life.

[ronaldo7]

Have I been transported to Hollywood and am now listening to Home alone, or is it still Woody and Buzz:confused:

[The_Todd]

Waa waa waa an anonymous poster on an internet messageboard of which I am also an anonymous member of was saying nasty things about me. Waa waa waa I think I'll sue.

Wuss.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Waa waa waa an anonymous poster on an internet messageboard of which I am also an anonymous member of was saying nasty things about me. Waa waa waa I think I'll sue.

Wuss.

Shut it ya dick :greengrin

[McIntosh]

Exhibit A your honour. Post #217 by woody1985.:faf:


You have it in one but stage one is sequestering your contact details. Now that will be fun.

[The_Todd]

Shut it ya dick :greengrin

Square go?

:P

[Dirkster23]

Already spoke to him this afternoon. Look at the name it is my own.

Well that narrows it down then :rolleyes:

[bighairyfaeleith]

been on the road so not really had a chance to comment on this whole thing, but here is my opinion.

Craig Thompson is a peado and should be sacked immediately and not let near any family friendly football club.

If hibs had a player who done this and never sacked him I would not go back to easter road, any hearts fan with any self respect will do the same.

Romanov is a complete fruit loop who has released this statement for one of two reasons, possibly both, he wants to get some money for CT so hopes this will die down and they can sell him in a year or two or he is just starting to go down the same insane route he did with kaunas because he isn't getting things his own way.

I am uncomfortable with hibs allowing CT into easter road next time we play hearts, has anyone asked hibs what they plan to do?

As a parent I have a genuine concern here and am considering contacting hibs if it looks like it's a possibility.

[--------]

1. I would send my children to an event that a convicted sex offender was present.
2. Hearts are not an organisation that works with children it is a football club!!!

Stamina, remember I have had to reply to havea dozen of you.

1. I think you would be very irresponsible to do so.

2. Hearts footballers work in primary schools. Hearts have youth teams down to U-9s. They have ball-boys and girls, match-day mascots, and competitions and guided visits involving children being in and around Tynecastle. They should not be employing a convicted SO.


I must admit I rather thought that I was being fairly rational in putting forward reasons why your stance is objectionable, but you feel free to view at self righteous. Maybe you should take a wee break and recuperate from your irony bypass operation?

And to answer your question - I don't really care what happens to Thomson. I don't think he should be attacked, or harmed, or assulted, but I don't think he should have his actions publicly defended by his employer, and specifically not in the manner in whch they have. I do tend toward the opinion that the risk of recidivist activity for paedophiles is pretty high, but there is of course a chance that he may not.

As for a way back, he has entirely brough this on himself. Why would he be deserving of any pity or special treatment just because he happens to be a footballer. If I was in a position to employ someone, I would not employ a sex offender. Part of the punishmnet meted out by the court in being placed on the register is surely (either directly or as a direct consequence of being on the list) to restict life opportunities. Again, just so you understand completely, he is the one who has done wrong, he is the one who has to take the immediate and long term consequences.


:top marks

Hearts sell themselves as a "family" club. Their players - Thomson included - work in schools with children and young teenagers. As far as I understand the law, no one on the Sex Offenders Register should be employed in any capacity which brings them into contact with children and teenagers under the age of 16.

If Thomson continues to play professional football, he will be in close proximity to children - children are now a significant part of football's target audience.

Recidivism rates among sex-offenders are very hard to quantify.

Many sexual attacks go unreported. Victims are embarrassed by what they see as their own gullibility; they anticipate being blamed for the incident (she/he was asking for it); they're understandably unwilling to have to recount and re-live a terrifying and humiliating experience in court, to see all the details put out in public in the press, and to undergo the sort of aggressive and defamatory interrogation customarily undergone by rape and sexual assault victims at the hands of defence counsel in this country. Reported sexual offences in fact represent no more than 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 of all actual offences committed.

Many studies of SO recidivism are short-term - they take only 3-5 years after release into account, and publish findings suggesting a re-offending rate of 5-6%. Studies that look at longer periods unsurprisingly return much higher rates - up to 50% for sexual offenders against children and 40% for rapists.

The fact that Thomson will be off the SO Register in five years time, when he'll be 24 years of age, is extremely worrying. He IS a potential danger to young girls, maybe not in the immediate future, since the spotlight's on him and the police will be taking notice of what he's up to, but certainly in the medium to long-term future, once the furore has died down - once he's off the register.

As you say, TC - he's the offender. He deliberately set out to prey on young girls on the net and in the classes he was involved in teaching. He lied to his employers (in retrospect one wonders why he bothered). His employers are now making excuses for him and suggesting that somehow he was 'set up' for a fall.

Thomson needs to learn that actions have consequences. In this case his actions - which were entirely indefensible - should IMO have had considerably more serious consequences than a £4,000 fine and 5 years on the SO register.

[gramskiwood]

You have it in one but stage one is sequestering your contact details. Now that will be fun.

You're making a bit of an idiot of yourself, with all due respect, maybe you should go for a wee lie down before posting any more on this thread.

[Woody1985]

BaHahahaHahaha

You not got nout better to do with all your millions on a Saturday night? At least watch king Kong.

Makes nae odds, I've moved about four times since 2007.

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Square go?

:P

Can we not solve this over a milkshake?

Preferably in a hotel in Leicester with a random grey-haired man beside us. :agree:

[hibee_nation]

You have it in one but stage one is sequestering your contact details. Now that will be fun.

The ultimate keyboard hardman. If you dont get legal aid woody i'll chip in a fiver for your costs. :greengrin

[McIntosh]

BaHahahaHahaha

You not got nout better to do with all your millions on a Saturday night? At least watch king Kong.

Makes nae odds, I've moved about four times since 2007.

Well actually I an going to the cinema in ten min but be assured It won't be hard to get a hold of you.

[The_Todd]

Can we not solve this over a milkshake?

Preferably in a hotel in Leicester with a random grey-haired man beside us. :agree:

You're on.

See how easy it is to make up, fellas?

[Woody1985]

You keep your money, you will need it. You are such a fool, you haven't even altered or removed any of your comments. You are responsible for your comments. Do you think any of the moderators are going to protect your sorry ass when push come to shove, you are out there on your own.

I'm sure a genius such as yourself has taken screenshots as evidence. If not, you're not the genius you appear to think.

Oh, and I'll get legal aid anyway.

Any publicity from court would only cause more people to think you're an idiot. Away and sue yourself for defamation.:faf:

[Removed]

BaHahahaHahaha

You not got nout better to do with all your millions on a Saturday night? At least watch king Kong.

Makes nae odds, I've moved about four times since 2007.

He can pay me to spill the beans though :wink:

[--------]

I don't need to come on here to have my professional reputation defamed, everyone in work already thinks I'm a complete cant. :agree:

Most of mine think I'm a plook, and say so. :agree:

Some of the things I've had said to me on here... Oy Vay! No way could I be all of them at once I think.

:rolleyes:

[Woody1985]

Well actually I an going to the cinema in ten min but be assured It won't be hard to get a hold of you.

Have fun.:bye:

[hibsbollah]

I couldn't send you a private message as you have to many emails in your inbox. I don't like lynching as for the legal action I mean to pursue that person. I haven't worked all my life to see my professional reputation defamed. As for the financial aspect they mentioned it not myself.

I just wished the moderators had removed the personal comments.

I have enjoyed many of your posts previously but I think, as pedantic says, you need to step away from this one.

[ronaldo7]

Well actually I an going to the cinema in ten min but be assured It won't be hard to get a hold of you.

Toy Story 3:rolleyes:

[Woody1985]

The ultimate keyboard hardman. If you dont get legal aid woody i'll chip in a fiver for your costs. :greengrin

Thanks mate.

It's gonna be a big bill. His reputation is in tatters, and that's before I posted.:greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

You have it in one but stage one is sequestering your contact details. Now that will be fun.

Gonnae either just do it or shut up about doing it?

Either way I suspect you're going to look something of a prat becuase you'll either (a) not do it, probably citing - "I can't be bothered, he's not worth it", or (b) do it, and lose horrendously.

Either way, the posturing is exceedingly embarrassing, and is just continuing to mask the preposterous of your stance. If you really are what you claim to be, you really ought to know better.

[The_Todd]

Going to? He already does.

[leither17]

BaHahahaHahaha

You not got nout better to do with all your millions on a Saturday night? At least watch king Kong.

Makes nae odds, I've moved about four times since 2007.

Don't mess with the travelling folk mcintosh they will just dig a hole for you and move the campsite lol

[jakki]

I give up!

All I would be doing if my grandkids were in schools in the Lothian region, would be asking of their school if Hearts had a training session with my kids and if this pervert would be taking any training sessions with them. Depending of their answers, I would be asking further questions.

No paedophile will be getting near my grandkids to my knowledge

[Removed]

I give up!

All I would be doing if my grandkids were in schools in the Lothian region, would be asking of their school if Hearts had a training session with my kids and if this pervert would be taking any training sessions with them. Depending of their answers, I would be asking further questions.

No paedophile will be getting near my grandkids to my knowledge

Jakki, do you understand what the sex offenders register is?

[Pedantic_Hibee]

Jakki, do you understand what the sex offenders register is?

A feeder club for Heart of Midlothian? :confused:

[Gatecrasher]

Following on from my article last night http://viewfromgorgie.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=177:what-becomes-of-the-broken-hearted&catid=54:editorial&Itemid=136 I posted a comment on Facebook and Twitter that read "Could this be Vlad's way of finding a way out of the club? Turn the support against him ... no point in staying!!".

Since then, I have read comments that state ...



No Vlad, No Hearts
If Not for Vlad, the Pieman would have killed the club
Remember where we would be if it wasn't for the Mad One


Now, I'm really sorry, and I may be being naive or even stupid, but I just don't buy that at all. Despite all we have heard in the past, Vladimir Romanov was NOT the only thing that would have seen Heart of Midlothian continue its life as a football club. He was, quite simply, the best option for Chris Robinson to exit with some cash in his pocket.

Was he the only answer to ripping up the Cala deal and staying at Tynecastle? Probably - but 6 years on, it looks like that decision was probably a mistake if we are being honest. For even Vladimir Romanov's current regime at Hearts are now saying almost exactly the same as Chris Robinson. Tynecastle is, sadly, not fit for purpose if we wish to play European football at our own ground. The only difference between Romanov's time and that of Robinson is that Robinson had no Plan B whereas Hearts' survey concerning a new stadium would suggest that Romanov does.

But "Hearts would be dead"? Sorry but I don't buy that at all.

Would we have split the Old Firm in 2006? Most likely not.

Would we have won the Scottish Cup in 2006? Maybe, maybe not. We won it in 1998 without the aid of players earning £10,000 a week, so why not then?

Would our debt levels have escalated to over £30,000,000? Again, most likely not. Had an individual or consortium from Scotland taken control of Hearts from Chris Robinson, the would - as every other club in the SPL had to - cut their cloth to suit. BUT! Hearts would have still had the 3rd largest support in the country and would have still been able to pay at least a bit more than other teams in and around us in the league.

So what would have changed?

The academy? No, that was built before Romanov came to the club.

The stadium? Other than small changes like new press boxes, dugouts etc, Tynecastle is the same now as when Romanov took over.

The playing staff? Actually, the current playing squad might not be all that different from the one about to start next season. The massive earners have all but gone. The expensive no users like Pinilla, Beslijia, Kingston and Nade have shuffled off. We now have only one Lithuanian guaranteed a first team spot ... and he does deserve his starting berth most weeks.

So what WOULD be different?

Well we probably wouldn't have been able to afford George Burley as manager. But then again, was John Robertson doing such a bad job that he shouldn't have been given a fair crack of the whip in the manager's chair?

We - most certainly in my eyes - wouldn't have gone down the road of employing a convicted sex offender as our manager.

We also more than likely wouldn't have had the embarrassing situation of three of our most senior players calling a press conference to tell the world of "significant unrest" within the playing squad.

We wouldn't have set ourselves up as a laughing stock by having a half-wit with a golden stick and a back box to say whether a player was fit or not.

We probably wouldn't have ended up with opposing fans able to ask if the owner had faxed today's team through to the manager yet.

But here's the biggy! I do not believe for one second that we would not have sacked a player who had been convicted of grooming young girls on the internet - especially as he committed those crimes whilst contracted to the club. And we would certainly not be in the position - which Vladimir Romanov has put us in - of being fans of a club that is not only keeping that player on their books but actually attempting to find some way, any way, of trying to defend that player's crimes.

Sorry but although Vladimir Romanov may have "saved" the club, OUR club from Chris Robinson's inept leadership, he should not be allowed to get away with this latest embarrassment to Heart of Midlothian Football Club!

Craig Thomson needs to have his employment with Hearts terminated - IMMEDIATELY!

If Vladimir Romanov chooses to follow him out of the door I, for one, will not shed a tear. At this moment in time, I would rather Hearts fold and be resurrected in the Junior Leagues than watch with sadness as Mr Romanov drags us deeper and deeper into the mire.

Heart of Midlothian and her fans are, rightly, proud of the sacrifices that their entire first team squad made by joining up to fight in the first world war rather than hide, safely, behind their credentials as football players.

With one fell swoop yesterday, Hearts, Vladimir Romanov and Craig Thomson by their acts of cowardice managed to tarnish the name of the club that once stood so proud.

from http://www.facebook.com/pages/View-from-Gorgie/6604163964

i kinda feel sorry for the more normal ones out there,

[lapsedhibee]

Its mind boggling that this convicted sex offender is still at the club. If i was a hearts fan and bumped into him at a players meet or even on the touchline then i wouldnt think twice about lamping him one.......it certainly wouldnt be the first time i attacked a convicted sex offender. These folk should be jailed to protect our children and in more serious cases hung.

See I dinna think you can get away with saying that. No problem with the hanging - though drawing and quartering might still be out - but by mentioning "more serious" cases you may be taken to be implying that there are also "less serious" cases of child abuse. And the idea of "not very serious" child abuse is not, I think, something that 99.9% of posters on this thread will tolerate!

[ArabHibee]

I give up!

All I would be doing if my grandkids were in schools in the Lothian region, would be asking of their school if Hearts had a training session with my kids and if this pervert would be taking any training sessions with them. Depending of their answers, I would be asking further questions.

No paedophile will be getting near my grandkids to my knowledge
I think that would be a phone call your grandkids parents would have to make, no?

[truehibernian]

http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/journal/oct2000/def.pdf

Pages 19-23 woody, just in case you don't get legal aid :greengrin Quite a good paper.

Really is quite bizarre that someone would even contemplate a legal action but hey-ho, each to their own.

Woody......I would, if I were you, read the section 'statements uttered in rixa'

McIntosh........I am genuinely interested to know. Why would you threaten legal action on what is an internet forum where heated debate does on occasion happen ? When posting on such an emotive subject, surely you know/knew that with a certain viewpoint, that viewpoint may be met with some hostility and to that end, it may be directed at you personally. Why enter into such debate, and then when it does descend into somewhat personal 'debate' do you immediately threaten legal action and become ultra defensive ?

Surely defamation is something that would only affect you if there were countless individuals that knew you, more specifically your username you use, read hibs.net and therefore could stand in a court and say that you were 'defamed' ? Since I very much doubt woody knows you, knows your job, knows your standing in society, your character and knows your moral views, how can he have 'defamed' you to your material/personal detriment ? Part of a defamation case is that you are 'identified'.........as far as I see you are 'McIntosh' by username and you yourself have alluded to where you work......no one else has. And even then it has been vague.

Genuinely keen to know........I've been in court too many times to mention so don't need the legal fees myself :greengrin My own view is that you would quite spectacularly fail with your action. Oh and if our 'certain Hibs player's' legal agent is reading he may wish to take you up on your 'drug dealing' comment.......mibbes anyways ! That player is far more easily identifiable than you I would dare to say.