Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Ozyhibby]

AD says discussion of electronic transfers and cheques is irrelevant as the "money was not there."


AD shows jury letter from David Horne to Whyte when press revealed the Ticketus deal. Asks for information on details of transaction

"It's plain there was a dishonest representation on the source of funds"

AD moves on to charge 2, jury given copies of relevant section of the Companies Act.

Adds "This is the sort of thing that would strike fear into the hearts of law students"

AD says essential point of section is that it is illegal to acquire a company using it's own resources.

AD "It wasn't about just paying a pound" bank debt had to be paid bank Says Ticketus lent money to Rangers who then lent it to Whyte who then paid the bank. "Financial assistance"

AD now reading out relevant section of companies act.

"How can it be good faith when you actively conceal the details..notes if you sell future season tickets "you run out of money at some point

AD suggests "Mr Whyte knew what he was doing" Says case is simple "Craig Whyte deceived Murray, used assets of club to buy it" Adds "false and dishonest representation"

AD "This has been a long case, but not as long as it could have been. I now sit down and don't say any more"

AD closes by thanking the jury for their attention

Court adjourns. Donald Findlay to make his speech for the defence tomorrow at 10am

Seems the case is that Murray did not know about ticketus. If this is it then why did Murray not put that there should be no 3rd party funding in the contract? It would have been easy to do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brog]

Seems the case is that Murray did not know about ticketus. If this is it then why did Murray not put that there should be no 3rd party funding in the contract? It would have been easy to do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SDM's behaviour in this saga reminds me of Ronald Reagan at the time of Irangate. The Washington Post headline was "Guilty But Asleep". Most apt for SDM.

[Eyrie]

The purchase of the shares was £1, but that was subject to a £48m injection on the part of CW. If he then only injected half of that, the contract hasn't been fulfilled.
Didn't Findlay get a Huns RIP witness to admit that there was nothing in the contract to hold Whyte to the promised injection of funding? And how much of the £48m was for the big tax case, rather than the squad or stadium repairs?


AD "It wasn't about just paying a pound" bank debt had to be paid bank Says Ticketus lent money to Rangers who then lent it to Whyte who then paid the bank. "Financial assistance"
Why would Huns RIP lend the money to Whyte to repay Lloyds, when it was Huns RIP that owed Lloyds the money? All Whyte did was refinance the club's borrowing that Murray had run up using the assets of the company which he now controlled.

Either I'm missing the bloody obvious or Findlay is going to have fun tomorrow.

[ancient hibee]

You are.Whyte was not the owner of Rangers when he used Rangers' assets to raise money.He then as you say refinanced by running up a debt in Rangers name which was not the deal.

[mim]

I wish posters wouldn't refer to old Huns as Rangers RIP, when it should obviously be Rangers RIH (rot in hell) :greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

You are.Whyte was not the owner of Rangers when he used Rangers' assets to raise money.He then as you say refinanced by running up a debt in Rangers name which was not the deal.

If I buy a house I arrange the funds before I take ownership with the house as security. Is that not the same?

[Eyrie]

You are.Whyte was not the owner of Rangers when he used Rangers' assets to raise money.He then as you say refinanced by running up a debt in Rangers name which was not the deal.
What money did he raise?

Whyte had an agreement in place with Ticketus to refinance the Lloyds debt. Is that any different to having an agreement in place with another bank, which would have required a security over Ibrox? This wasn't fresh money that he could then pay out to himself.

And was the Ticketus money a loan? I think I read earlier in the court proceedings that they had actually purchased the tickets at a discount, although I could be mistaken.

[CropleyWasGod]

What money did he raise?

Whyte had an agreement in place with Ticketus to refinance the Lloyds debt. Is that any different to having an agreement in place with another bank, which would have required a security over Ibrox? This wasn't fresh money that he could then pay out to himself.

And was the Ticketus money a loan? I think I read earlier in the court proceedings that they had actually purchased the tickets at a discount, although I could be mistaken.
Remember that Ticketus were a creditor in the RFC liquidation. That was for a loan that CW took out before he was the owner. Ticketus believed that he was acting on behalf of RFC, which is why they paid over the money......and why they subsequently successfully sued him.

It definitely was a loan, BTW. An advance secured on ST sales, which they "bought" at a discounted rate and recouped at the full rate.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[majorhibs]

SDM's behaviour in this saga reminds me of Ronald Reagan at the time of Irangate. The Washington Post headline was "Guilty But Asleep". Most apt for SDM.

Murrays as guilty as sin. CW guilty of an almighty gamble on Cl qualification that didn't pay off. But Murray is guilty beyond belief! Of stiffing Hibs & Scottish football & basically everyone with illegal stuff that gave his vile club an advantage & players that no-one else had! Hang draw & quarter the charlatan that is Murray before anything else!

[Ozyhibby]

I have to say that I don't really care whether Whyte is guilty or not. I'm more interested in exposing the corruption at the SFA and having the titles stripped. Old Rangers were evading tax to win football games and until that's recognised then the game will suffer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

Murrays as guilty as sin. CW guilty of an almighty gamble on Cl qualification that didn't pay off. But Murray is guilty beyond belief! Of stiffing Hibs & Scottish football & basically everyone with illegal stuff that gave his vile club an advantage & players that no-one else had! Hang draw & quarter the charlatan that is Murray before anything else!

He even admitted it by saying they did the EBT scheme to buy more expensive players. You do get the impression he is untouchable.

[Moulin Yarns]

Proceedings resume. Defence Advocate DonaldFindlay QC rises to begin his address to the jury

Findlay begins by telling the jury about aclerk of the court who used to say "you can't rush these things, justiceis too important."

Findlay "The public are entitled tosee justice being done."

Findlay "In this course of this trialyou have seen witness after witness come into court and refuse to takeresponsibility for anything" "It wasnae me"

Findlay "People are clearly givingevidence on what they know now..I've never made a mistake with the benefit ofhindsight"

Findlay urges the jury to assess evidencebased on what people knew at the time. What happened later to Rangers"irrelevant"

Findlay on Crown witnesses "They aretrying to protect their place in history"

Findlay "Football is a game ofpassion, it gets you" but adds that this also is irrelevant, "isabout a company, Rangers Football Club PLC"

Findlay The two big Scottish football clubsmake a huge contribution to Scottish life" "But in the end hasnothing to do with this case"

Findlay The Advocate Depute had lot to sayabout the roles people have in court "but didn't have much to say aboutthe role of the defence

Findlay, Crown have to show there was acrime. "When the state makes an allegation against an individual​ it is upto state to prove it"

Findlay: There was no crime

Findlay "Guilt has to be proved, it'snot for the police to do that, it's not for the prosecution to do that"tells jury "It's up to you"

Findlay: The Crown approach is wrong, isunfair is unjustifiable

Findlay: 400,000 pages of evidence yetCrown focussing on 6 words. Argues "This is a revisionist view ofhistory" "That's just wrong"

Findlay "The Advocate Depute says hehas to prove his case then jumps to the end..is a semantic exercise"

[Moulin Yarns]

Findlay "Mr Whyte is not my client" says he works on instructions of solicitor


Findlay "what happens then is that the person sitting over there (points to the dock) puts his trust in me.

"He sits in the dock and is in my hands... responsibility is mine, and mine alone"

Findlay: Crown suggest Whyte was in control of everything that happened during the purchase "That is far from the case"

Notes role of lawyers, asks if you would expect a Dr to ask you for advice on treatment?

Findlay Whyte and David Murray have both been "Ill served by their advisors"

Findlay "you might wonder why trial has not lasted 12 weeks" Says after McIntyre testified "a sea change in Crown case" Says Crown tried to drive down the case to narrowest level, witnesses got "shorter and shorter... there is a lot more to it than that"

Findlay compares Crown case to trying to solve a jigsaw only looking at a few pieces.

Findlay to the jury "look at the bigger picture"

Findlay Crown case is that money was not available on date of purchase, 6 May 2011, and Whyte knew, that amounts to fraud.

Whyte was on one side and on the other "the dupe"

Findlay "There was no financial loss to Murray, not a penny piece, well I suppose you could say they lost a pound" Findlay accuses Crown witnesses of buck passing" to preserve their reputations.

Findlay says all business negotiations involve "lying to each other"

Findlay: in 2008 a financial crisis hit the whole world. "A Tsunami of financial problems hit Murray"

Findlay David Murray made two mistakes, turned out to be "catastrophic" 1 entrusted club to a board that "didn't have a clue" 2 Trusted his advisors, which was a mistake

Findlay: The big tax case liability could be £50m, £60m would have been "the end of the club"

Findlay: Mr Whyte came along and had a business plan, how practical it was not relevant

Findlay Craig Whyte painted as a pantomime villain as if everything was fine before he came. Was the "fall guy"

Findlay: Rangers was declining and no-one knew what to do. Only plan to borrow money to spend on the team. "Ludicrous"

Findlay The only questions Murray ever asked Whyte was "money?" "money?' "money?"

Findlay "Murray wasn't interested in where the money was coming from" notes words "third party resources" in purchase agreement

Adds What did Murray's lawyers ask about it? Absolutely nothing

Findlay to the jury: "The Crown are desperate for you to throw the context away"

Findlay says he will try and finish today but will not be constrained by time from doing his duty to his client. Court takes morning break

[Moulin Yarns]

Proceedings resume with Donald Findlay QCcontinuing his closing address to the jury.

Findlay: Let's start with Dorchester hotel.Says Murray was about to sign deal but walked out as involved building flats atRangers

"Why didn't the advisers check in thefirst place?"

After that experience surely lawyers wouldhave checked everything

Findlay Can I prove Murray knew aboutTicketus, I can not. Can I prove he should have known, yes I can.

"It was more important to get the dealover the line..."

Findlay notes Murray spent money marketingthe club, spent money on accountants for tax case, had Dundas and Wilson

"How much did they spend checking onMr Whyte's background? Nothing, not a penny"

Findlay to jury "You are entitled toask yourself why, why were they so inneficient?"

Findlay The alarm bells were ringing, butno-one made inquiries..not the hardest job...Murray advisors focused on gettingdeal done"

Findlay notes previous potential buyerswere checked out says McGill view on Whyte: let's tell the press about it thenlet them investigate

4 May 2011 email from David Murray (asDavid Fraser) "Need to get this over the line..no realisticalternative..nothing is perfect"

"The fallout of no deal is reallyserious"

Findlay The deal was more important thanthe detail.

Findlay, when third party funding added toagreement, "no-one batted an eyelid, no-one cared"

Findlay moves on to then Rangers chairmanAlistair Johnson. Notes his board brought in "not a penny" ofInvestment.

Findlay on Paul Murray plan "At 11thhour he put in a bid, failed for only two reasons "It was nonsense and itwas illegal" "I might be uncharitable but you would think a man fromthe financial world would know these things"

[Moulin Yarns]

Findlay recalls evidence from Walter Smith, notes he said playing squad needed to be strengthened but "the bank had had enough."


Things were very very bad, chances of European football diminishing dramatically.

Findlay: common sense tells you no-one can guarantee the result of a game of football, "you cannot just buy success"

view of Rangers board "Borrow more money, spend more money and everything would be all right. Would have meant end of Rangers Football Club

"They were driving Rangers into a train crash and nobody saw it, or nobody knew what to do."

Findlay notes that Ian McGill of Lloyd's called the Rangers board "disfunctional" in his statement to police

Says £1.7m needed for health and safety work at stadium could not have happened overnight.

Findlay "Murray wanted to sell Rangers Football Club, there came a point in time when he had to sell Rangers Football Club."

Findlay says there was an advantage to Murray from the sale of Rangers, bank would consider giving him metals business back.

That was his incentive

Findlay: "It was a con being run by people who didn't know what they were doing"

Findlay The Advocate Depute said Mr Johnson and Mr King not called as witnesses, "that's not my problem" adds up to Crown who to call

Findlay​ notes after Whyte takeover, bank was paid, stadium repaired and players brought, including current captain Lee Wallace.

"What more did they want him to do?"

Findlay : season started "unfortunately had to have a trip to Malmö, if Rangers made Champions League we probably wouldn't be here today."

Findlay Talk of intention to invest in players "PR window dressing" adds "I might have an intention to buy Juventus"

Says £5m would have bought very little in way of players "was just PR"

Court adjourns for lunch, back at 2pm

[Dashing Bob S]

Murrays as guilty as sin. CW guilty of an almighty gamble on Cl qualification that didn't pay off. But Murray is guilty beyond belief! Of stiffing Hibs & Scottish football & basically everyone with illegal stuff that gave his vile club an advantage & players that no-one else had! Hang draw & quarter the charlatan that is Murray before anything else!


A decent start has already been made on that enterprise.

[Spike Mandela]

Is it just me but the Crown's case after such a long time in preparation seems very weak?

No 'smoking gun' evident.

[Moulin Yarns]

Findlay: The bank debt had to be paid offas part of the procedure of the deal, that was done, other obligations"future obligations"

One was "hold £5m for playingsquad" Ally McCoist testified in fact more than £5m spent on squad Findlaysays

Health and safety liability met, taxliability appealed. "Not a scrap of evidence working capital notprovided"

"the question might legitimatelyasked, why are we here?"

Findlay: evidence from after an allegedoffence can be relevant, gives example of a murderer burying a body after thecrime. (I always said DF knew where the bodies wereburied)

"The fact somebody did this maysuggest they were involved in the murder"

Findlay wether the plan to use the Ticketusmoney was a good one or a bad one is not relevant, notes paying bank debt saved£1m a year

Findlay says Whyte was willing to deal withbig tax case, notes no-one can know if his plan would work has still notconcluded

Findlay suggests that in business theresources you have included "money that is available to you"

Adds If it matters to someone where yourmoney is coming from they can ask

Findlay, Murray could have walked away atany time, they chose not to"

Findlay: Ticketus would not have done adeal with Craig Whyte if they didn't know he had the resources to back it up

Findlay says Murray had the option to lookinto the sources of funds "they chose not to, that's not Mr Whyte'sfault"

Findlay says there was a secrecy element toTicketus deal which the Crown are presenting as "sinister" Showscourt Ticketus document saying deal is for paying the bank debt. "Nothingwas hidden from Ticketus"

"That's as plain as you can get, 2+2equalling 4"

Findlay says it was Ticketus who wereinsisting deal be kept confidential as didn't want football supporters to knowof their involvement

Findlay says he can't prove Murray knewabout Ticketus deal, but the football club had dealt with them previously.

Adds Murray knew there were otherInvestors, quotes email from "Trusted advisor" Mike McGill. April2011

[Moulin Yarns]

"Interestingly DG (David Grier) let slip that this opinion was required for Craig Whytes other Investors"


Recipients of email included David Murray

Findlay "Only conceivable question was to ask 'who are other Investors..what did they do.. absolutely nothing"

a "first year law student" would have spotted this...only conclusion it didn't matter where the money came from..they didn't care

Findlay: David Murray himself sat in that witness box and said no connection with Mr Whyte..then we saw the emails..how easily people forget

Court shown note made by Alistair Johnson from 23 Nov 2010 "Octopus £15m attempt to borrow" Findlay "It's Craig Whyte he is talking about.

Court shown notes from Murray lawyer David Horne, "£25m in escrow..Octopus meeting-discussing with CW re £15m"

Findlay "Who told them Whyte was talking to Ticketus?"

Findlay "What you just say 'oh well' and do nothing about it?"

"They will spend money on fancy brochures..but when it comes to the most precious thing Murray has to sell they do nothing"

Findlay: I can't prove Murray knew about Ticketus but, I think I've proved beyond a reasonable doubt, they should have.

Only two conclusions they didn't do their job properly or they didn't care

Findlay shows court HMRC letter about "Small tax case" Nov 2010 demand is for £2.28m, interest was"running"

By time Whyte takeover bill had risen to £2.8m, Findlay "Why? No-one had done anything about it..a familiar refrain"

The hope that was "someone else would sort it out..1/2 million pounds thrown away for nothing

"The notion this club was being run properly is becoming offensive."

Findlay to jury "If I had half a million pounds I'd have a good weekend. Would still be back in court on Monday, it's my job.

Findlay "The whole thing was deteriorating, was getting worse and worse by the minute." Stadium repair bill reached £1.7m "before anyone did anything about it."

Findlay "Rangers Football Club was given away for nothing" Court takes short break

[Moulin Yarns]

Donald Findlay rises to continue defenceclosing address to the jury. "As you know her ladyship is in charge ofthis court, her word is law

Adds "I could go on all night but Imight deal.with a short chapter then take the risk of asking for anadjournment" Laughter in court

Findlay "When I was a young lawyer themantra was 'attention to detail'" It "ought to be instinctive to alawyer"

Findlay on Murray and Whyte/Ticketus deal"They knew or must have known, ..the deal was the thing"

Findlay on real world of business documentsare prepared in advance, minutes created for meetings that dont happen"

Findlay on share purchase agreement"immediately" and "unconditionally" says is "adistinction without a difference."

Findlay on bank transfers: It leaves youraccount right away, doesn't reach recipient instantaneously"

Paying Immediately means "subject tothe workings of the bank"

Findlay, when you are told about thirdparty funding is involved and you don't ask who, you are taking a risk

From the moment third party funding wasadded to the share purchase agreement Murray was "on notice"

Third party funding, by its very nature,cannot be unconditional, as a lawyer you ask for evidence

"Nobody asked about the source of themoney, the only reason could be, that didn't matter"

Findlay wishes jury a pleasant weekend,tells jury not to forget what he says but "don't dwell on it" AsksLady Stacey for an adjournment

Lady Stacey advises jury "file it allin your head..but don't make up your mind over the weekend.. please don't talkto anyone about it.

[Eyrie]

Remember that Ticketus were a creditor in the RFC liquidation. That was for a loan that CW took out before he was the owner. Ticketus believed that he was acting on behalf of RFC, which is why they paid over the money......and why they subsequently successfully sued him.

It definitely was a loan, BTW. An advance secured on ST sales, which they "bought" at a discounted rate and recouped at the full rate.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Cheers - that explains why I was even more confused than normal about the "purchase".

[Hibs Class]

Findlay completed his closing argument this morning - judge now doing her summing up. For twitter updates follow James Doleman (@jamesdoleman)

[Keith_M]

TBH, I think it would be a travesty if Whyte was convicted and everyone else got off scot-free. The phrase Sacrificial Lamb springs to mind.





As an aside, the term 'scot free' has nothing to do with Scotland or Scottishness, but comes from a middle-english phrase that could equally be translated as to get off "tax-free".


Spooky!

:wink:

[Iain G]

Looks like they really do have no money to spend if they are fishing in the same murky transfer pool as the Hearts :greengrin

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40154488

[Hibs Class]

Court finished for the day - summing up to conclude tomorrow and jury will then be sent out

[CropleyWasGod]

Court finished for the day - summing up to conclude tomorrow and jury will then be sent out

It's not Hibs Class to just say that, without telling us all what happened today.:greengrin

I've read Doleman's Tweets today, and Lady Stacey is getting right to the heart of what is important in the case. Maybe somebody smarter than me can reproduce her comments.

[SirDavidsNapper]

Where are they getting all this money? Will they never learn? 5.5million spent already. Can see the new club going the way of the old one at this rate.

[Hibs Class]

It's not Hibs Class to just say that, without telling us all what happened today.:greengrin

I've read Doleman's Tweets today, and Lady Stacey is getting right to the heart of what is important in the case. Maybe somebody smarter than me can reproduce her comments.


I know, sorry! Twitter is blocked at work and so I tried to cut and paste on my phone but didn't get past 3 or 4 tweets before I did something wrong and lost everything. Looked like an interesting summing up though, directing without leading the jury.

[silverhibee]

It's not Hibs Class to just say that, without telling us all what happened today.:greengrin

I've read Doleman's Tweets today, and Lady Stacey is getting right to the heart of what is important in the case. Maybe somebody smarter than me can reproduce her comments.


You think. :greengrin

[greenginger]

Looks like they really do have no money to spend if they are fishing in the same murky transfer pool as the Hearts :greengrin

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40154488


At this rate they're going to have more Kafflics in their side than the Celtic mob.

[lapsedhibee]

isn't it only Whyte that has been charged?
it appears to me that his defence is that other people should have done more to stop him committing an offence.

I think Craigie's defence against the fraud charge is that he's not guilty of fraud because he didn't pretend anything to the people he's alleged to have defrauded. Are we to believe that David Murray, a peer of the realm if not quite a fragrant lady, lied when he claimed to have been duped? I do, and expect Craigie to walk away from that charge.

[Deansy]

At this rate they're going to have more Kafflics in their side than the Celtic mob.

Was just about to type the same - can't be far away from a Hun-team with NO Protestants !

Wonder what they'll sing then .............................

[Brunswickbill]

It's not Hibs Class to just say that, without telling us all what happened today.:greengrin

I've read Doleman's Tweets today, and Lady Stacey is getting right to the heart of what is important in the case. Maybe somebody smarter than me can reproduce her comments.

Oh Oh Oh to be
Smarter than CWG

Lady Stacey begins by telling the jury her role is to "explain the legal rules you need to decide the case. The jury is the judge of the facts"
All of the evidence in the joint minute of agreed facts is proven fact
On witnesses​: "it is the answer to a question that is the evidence, not the question" Speeches also not evidence
Jury must take care over some of the documents such as Alistair Johnston note, as he was never called as a witness.
Cautions the jury about note from the takeover panel, again as no witness spoke to it. "Take it for what it's worth"
Tells jury "not to be deflected...get to the heart of it." Adds "you must not be influenced by what you have read about Rangers
On judging witnesses "No-one comes into court wearing a badge saying 'I am reliable'"
Notes the Crown relied on some parts of what lawyer Gary Withey testified to, but not all of it."
Circumstantial evidence can be just as important as direct eyewitness testimony.
On Mr Holmes testimony "He wasn't around for very long, unlike some of them."
One of the issues jury has to decide is "was there a crime?" which doesn't usually happen in, for example, a murder case
No-one has to disprove the charges against them, Crown must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
In Scottish law nobody can be convicted on the evidence of one person alone, must be corroborated.
Mr Whyte does not have to lead evidence, he doesn't have to prove anything, can't draw inference from non-testimony.
Tells the jury to look at their copies of the indictment (sometimes called The Libel)
The key part in the first charge is Whyte pretending to Murray he had his own funds to complete transaction
Legally fraud involves making a dishonest and false pretence for some practical purpose.
Not enough to be reckless or careless about being truthful" also has to lead to a practical result
To be satisfied 1. Whyte made dishonest pretence 2. Knew what he was doing 3. Must have led to a practical result.
No direct evidence of Whyte intentions, must be inferred from his actions
Tells jury that even if no-one lost anything that, in itself, is not a defence against fraud. No need to show loss to Murray.
Crown has to show that any dishonest pretence led to the share transfer, fraud must have a practical result
Summarising the financial transaction. Whyte bought the bank debt from Lloyds for over £18m Money transferred 8 May 2011
This happened after Rangers' lent Whyte's company Wavetower​ £16m
"The bank wanted to get it's money back, and it did" adds "Played hardball"
Points to para 14.5 of the Share Purchase Agreement "which you've not heard much of" "The purchaser may waive any part of the agreement" Says is not about any duties you may have under any agreement
Notes Crown say Whyte could not receive the Ticketus money until after he owned the club
Mr Findlay says Murray knew about "third party funding" as this is written in the Share Purchase Agreement. If they wanted to find out who was funding source "all they had to do was ask."
Reminds jury that Rangers put out a sale brochure​ saying "no investment needed"
says Findlay's: "know or ought to have known" is used in civil cases. Cites a building firm not protecting staff from asbestos.
Defence position s that Murray would have sold even if they knew about Ticketus, hence no "practical result" of pretence
Directs the jury issue is not if Murray should have known, , but the practical result of pretence. "Mr Whyte does not have to prove he didn't do it."
Lady Stacey tells the jury she is moving on to Charge 2 "financial assistance" an alleged breach of the Companies Act.
Tells the jury the offence of financial assistance was created by Parliament, asks jury to look at relevant section of the act. This is believed to be the first time a jury in Scotland has been asked to deal with a financial assistance charge.
The loan from Rangers may have been unlawful as used to pay off their liability. However not a crime if done 1. In good faith or 2. Was done for the benefit of the company.
tells the jury the Crown reject financial assistance was given in good faith or was good for the company. Mr Findlay on the other hand says there was a bigger picture." Club not in a good state bank wanted money back. Was for good of company
Directs the jury that "the law requires a mental element..the person needs to know he is doing something" Continues "Businessmen have to stick to the rules laid out by the companies act"
"Mr Findlay is very keen to remind you to take things in context, and he is surely right " What you have to decide if there was a purpose in financial assistance other than paying the debt.
It's for the Crown to show this wasn't done in good faith, it's not for Mr Whyte to prove anything
Court adjourns for the day.

[Bostonhibby]

Was just about to type the same - can't be far away from a Hun-team with NO Protestants !

Wonder what they'll sing then .............................
The cry was we surrendered, surrendered then we died (again)?

Sounds like another Kafflik conspiracy. Actually all down to their former board of directors and owner by the sounds of it.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[ACLeith]

I think Craigie's defence against the fraud charge is that he's not guilty of fraud because he didn't pretend anything to the people he's alleged to have defrauded. Are we to believe that David Murray, a peer of the realm if not quite a fragrant lady, lied when he claimed to have been duped? I do, and expect Craigie to walk away from that charge.
Why did DM not have due diligence carried out? Only one reason - he wanted to offload the club to anyone daft enough to take it on and didn't want to unearth the truth about CW.

Doesn't mean CW is innocent of course, though I heard it said from a senior person in the Legal profession that he is simply the "patsy" in all of this.

[Geo_1875]

Why did DM not have due diligence carried out? Only one reason - he wanted to offload the club to anyone daft enough to take it on and didn't want to unearth the truth about CW.

Doesn't mean CW is innocent of course, though I heard it said from a senior person in the Legal profession that he is simply the "patsy" in all of this.

Does it matter that Murray didn't want to know and could have found out if he wanted to? I think Whyte walked into it knowing what he was doing was wrong and thought he could get away with it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Does it matter that Murray didn't want to know and could have found out if he wanted to? I think Whyte walked into it knowing what he was doing was wrong and thought he could get away with it.

This is from Lady Stacey's summing-up:-

Directs the jury issue is not if Murray should have known, , but the practical result of pretence

I interpret that as "it's irrelevant" that he could/should have known.

[Hibs Class]

Jury sent out about an hour ago

[ACLeith]

Does it matter that Murray didn't want to know and could have found out if he wanted to? I think Whyte walked into it knowing what he was doing was wrong and thought he could get away with it.
Think you're probably right but Murray IMO has repeatedly lied, both before and during the case. His reputation has been shot down but not as much as I would like to have seen

[Deansy]

I think Craigie's defence against the fraud charge is that he's not guilty of fraud because he didn't pretend anything to the people he's alleged to have defrauded. Are we to believe that David Murray, a peer of the realm if not quite a fragrant lady, lied when he claimed to have been duped? I do, and expect Craigie to walk away from that charge.

If Murray sold the Hun to Sir Craig as a 'Viable business' surely it's Murray who's guilty of fraud ?

[ancient hibee]

Still think not proven is likely verdict and quite quickly unless the jury want to spin it out.

[Keith_M]

Still think not proven is likely verdict and quite quickly unless the jury want to spin it out.


:agree:


I still think Murray should be prosecuted, even if it's just for the crime of being David Murray.

[Deansy]

:agree:


I still think Murray should be prosecuted, even if it's just for the crime of being David Murray.

Ditto !!

[Hibs Class]

Still think not proven is likely verdict and quite quickly unless the jury want to spin it out.

Judge said in her summing up that she would accept an 8-7 verdict.

[southsider]

Judge said in her summing up that she would accept an 8-7 verdict.
What would happen if 5 vote guilty, 5 not-guilty and 5 not proven ?

[Geo_1875]

What would happen if 5 vote guilty, 5 not-guilty and 5 not proven ?

Nothing?

[Hibs Class]

What would happen if 5 vote guilty, 5 not-guilty and 5 not proven ?

Ha - good question! Cannot find that in Doleman's tweets, certainly not enough for a conviction, and she did say that not guilty and not proven would have exactly the same effect. I suspect that there would be an acquittal but cannot say for sure.

[ehf]

This is from Lady Stacey's summing-up:-

Directs the jury issue is not if Murray should have known, , but the practical result of pretence

I interpret that as "it's irrelevant" that he could/should have known.

This is closely linked to:

Defence position s that Murray would have sold even if they knew about Ticketus, hence no "practical result" of pretence

That's the key question for the jury: Murray has stated on oath that he would not have sold had he know about Ticketus but Findlay clearly considers that the jury have heard sufficent evidence to expose that for the pile of bullsheet is palpably is.

[Hibs Class]

Jury back in, verdict due imminently.....

[DarlingtonHibee]

Jury back in, verdict due imminently.....

Drum roll..... Going for not guilty.

[Hibs Class]

Not guilty on all charges

[Kojock]

Not guilty on all charges

No great surprise there.

[Hibs Class]

It's a majority verdict, don't know what the split was

[southsider]

Not guilty on all charges
Had to be DF played a blinder.

[ancient hibee]

Many backsides being kicked in Crown Office.Started with a full house of people to be charged.Ended up with one in the dock,an unprovable case badly presented with witnesses happily perjuring themselves and not saying what the Crown expected.

[Iain G]

Not guilty on all charges

Looking forward to seeing how this plays out now!! :greengrin

[stantonhibby]

Looking forward to seeing how this plays out now!! :greengrin

Whyte about to make a statement outside the court....could be interesting.

No statement now apparently

[Hibernia&Alba]

Not guilty on all charges

So, what are the implications of the verdict?

[tamig]

Excellent result.

[Brunswickbill]

Whyter than Whyte.

[Stonewall]

So, what are the implications of the verdict?

Interesting to see if anyone held to account over huge waste of public money and could get very interesting now the reporting restriction have been lifted and people are free to report all that went on in the court.

happy days.

[Hibs Class]

Whyte now not going to make any comment outside court after all. Doleman tweeting that he'll be posting more on what went on in court that couldn't be reported until the case was over.

[southsider]

So, does Whyte get the old rangers assets back ? Or does he just own sDM,s ass ? Can he sue him ?

[Seveno]

BREAKING NEWS: David Murray surrenders his knighthood to Donald Findlay.

[ballengeich]

A fix. SNP organised the whole thing. Brendan O'Flaherty was the jury foreman. The club was doing fine financially until Whyte took over.

You don't believe those things? Get on to the Huns' fans' forums and they'll put you right. The stupidity is remarkable even by their standards.

One of the bits of evidence I found interesting was that Lloyds Bank rejected futher loans because the business case supporting the request depended on qualification for the Champions League group for the next three seasons. It would be interesting to observe a parallel universe in which Rangers beat Malmo in 2011 and went on to the group stage. We might find how Whyte planned to profit from the deal.

[silverhibee]

Not Guilty on both charges.

Bit late with that info :greengrin

[Hibs Class]

A fix. SNP organised the whole thing. Brendan O'Flaherty was the jury foreman. The club was doing fine financially until Whyte took over.

You don't believe those things? Get on to the Huns' fans' forums and they'll put you right. The stupidity is remarkable even by their standards.

One of the bits of evidence I found interesting was that Lloyds Bank rejected futher loans because the business case supporting the request depended on qualification for the Champions League group for the next three seasons. It would be interesting to observe a parallel universe in which Rangers beat Malmo in 2011 and went on to the group stage. We might find how Whyte planned to profit from the deal.

In respect of parallel universes, would also have been interesting to see what would have happened had Lloyds not taken over Bank of Scotland. BoS had been exceptionally lenient / generous in their support of Scottish clubs and I think Lloyds was aghast at what they took over and were immediately looking to significantly reduce their exposure.

[Cabbage East]

A fix. SNP organised the whole thing. Brendan O'Flaherty was the jury foreman. The club was doing fine financially until Whyte took over.

You don't believe those things? Get on to the Huns' fans' forums and they'll put you right. The stupidity is remarkable even by their standards.

One of the bits of evidence I found interesting was that Lloyds Bank rejected futher loans because the business case supporting the request depended on qualification for the Champions League group for the next three seasons. It would be interesting to observe a parallel universe in which Rangers beat Malmo in 2011 and went on to the group stage. We might find how Whyte planned to profit from the deal.

Not far off. Lifted from their forum


questions have to be raised about the jury's integrity. Given that if you had any links to the Club whether that be season ticket, shares or family who work at Rangers you were not allowed on the jury as there would be a conflict of interest. They did not carry out any other checks to see what football tendencies they had.. For a big case like this there should have been an impartial jury brought in from another UK city..

[Geo_1875]

Not far off. Lifted from their forum
Quote Originally Posted by hun

questions have to be raised about the jury's integrity. Given that if you had any links to the Club whether that be season ticket, shares or family who work at Rangers you were not allowed on the jury as there would be a conflict of interest. They did not carry out any other checks to see what football tendencies they had.. For a big case like this there should have been an impartial jury brought in from another UK city..

He'd probably been happy bussing them in from Belfast

[Brunswickbill]

James Doleman's comments https://www.byline.com/project/72/article/1712

[JeMeSouviens]

Donald Findlay :not worth

[southsider]

He'd probably been happy bussing them in from Belfast
Another genius just said "no rangers men were allowed on the jury. Just Catholics and rangers haters." Unbelievable in 2017.

[s.a.m]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
Rangers fraud trial: SFA to seek £200,000 from Craig Whyte
By Chris McLaughlin

BBC Sport
11 minutes ago



From the section Football (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/scottish)


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
The SFA is considering pursuing Craig Whyte for a £200,000 fine




The Scottish Football Association is to consider pursuing former Rangers owner Craig Whyte for a fine of £200,000 for bringing the game into disrepute.
Whyte, found not guilty of taking over the club by fraud in May 2011, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40156934) was fined by the governing body in 2012 but the money was never paid.
SFA chief executive Stewart Regan confirmed the body will take advice about how to recover the money.


Regan declined to comment on the High Court verdict concerning Whyte.
More to follow.

[lapsedhibee]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
Rangers fraud trial: SFA to seek £200,000 from Craig Whyte
By Chris McLaughlinBBC Sport


11 minutes ago
From the section Football (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/scottish)


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/faqs/questions/bbc_online/sharing)The SFA is considering pursuing Craig Whyte for a £200,000 fine

The Scottish Football Association is to consider pursuing former Rangers owner Craig Whyte for a fine of £200,000 for bringing the game into disrepute.
Whyte, found not guilty of taking over the club by fraud in May 2011, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40156934) was fined by the governing body in 2012 but the money was never paid.
SFA chief executive Stewart Regan confirmed the body will take advice about how to recover the money.

Regan declined to comment on the High Court verdict concerning Whyte.
More to follow.

Regan brings Scottish fitba into more disrepute than Craigie ever did.

[Ozyhibby]

After following the case, I could not see how any other decision could be taken. There just did not seem to be any evidence that he committed fraud.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

Donald Findlay :not worth

Certainly a more impressive lawyer's performance than this bloke:

Gary Withey, who was hired by Craig Whyte to see through the Rangers deal, was unable to tell the court how old he was. Prosecutor Alex Prentice QC asked Mr Withey to state his age - a standard question asked of all witnesses at the start of their evidence. After attempting to recall the year in which he was born, Mr Withey eventually settled on 52.

[HoboHarry]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
Rangers fraud trial: SFA to seek £200,000 from Craig Whyte
By Chris McLaughlin

BBC Sport
11 minutes ago
From the section Football (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/scottish)


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
The SFA is considering pursuing Craig Whyte for a £200,000 fine



The Scottish Football Association is to consider pursuing former Rangers owner Craig Whyte for a fine of £200,000 for bringing the game into disrepute.
Whyte, found not guilty of taking over the club by fraud in May 2011, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40156934) was fined by the governing body in 2012 but the money was never paid.
SFA chief executive Stewart Regan confirmed the body will take advice about how to recover the money.


Regan declined to comment on the High Court verdict concerning Whyte.
More to follow.

I hope they try. I've never understood why sporting bodies are allowed to fine individuals sums of money which are often in excess of what the courts of the land impose. CW has nothing to lose and could challenge them all the way to the highest court in the land (Europe if we are still in it) and I think he would win. Those at the top of the SFA chain are collectively the most idiotic bunch imaginable.....

[CropleyWasGod]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
Rangers fraud trial: SFA to seek £200,000 from Craig Whyte
By Chris McLaughlin

BBC Sport
11 minutes ago



From the section Football (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/scottish)


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40174547
The SFA is considering pursuing Craig Whyte for a £200,000 fine




The Scottish Football Association is to consider pursuing former Rangers owner Craig Whyte for a fine of £200,000 for bringing the game into disrepute.
Whyte, found not guilty of taking over the club by fraud in May 2011, (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-40156934) was fined by the governing body in 2012 but the money was never paid.
SFA chief executive Stewart Regan confirmed the body will take advice about how to recover the money.


Regan declined to comment on the High Court verdict concerning Whyte.
More to follow.

Strange timing.

Given that CW was made bankrupt a couple of years ago, and has only recently had that lifted, I'm not sure the SFA have much chance of getting their money anytime soon.

[lapsedhibee]

Strange timing.

Pound of flesh wanted from The Patsy, one way or another.

[CropleyWasGod]

... and another bizarre twist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40175853

Last week, his reputation is trashed in Court. This week, he confirms it :greengrin

[Smartie]

One of things I can't get my head around is what exactly Donald Findlay's agenda is.

I've followed the case and I've started to take a bit of an interest in the law. By all accounts he played an absolute blinder.

But why and for what reason? What was his agenda?

He's a Rangers man and he's a top criminal lawyer. Did he want the truth to be heard in court? Why did he agree to represent Whyte, given that he is a bit of a pariah amongst those of a Rangers persuasion? Did he just want to defend his client, as a fine upstanding gentleman who wishes to see justice being done?

Was he trying to get one over on Murray so that the real villain of the piece, the real man who should be targeted more than any other for what has happened to Rangers over the past decade gets exposed?

[Iain G]

... and another bizarre twist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40175853

Last week, his reputation is trashed in Court. This week, he confirms it :greengrin

Did they not work out he was a clueless, headless monkey last time he was on the board?

I guess he's a Rangers man so that overlooks any of his abilities to do the job required of him!? :confused::rolleyes:

They are the gift that just keeps you laughing!! :thumbsup::greengrin

[hibs0666]

One of things I can't get my head around is what exactly Donald Findlay's agenda is.

I've followed the case and I've started to take a bit of an interest in the law. By all accounts he played an absolute blinder.

But why and for what reason? What was his agenda?

He's a Rangers man and he's a top criminal lawyer. Did he want the truth to be heard in court? Why did he agree to represent Whyte, given that he is a bit of a pariah amongst those of a Rangers persuasion? Did he just want to defend his client, as a fine upstanding gentleman who wishes to see justice being done?

Was he trying to get one over on Murray so that the real villain of the piece, the real man who should be targeted more than any other for what has happened to Rangers over the past decade gets exposed?

A £100-200K invoice to Legal Aid might have something to do with it.

[HoboHarry]

... and another bizarre twist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40175853

Last week, his reputation is trashed in Court. This week, he confirms it :greengrin
I imagine it may simply be deflection from the Craig Whyte fiasco, BBC are running with this story and not the CW case as the headliner......

[Smartie]

A £100-200K invoice to Legal Aid might have something to do with it.

Does he really need the money that much though? Does he not command fees of that size fairly regularly? Could he not have just picked up a similar ticket keeping a fairly routine murderer out of prison somewhere, rather than potentially alienate many of his own peepul?

Had there been a court case following the Merger saga at Hibs, would any Hibs supporting lawyer be in a hurry to go to court to defend David Rowland?

I wouldn't have thought this would be a gig he'd really want, and have assumed that he must be up to something.

[overdrive]

Does he really need the money that much though? Does he not command fees of that size fairly regularly? Could he not have just picked up a similar ticket keeping a fairly routine murderer out of prison somewhere, rather than potentially alienate many of his own peepul?

Had there been a court case following the Merger saga at Hibs, would any Hibs supporting lawyer be in a hurry to go to court to defend David Rowland?

I wouldn't have thought this would be a gig he'd really want, and have assumed that he must be up to something.

Potentially some 'beef' with Murray and/or those in the Murray regime?

[marinello59]

Does he really need the money that much though? Does he not command fees of that size fairly regularly? Could he not have just picked up a similar ticket keeping a fairly routine murderer out of prison somewhere, rather than potentially alienate many of his own peepul?

Had there been a court case following the Merger saga at Hibs, would any Hibs supporting lawyer be in a hurry to go to court to defend David Rowland?

I wouldn't have thought this would be a gig he'd really want, and have assumed that he must be up to something.

Maybe it's just his ego driving him.

[CropleyWasGod]

I imagine it may simply be deflection from the Craig Whyte fiasco, BBC are running with this story and not the CW case as the headliner......

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

[Iain G]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

OMG! What a roaster!

He can't take the fact that he has been shown to be incompetent and his mate Murray a liar and a desperado...

[overdrive]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

What a very strange looking guy. Can't see the Rangers masses (:wink:) being too happy with the "murder" terminology there. Implies their club died.

[Alan62]

Indeed. No corpse, no murder.

Nice to hear it confirmed at last.

[HoboHarry]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09
:faf: Definitely deflection.......

[number9dream]

Strange timing.

Given that CW was made bankrupt a couple of years ago, and has only recently had that lifted, I'm not sure the SFA have much chance of getting their money anytime soon.

I think Ticketus are at the front of the queue, looking for their £18m back.
Wee Craig just seems to sail through the turbulent waters with that deranged smile...

[Hibrandenburg]

A fix. SNP organised the whole thing. Brendan O'Flaherty was the jury foreman. The club was doing fine financially until Whyte took over.

You don't believe those things? Get on to the Huns' fans' forums and they'll put you right. The stupidity is remarkable even by their standards.

One of the bits of evidence I found interesting was that Lloyds Bank rejected futher loans because the business case supporting the request depended on qualification for the Champions League group for the next three seasons. It would be interesting to observe a parallel universe in which Rangers beat Malmo in 2011 and went on to the group stage. We might find how Whyte planned to profit from the deal.

Whenever I ask myself how on earth in the year 2017 so many people could vote for a horse's arse like Donald Trump, I pop over there and it becomes crystal clear.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I think Ticketus are at the front of the queue, looking for their £18m back.
Wee Craig just seems to sail through the turbulent waters with that deranged smile...

From whom would Ticketus try to re-claim the money?

[CropleyWasGod]

From whom would Ticketus try to re-claim the money?

They've already sued CW for it, which is why he was declared bankrupt.

[Jack]

One of things I can't get my head around is what exactly Donald Findlay's agenda is.

I've followed the case and I've started to take a bit of an interest in the law. By all accounts he played an absolute blinder.

But why and for what reason? What was his agenda?

He's a Rangers man and he's a top criminal lawyer. Did he want the truth to be heard in court? Why did he agree to represent Whyte, given that he is a bit of a pariah amongst those of a Rangers persuasion? Did he just want to defend his client, as a fine upstanding gentleman who wishes to see justice being done?

Was he trying to get one over on Murray so that the real villain of the piece, the real man who should be targeted more than any other for what has happened to Rangers over the past decade gets exposed?

I'm pretty sure he must have left amid much bitterness on both sides and it wouldn't surprise me if he and SDM never saw eye to eye either.

If you're involved in any jiggery pokery DF is not the sort of person you want to have previously upset. It wouldn't surprise me if Donald volunteered his services or at least offered mates rates to get his own back on SDM and that rangers board.

[emerald green]

Whatever people may think of Donald Findlay QC, he has played an absolute blinder in this case, exposing Sir David Murray and the shambles that was Rangers FC.

[Deansy]

In respect of parallel universes, would also have been interesting to see what would have happened had Lloyds not taken over Bank of Scotland. BoS had been exceptionally lenient / generous in their support of Scottish clubs and I think Lloyds was aghast at what they took over and were immediately looking to significantly reduce their exposure.

While all right-minded people will be rejoicing at Sir Craig's resounding victory, let's not forget the part that Lloyds also played in the Huns downfall - thank you Lloyds, Scottish Football salutes both you and SCW !

So looking forward to the 'Daily Rectum's headlines tomorrow - 'The law's an ass'/'SNP to blame for appalling justice-system'/'Here are the names & addresses of the jury' etc,etc ??

[Keith_M]

I'm pretty sure he must have left amid much bitterness on both sides and it wouldn't surprise me if he and SDM never saw eye to eye either.

If you're involved in any jiggery pokery DF is not the sort of person you want to have previously upset. It wouldn't surprise me if Donald volunteered his services or at least offered mates rates to get his own back on SDM and that rangers board.


When he was caught singing bigoted songs at a Rangers Supporters Function, it was Murray that forced him out of Ibrox.

I don't think the Findlay The Bigot has ever forgiven Teflon Murray (presumably he thinks he did nothing wrong by singing sectarian songs)

[heretoday]

YAWN! Has nothing else occurred in Scotland today?

Hey there's an election on!

[Kojock]

When he was caught singing bigoted songs at a Rangers Supporters Function, it was Murray that forced him out of Ibrox.

I don't think the Findlay The Bigot has ever forgiven Teflon Murray (presumably he thinks he did nothing wrong by singing sectarian songs)

I maybe wrong but my memory is that Findlay was singing the Sash which the Scottish Government stated was not sectarian.

[Jack Hackett]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09


Wow!... just eff'n WOW!!!

Welcome back clown

:faf:

[ballengeich]

What a very strange looking guy. Can't see the Rangers masses (:wink:) being too happy with the "murder" terminology there. Implies their club died.
Aye. Sevco now have a director who believes that Rangers are deid.

[TRC]

Is Findlay not just covering his own arse he must have been involved with tons of dodgey goings on at the former 'institution' that's been murdered. Maybe he's fixed the case so none of his input will ever be seen??

[SirDavidsNapper]

:faf: Definitely deflection.......

Murder an institution? Does murder not constitute death? But Rangers didn't die. They're the same club aren't they?

[Hibs Class]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

Pitiful. Perfect end to a pretty good day, with CW acquitted and this moron marking his appointment to the new huns with proof of oldco death.

[brianmc]

Uh oh! Quick- someone dig up Taggart. There's been a MURDER 🤤

[Ozyhibby]

The case has now exposed that Rangers committed fraud in 2011 when they declared they had no outstanding tax. It was established in the case that they had a bill in November 2010 and therefore should not have been given a license to compete in Europe.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c4d3104cc01dbb92a88d36cedbe5a126.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c2d5ec33b64131b8c608ea75f333f134.jpg
The res 12 guys now have a smoking gun, question now is if anyone at Celtic is willing to take up their case.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Not sure why people are trying to 2nd guess Findlays role. He's just a bloody good lawyer doing his job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Not sure why people are trying to 2nd guess Findlays role. He's just a bloody good lawyer doing his job.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly.

Anything else would be professional suicide IMO. If he thought he had a conflict of interest, he wouldn't have taken it on.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Colr]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40110475

Mike McGill, former Murray Group finance director, told the court that another offer came in and was to be funded by a Lithuanian bank. The court heard it seemed to have the "wherewithal" to complete a sale. But, Mr McGill told the court that the Murray Group became "extremely uncomfortable" dealing with the Lithuanian bank because of accusations it was involved in "organised crime and money laundering". There were also added concerns about any "furore" given the publicity surrounding the Lithuanian owners of another Scottish club. At that time, Heart of Midlothian were owned by Lithuanian tycoon Vladimir Romanov.

[Mainstandman]

If this helps, Findlay is not a solicitor who gives legal advice. He's a defence QC who defends people in court. He does not pick clients as such. Solicitors come to him to represent their clients in court. Their solicitor cannot do this job in court and requires a QC for this. So he would not pick this case himself but be picked by someone, that is Whyte's solicitor. Findlay is a big legal aid guy as he is an excellent QC. Having said that he may have been happy as such to take this on. You may have views on him as a person but he is undoubtly one of scotlands top QCs and a very bright guy.

Hope a never need him.

[Ozyhibby]

If this helps, Findlay is not a solicitor who gives legal advice. He's a defence QC who defends people in court. He does not pick clients as such. Solicitors come to him to represent their clients in court. Their solicitor cannot do this job in court and requires a QC for this. So he would not pick this case himself but be picked by someone, that is Whyte's solicitor. Findlay is a big legal aid guy as he is an excellent QC. Having said that he may have been happy as such to take this on. You may have views on him as a person but he is undoubtly one of scotlands top QCs and a very bright guy.

Hope a never need him.

But if you ever do need a QC then he is def the one you want.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vincipernoi]

Wow!... just eff'n WOW!!!

Welcome back clown

:faf:

he seems to have that rangers 'very youthful head of hair stuck on an Egyptian mummy look' that Dave King manages so successfully

[Phil MaGlass]

The case has now exposed that Rangers committed fraud in 2011 when they declared they had no outstanding tax. It was established in the case that they had a bill in November 2010 and therefore should not have been given a license to compete in Europe.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c4d3104cc01dbb92a88d36cedbe5a126.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c2d5ec33b64131b8c608ea75f333f134.jpg
The res 12 guys now have a smoking gun, question now is if anyone at Celtic is willing to take up their case.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bump

[magpie1892]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

That is 100% actionable slander.

The arrogance of the hun is not that they think they can (and will) get away with it, but that they don't realise they're actually doing it.

[truehibernian]

That is 100% actionable slander.

The arrogance of the hun is not that they think they can (and will) get away with it, but that they don't realise they're actually doing it.

Defamation :aok: I'd argue it's warped opinion, not defamation......even then, nothing worthy of a court action. You hear worse on Have I Got News For You.

What I'd agree is AJ is an eejit :greengrin:aok: (happy to defend myself in any raised action AJ :na na:)

[Kaiser1962]

Get this FFS

https://twitter.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/872094018984972288?s=09

Telt ye! They're deid..........:na na:

[CropleyWasGod]

The case has now exposed that Rangers committed fraud in 2011 when they declared they had no outstanding tax. It was established in the case that they had a bill in November 2010 and therefore should not have been given a license to compete in Europe.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c4d3104cc01dbb92a88d36cedbe5a126.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170606/c2d5ec33b64131b8c608ea75f333f134.jpg
The res 12 guys now have a smoking gun, question now is if anyone at Celtic is willing to take up their case.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
HMRC regularly issue assessments, which can be appealled , debated and negotiated. Often these assessments are reduced to £nil. Sometimes, as with the Big Tax Case, they go through a lengthy judicial process.

At the time, therefore , it could be argued that this was no more than the starting point for negotiation. Although it was provided for in the accounts, a provision is not the same as a debt.

I therefore can understand why the SFA made the decision they did. Without seeing all of the HMRC documentation and correspondence, though, it's difficult to be absolutely certain.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

HMRC regularly issue assessments, which can be appealled , debated and negotiated. Often these assessments are reduced to £nil. Sometimes, as with the Big Tax Case, they go through a lengthy judicial process.

At the time, therefore , it could be argued that this was no more than the starting point for negotiation. Although it was provided for in the accounts, a provision is not the same as a debt.

I therefore can understand why the SFA made the decision they did. Without seeing all of the HMRC documentation and correspondence, though, it's difficult to be absolutely certain.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Confirmed in court that there was no appeal being made and that the bill was overdue and interest accruing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Confirmed that Dave King paid £25k for Charlotte Fakes material.
https://www.byline.com/project/72/article/1713


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Confirmed in court that there was no appeal being made and that the bill was overdue and interest accruing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The point is, though, that the SFA seem to have relied on the Grant Thornton submission which talks about a "provision" for a "potential liability". They're entitled to do that.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Hibs Class]

The point is, though, that the SFA seem to have relied on the Grant Thornton submission which talks about a "provision" for a "potential liability". They're entitled to do that.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

So did somebody somewhere misrepresent something to somebody else?

[Mr White]

So did somebody somewhere misrepresent something to somebody else?

That sounds like a line from a Jack Johnson song :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

So did somebody somewhere misrepresent something to somebody else?
Possibly, Mr Findlay, I cannot recall.😆

Perhaps the SFA should have asked supplementary questions (maybe they did), but their information was that there was no debt.

As for GT, as is normal for those who want to protect their arse, they said as little as possible. What they said was factual.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[jgl07]

Confirmed that Dave King paid £25k for Charlotte Fakes material.
https://www.byline.com/project/72/article/1713


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fakes news?

[Ozyhibby]

Possibly, Mr Findlay, I cannot recall.[emoji38]

Perhaps the SFA should have asked supplementary questions (maybe they did), but their information was that there was no debt.

As for GT, as is normal for those who want to protect their arse, they said as little as possible. What they said was factual.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

The SFA could have followed procedures but it still means Rangers lied to them, no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

The SFA could have followed procedures but it still means Rangers lied to them, no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems that way. But it's the SFA who are getting the flak today, and I'm not convinced that's fair.

[CropleyWasGod]

The DR carrying on with their usual financial acumen....

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/exclusive-document-reveals-craig-whyte-10574238

For those who won't click on it, the gist of the story is that the Lloyds Bank debt was transferred ("assigned") to Wavetower the day after the takeover.

According to the DR, that immediately made CW £18m richer. Their reasoning being that Wavetower were now owed that amount by RFC.

They conveniently ignore the fact that, having been assigned the debt, they also owed Lloyds the same amount. :rolleyes:

[Ozyhibby]

It seems that way. But it's the SFA who are getting the flak today, and I'm not convinced that's fair.

They deserve it because they now know they were lied to but refuse to act.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DarlingtonHibee]

Can anybody tell me who the winners and losers are, and what if any impact it had on Hibs?

[CropleyWasGod]

Can anybody tell me who the winners and losers are, and what if any impact it had on Hibs?

Of the CW case?

The winners are those who eagerly await the next Season of the drama. CW is clearly a winner, and he may feel justified now in some kiss-and-tell revelations. There was speculation that he had taped a lot of his conversations.... which would be nice .....

The losers are those who wanted CW to be the scapegoat for the murdurr of RFC. Whilst he held one of the daggers, there are plenty more out there, of course.

Can't see it having any impact on Hibs. Any damage to our income, potential cup wins, European qualification etc, was all done before CW was involved.

[DarlingtonHibee]

Of the CW case?

The winners are those who eagerly await the next Season of the drama. CW is clearly a winner, and he may feel justified now in some kiss-and-tell revelations. There was speculation that he had taped a lot of his conversations.... which would be nice .....

The losers are those who wanted CW to be the scapegoat for the murdurr of RFC. Whilst he held one of the daggers, there are plenty more out there, of course.

Can't see it having any impact on Hibs. Any damage to our income, potential cup wins, European qualification etc, was all done before CW was involved.

Cheers CWG

[Ozyhibby]

Of the CW case?

The winners are those who eagerly await the next Season of the drama. CW is clearly a winner, and he may feel justified now in some kiss-and-tell revelations. There was speculation that he had taped a lot of his conversations.... which would be nice .....

The losers are those who wanted CW to be the scapegoat for the murdurr of RFC. Whilst he held one of the daggers, there are plenty more out there, of course.

Can't see it having any impact on Hibs. Any damage to our income, potential cup wins, European qualification etc, was all done before CW was involved.

Hibs done the decent thing and were crap the whole time Whyte was there ensuring we couldn't lose out. [emoji23]
Biggest losers from the whole era are Celtic obviously as they missed out on titles during the EBT era and Champions league qualification in 2011/12 when Rangers lied to the SFA about their tax liabilities to gain a European license. Kilmarnock also lost out here as they were denied entry to the Europa cup because of it.
We did have to watch them being crowned champions of Scotland at Easter road with all their fans running about our pitch while every player on the pitch was in receipt of an EBT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crazyhorse]

Hibs done the decent thing and were crap the whole time Whyte was there ensuring we couldn't lose out. [emoji23]
Biggest losers from the whole era are Celtic obviously as they missed out on titles during the EBT era and Champions league qualification in 2011/12 when Rangers lied to the SFA about their tax liabilities to gain a European license. Kilmarnock also lost out here as they were denied entry to the Europa cup because of it.
We did have to watch them being crowned champions of Scotland at Easter road with all their fans running about our pitch while every player on the pitch was in receipt of an EBT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah but remember they only came on the pitch to protect those players...

[Ozyhibby]

https://thecelticblog.com/2017/06/blogs/stewart-regan-knows-resolution-12-threatens-him-he-also-knows-hes-safe-its-over/

This article is spot on. The clubs have decided they don't care so long as the money keeps coming in. And with Petrie involved with the SFA, Hibs are as guilty as any.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AndyM_1875]

Hibs done the decent thing and were crap the whole time Whyte was there ensuring we couldn't lose out. [emoji23]
Biggest losers from the whole era are Celtic obviously as they missed out on titles during the EBT era and Champions league qualification in 2011/12 when Rangers lied to the SFA about their tax liabilities to gain a European license. Kilmarnock also lost out here as they were denied entry to the Europa cup because of it.
We did have to watch them being crowned champions of Scotland at Easter road with all their fans running about our pitch while every player on the pitch was in receipt of an EBT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be fair Hibs were bloody good in 2000-2002 under McLeish. We finished 3rd (behind guess who) and reached a Scottish Cup final. We also finished 3rd in 2005/6 behind the ugly sisters.
Think there were also a few top 6 finishes in that time too from us. We may have got UEFA Cup football, ok it's usually just the 2 games but still....

[ancient hibee]

https://thecelticblog.com/2017/06/blogs/stewart-regan-knows-resolution-12-threatens-him-he-also-knows-hes-safe-its-over/

This article is spot on. The clubs have decided they don't care so long as the money keeps coming in. And with Petrie involved with the SFA, Hibs are as guilty as any.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hypocritical rubbish frankly by supporters who like to think they inhabit the high moral ground .

[Ozyhibby]

Hypocritical rubbish frankly by supporters who like to think they inhabit the high moral ground .

On issues of Tax and FFP, most clubs in Scotland inhabit the moral high ground over Rangers. The Yams, not so much.
There is a case to answer here but our clubs appear happy to turn a blind eye. I'm not sure why.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AndyM_1875]

On issues of Tax and FFP, most clubs in Scotland inhabit the moral high ground over Rangers. The Yams, not so much.
There is a case to answer here but our clubs appear happy to turn a blind eye. I'm not sure why.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably because it's "wrongs" from a decade and longer ago that are at the heart of this matter.
There are more important issues day to day for the clubs to be dealing with. The time for anything more punitive to happen to a Rangers out with their meltdown & humiliation was in summer 2012 and Regan & the SFA were woefully unprepared but time has moved on & this story is now playing out to an ever diminishing audience.
Whilst the collapse of a Rangers has been amusing and deserved I certainly would not want Leeann Dempster & Rod Petrie wasting any of their time on this when the running of Hibs and our club's growth & re establishment is all important as far as I'm concerned.

[Ozyhibby]

Since Dave King has now been revealed to have bought the Charlotte fakes material, should he not be charged with reset since the documents were stolen from Craig Whyte's computer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

Since Dave King has now been revealed to have bought the Charlotte fakes material, should he not be charged with reset since the documents were stolen from Craig Whyte's computer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point, and I am convinced police Govan would love to be able to pursue this but their crack investigative team are completely tied up sitting on their erses eating doughnuts whilst watching exuberant Hibbies on CCTV to ensure Scotlands crime of the century is solved.

They'll get round to the mass of frauds associated with the conduct of the board of the now defunct glasgow rangers sometime never.

[Kato]

Good point, and I am convinced police Govan would love to be able to pursue this but their crack investigative team are completely tied up sitting on their erses eating doughnuts whilst watching exuberant Hibbies on CCTV to ensure Scotlands crime of the century is solved.

.

Seems like the dream job doesn't it? Being paid to watch Hibs fans going bammy cos we've just won the cup over and over and over again.

[linlithgowhibbie]

Seems like the dream job doesn't it? Being paid to watch Hibs fans going bammy cos we've just won the cup over and over and over again.


I only remember us winning it once!:wink:

[Bostonhibby]

Seems like the dream job doesn't it? Being paid to watch Hibs fans going bammy cos we've just won the cup over and over and over again.
[emoji1]

Sounds good. I'm going to get myself a tattoo of a camp looking guy on a horse, pile on another 5 stone and join the masons then apply to join Scotlands finest.

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Spike Mandela]

Probably because it's "wrongs" from a decade and longer ago that are at the heart of this matter.
There are more important issues day to day for the clubs to be dealing with. The time for anything more punitive to happen to a Rangers out with their meltdown & humiliation was in summer 2012 and Regan & the SFA were woefully unprepared but time has moved on & this story is now playing out to an ever diminishing audience.
Whilst the collapse of a Rangers has been amusing and deserved I certainly would not want Leeann Dempster & Rod Petrie wasting any of their time on this when the running of Hibs and our club's growth & re establishment is all important as far as I'm concerned.

No need to put wrongs in inverted commas as if it's debatable that they cheated , dodged tax and the SFA and SPL did everything in their power for Rangers to avoid sanction and have a soft landing. They were liquidated.

As for more important things to worry about now that is just the catchphrase of those happy to sweep everything under the carpet. Nothing, absolutely nothing has been put in place to stop The Rangers or anyone else from doing this again. The fact we have convicted fraudster King anywhere near Scottish football shows how toothless our authorities are. Might not be EBT's next time but I am sure King and his cronies will be stretching legality in every area of business.

As for Petrie not wasting his time on this well, the man has ambitions in the SFA and has his hands dirty all over the secret 5 way agreement and his scuttling around for Regan between Charles Green and the SFA.

Yes we can bury our heads in the sand and just 'concentrate on the running of Hibs' but if we do that whilst our authorities are designed and run purely to let The Rangers and others like them to cheat without punishment our efforts will largely amount to a waste of time and money.

The MSM would like to airbrush all of this out of existence but let's not do their dirty work for them, we should never forget and never LET them forget.

[Ozyhibby]

No need to put wrongs in inverted commas as if it's debatable that they cheated , dodged tax and the SFA and SPL did everything in their power for Rangers to avoid sanction and have a soft landing. They were liquidated.

As for more important things to worry about now that is just the catchphrase of those happy to sweep everything under the carpet. Nothing, absolutely nothing has been put in place to stop The Rangers or anyone else from doing this again. The fact we have convicted fraudster King anywhere near Scottish football shows how toothless our authorities are. Might not be EBT's next time but I am sure King and his cronies will be stretching legality in every area of business.

As for Petrie not wasting his time on this well, the man has ambitions in the SFA and has his hands dirty all over the secret 5 way agreement and his scuttling around for Regan between Charles Green and the SFA.

Yes we can bury our heads in the sand and just 'concentrate on the running of Hibs' but if we do that whilst our authorities are designed and run purely to let The Rangers and others like them to cheat without punishment our efforts will largely amount to a waste of time and money.

The MSM would like to airbrush all of this out of existence but let's not do their dirty work for them, we should never forget and never LET them forget.

100% agree. Sevco are already riding roughshod over FFP rules and the SFA have granted them a license to compete in Europe this season. Hearts lost out this year but next year it might be us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deansy]

As far as I'm concerned, the Hun have STILL to be adequately punished for their crimes and all efforts should be made to see that they are - any other club (outside of Septic, naturally) would've been hung, drawn and quartered !

[CropleyWasGod]

As far as I'm concerned, the Hun have STILL to be adequately punished for their crimes and all efforts should be made to see that they are - any other club (outside of Septic, naturally) would've been hung, drawn and quartered !

For that, you'd need to accept that they're the same club..... :stirrer:

[Bostonhibby]

For that, you'd need to accept that they're the same club..... :stirrer:
But their recently appointed director has just confirmed that club is dead. And he should know as he was also on the board that killed it.?

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

But their recently appointed director has just confirmed that club is dead. And he should know as he was also on the board that killed it.?

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

So they can't be punished :greengrin

(ps the day I start taking lessons from Alastair Johnson is the day I hang up my calculator :greengrin:greengrin)

[Ozyhibby]

For that, you'd need to accept that they're the same club..... :stirrer:

Titles can be stripped without us having to give up calling them Sevco.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[southsider]

Did rangers, old or new , ever pay the SFA fine for using EBT's. ? Never heard of that being paid. Then why did Regan say SFA might go after Whyte for his unpaid fine whilst avoiding saying they will go after rangers. Charge them 6% a day interest from when the fine was given. Pretty penny for the SFA.

[Bostonhibby]

So they can't be punished :greengrin

(ps the day I start taking lessons from Alastair Johnson is the day I hang up my calculator :greengrin:greengrin)
Agreed, but the return of him is punishment enough. A village somewhere is looking for its idiot

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Kavinho]

Did rangers, old or new , ever pay the SFA fine for using EBT's. ? Never heard of that being paid. Then why did Regan say SFA might go after Whyte for his unpaid fine whilst avoiding saying they will go after rangers. Charge them 6% a day interest from when the fine was given. Pretty penny for the SFA.

Pretty sure it was Oldco who took the fine? Rendering it nothing more than an empty gesture.

[Jack]

Pretty sure it was Oldco who took the fine? Rendering it nothing more than an empty gesture.

Football debt?

[Ozyhibby]

Did rangers, old or new , ever pay the SFA fine for using EBT's. ? Never heard of that being paid. Then why did Regan say SFA might go after Whyte for his unpaid fine whilst avoiding saying they will go after rangers. Charge them 6% a day interest from when the fine was given. Pretty penny for the SFA.

They paid. It was in last seasons accounts. The newco had to pay it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[southsider]

They paid. It was in last seasons accounts. The newco had to pay it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Cheers mate.

[JeMeSouviens]

Titles can be stripped without us having to give up calling them Sevco.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In this case, posthumously. :agree:

[Kavinho]

They paid. It was in last seasons accounts. The newco had to pay it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I stand corrected! Cheers!

[Deansy]

For that, you'd need to accept that they're the same club..... :stirrer:

There are times I loathe and despise your level-headed, clear and concise logic:boo hoo:

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170608/973d2a8ab6eaf8a3469cfacd0abcdfa0.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

There are times I loathe and despise your level-headed, clear and concise logic:boo hoo:

:greengrin

Of course, I wasn't being entirely serious. The "stirrer" smiley was intended to do just that. :cb

[Deansy]

:greengrin

Of course, I wasn't being entirely serious. The "stirrer" smiley was intended to do just that. :cb

Ditto - hence the 'Greetin-faced bairn' smiley :wink:

[Iain G]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170608/973d2a8ab6eaf8a3469cfacd0abcdfa0.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In other news, the Pope favours Celtic, a bear has been seen wiping its backside in the woods and Craig Whyte is innocent :wink::agree:

[Bostonhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170608/973d2a8ab6eaf8a3469cfacd0abcdfa0.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ridiculing him? Jeez, we all know what happened last time folk had a laugh at the the new boys expense. Police Govan will be all over this like sugar on one of their doughnuts.



Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4589456/Porto-fined-hit-restrictions-breaching-UEFA-rules.html

Potential problems Sevco could face now they are in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Viva_Palmeiras]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4589456/Porto-fined-hit-restrictions-breaching-UEFA-rules.html

Potential problems Sevco could face now they are in Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting. Long long time ago when my brain hadn't been mangled by vP junior the 2nd I looked into a bit around football finance it looked at financial statements of Porto who'd been so successful at the time to look at the "blue print". Iirc they were still achieving with the turnover to wages ratio around 60%.

So what happened?

[Deansy]

Unbelieveable - Regan, with no apparent sign of shame, in a pathetic display of solidarity with his paymasters - The Hun - castigates Sir Craig Whyte with 'We found him not be a fit & proper person several years ago' as if he and his fellow-shysters knew all about SCW from the very beginning !. And he does this in the knowledge that the entire country KNOWS that somehow, he and his cohorts found ways and means for KING to be declared a 'fit & proper person' despite all the evidence before and since !

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/40178243


You really couldn't mark Regan's (or any member of the GFA's) neck with a blow-torch !

[ian cruise]

Chat through here in the West is the Sport Direct contract has been ripped up and a press conference is imminent. If true I wonder if that's been the reason for the spend this summer?

[Ozyhibby]

Chat through here in the West is the Sport Direct contract has been ripped up and a press conference is imminent. If true I wonder if that's been the reason for the spend this summer?

It's a new deal with sports direct which will be sold as a victory for Sevco. Will it be though?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KdyHby]

https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/club-statement-77/

[Spike Mandela]

It's a new deal with sports direct which will be sold as a victory for Sevco. Will it be though?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The devil, as they say, will be in the detail.

[Smartie]

I think this was inevitable.

The previous deal was lose/ lose for Sports Direct and The Rangers, even though I quite liked it.

Sports Direct had Sevco by the nuts, but the deal was so bad that the "hordes" were boycotting.

This move can only be common sense and good news for them, and bad news for us.

But as is mentioned above, the devil is indeed in the detail.

[Iain G]

I think this was inevitable.

The previous deal was lose/ lose for Sports Direct and The Rangers, even though I quite liked it.

Sports Direct had Sevco by the nuts, but the deal was so bad that the "hordes" were boycotting.

This move can only be common sense and good news for them, and bad news for us.

But as is mentioned above, the devil is indeed in the detail.

This bit caught me eye from the BBC story:

Rangers chairman Dave King also revealed he and other shareholders - including Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor - have provided additional funding to the club in recent weeks in the form of interest-free loans

And I love they have signed a player named Morelos 🙂👌😁

[Ozyhibby]

This bit caught me eye from the BBC story:

Rangers chairman Dave King also revealed he and other shareholders - including Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor - have provided additional funding to the club in recent weeks in the form of interest-free loans

And I love they have signed a player named Morelos [emoji846][emoji108][emoji16]

They are just laughing at UEFA FFP rules now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[majorhibs]

In other news, the Pope favours Celtic, a bear has been seen wiping its backside in the woods and Craig Whyte is innocent :wink::agree:

CW is much, much MUCH more innocent than the shysters murray & king, CE a bit of a chancin buffoon, murray & king thieving lying ****bags.

[Jim44]

They are just laughing at UEFA FFP rules now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's face it, UEFA, because of their moral ineptitude, deserve to be laughed at.

[Ozyhibby]

http://www.theoffshoregame.net/corrupt-or-incompetent-sfa/

More from the Tax Justice Network.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

http://www.theoffshoregame.net/corrupt-or-incompetent-sfa/

More from the Tax Justice Network.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The offshoregame are putting up an admirable fight but I long ago came to the conclusion that its not just Regan and Doncaster at work here - every club in this country is complicit by their silence. Why else would Hearts keep quiet about Sevco being allowed to enter into Europe? Silence from them........

[Ozyhibby]

The offshoregame are putting up an admirable fight but I long ago came to the conclusion that its not just Regan and Doncaster at work here - every club in this country is complicit by their silence. Why else would Hearts keep quiet about Sevco being allowed to enter into Europe? Silence from them........

I agree. Hibs are part of this as well. This season we could be pipped for a euro spot by Sevco who are admitting to breaking FFP rules again this year and I guarantee we will say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

I agree. Hibs are part of this as well. This season we could be pipped for a euro spot by Sevco who are admitting to breaking FFP rules again this year and I guarantee we will say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've just had a squint at the revised SFA Licencing requirements.

According to my reading, RFC had what is known as "indicators" in their accounts, ie that the Audit Report was not unqualified. Because of that, they are required to furnish the following:-

Where the Indicators apply, licence applicants must prepare and submit future financial
information in order to demonstrate to the Scottish FA their ability to continue as a
going concern until the end of the licence season.
Future financial information consists of:
a) A budgeted profit and loss account;
b) A budgeted cash flow; and
c) Explanatory notes including a brief description of each of the significant assumptions
(with reference to the relevant aspects of historic financial and other information)
that have been used to prepare the budgeted profit and loss account and cash flow
statement, as well as of the key risks that may affect the future financial results

I am assuming that they have supplied that information, as they have been granted an SFA Licence. I can't see any other way in which they might have breached the regulations, which is why there has been no complaint from anyone else.

The list of licenced clubs is forwarded to UEFA by 31st May, for their own review. That review will include the issues of the directors' funding. Whether or not that has been done, we can't tell. However, given that RFC are already in the draw, I'm not sure that there will be any expulsion or refusal. If they are punished, it will be financial.

I'm not saying I agree with the process,.... I'm just laying out the process as I understand it.

[Ozyhibby]

I've just had a squint at the revised SFA Licencing requirements.

According to my reading, RFC had what is known as "indicators" in their accounts, ie that the Audit Report was not unqualified. Because of that, they are required to furnish the following:-

Where the Indicators apply, licence applicants must prepare and submit future financial
information in order to demonstrate to the Scottish FA their ability to continue as a
going concern until the end of the licence season.
Future financial information consists of:
a) A budgeted profit and loss account;
b) A budgeted cash flow; and
c) Explanatory notes including a brief description of each of the significant assumptions
(with reference to the relevant aspects of historic financial and other information)
that have been used to prepare the budgeted profit and loss account and cash flow
statement, as well as of the key risks that may affect the future financial results

I am assuming that they have supplied that information, as they have been granted an SFA Licence. I can't see any other way in which they might have breached the regulations, which is why there has been no complaint from anyone else.

The list of licenced clubs is forwarded to UEFA by 31st May, for their own review. That review will include the issues of the directors' funding. Whether or not that has been done, we can't tell. However, given that RFC are already in the draw, I'm not sure that there will be any expulsion or refusal. If they are punished, it will be financial.

I'm not saying I agree with the process,.... I'm just laying out the process as I understand it.

Yes, they can't be kicked out this year but they can be told to make sure they hit break even by next season by UEFA.
https://stv.tv/sport/football/1374309-explained-will-rangers-need-approval-to-play-in-europe/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Yes, they can't be kicked out this year but they can be told to make sure they hit break even by next season by UEFA.
https://stv.tv/sport/football/1374309-explained-will-rangers-need-approval-to-play-in-europe/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So there's no point in Hearts complaining this year?

As for the coming year, the Sports Direct deal will be a big help. The merchandising sales have apparently been excellent already.
A decent run in the Europa League, and they may be able to pay off a fair bit of the directors loans.
And, now that the SD deal has.been done, they may have another crack at allowing those loans to be converted into shares.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

So there's no point in Hearts complaining this year?

As for the coming year, the Sports Direct deal will be a big help. The merchandising sales have apparently been excellent already.
A decent run in the Europa League, and they may be able to pay off a fair bit of the directors loans.
And, now that the SD deal has.been done, they may have another crack at allowing those loans to be converted into shares.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

That last paragraph is the one they need. That would allow them to create new shares and distribute them among the directors. All the other shareholders would lose out but they won't care so long as they get into Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sylar]

Their fans appear to be pishing their frillies at an announcement that's supposedly taking place later today. club1872 have allegedly bought out Ashley's shares and there's a foreign investor who's to be unveiled.

Could be fan forum pish, but it's pish that's been spread widely.

They've brought in a lot of talent this past wee while and both Herrera and Pena are excellent signings for them. They definitely look like they're going to be a slightly different animal this coming season.

[grunt]

That last paragraph is the one they need. That would allow them to create new shares and distribute them among the directors. All the other shareholders would lose out but they won't care so long as they get into Europe.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWhatever happened to the Takeover Panel judgement requiring King to offer for all the shares? Does that just get ignored?

[Ozyhibby]

Whatever happened to the Takeover Panel judgement requiring King to offer for all the shares? Does that just get ignored?

Seems to be.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brunswickbill]

Whatever happened to the Takeover Panel judgement requiring King to offer for all the shares? Does that just get ignored?
At the Court of Session http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39592351

[Ozyhibby]

Now that Ashley has sold his shares, they def have the votes to get through the vote on the share issue. Only takeover panel ruling in the way now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brunswickbill]

James Doleman pointed to decisions on appeals to Court of Session on two cases. Charles Green claim for Sevco to pay his legal fees, and case against Gary Withey and David Grier both rejected by the court. Green case link below. Can only post one link at a time . Withey case to follow

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=6eaf36a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7










(http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=7aaf36a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7)

[Brunswickbill]

Withey Grier link

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=7aaf36a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

[Ronniekirk]

So they are bit by bit getting past any hurdles Soon they will be telling us they are looking to challenge Celtic for the Title next SeasonNever seen so many fans excited at buying up Club merchandise in bulk since we were snapping up anything with the word Persevered on it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ballengeich]

They seem to have been selling the strips at a significantly lower price than is usual. I wonder why. The most common reason for discounted clothing is to clear space for a new season's stock, but we're told they're using the same strips as last season. You'd have thought they'd charge the maximum the market could stand to cash in on the pent-up demand. That gives the possibility that the business currently has more concern for cashflow than profit.

The directors have supplied further loans to bring in the new players. I suspect there's a business plan that's heavily dependent on European success, so they've already spent a significant proportion of the 17/18 season to increase the chance of achieving that, and as a result are very short of cash until ST instalments arrive. When the accounts appear later in the year the cash position at 30th June will be interesting.

[Stonewall]

They seem to have been selling the strips at a significantly lower price than is usual. I wonder why. The most common reason for discounted clothing is to clear space for a new season's stock, but we're told they're using the same strips as last season. You'd have thought they'd charge the maximum the market could stand to cash in on the pent-up demand. That gives the possibility that the business currently has more concern for cashflow than profit.

The directors have supplied further loans to bring in the new players. I suspect there's a business plan that's heavily dependent on European success, so they've already spent a significant proportion of the 17/18 season to increase the chance of achieving that, and as a result are very short of cash until ST instalments arrive. When the accounts appear later in the year the cash position at 30th June will be interesting.

Wrong to take anything that comes out of Dave King/ level 5s mouths at face value.

John James, PMG and James Forrest are pretty scathing about the accuracy of what the press are reporting.

e.g. Are Rangers actually getting any money for the current merchandise sales as they still owe SD for last year's unsold stock, they may owe Puma money too?

D

[kaimendhibs]

EXCLUSIVE: @RangersFC new deal with @SportsDirectUK does not begin until July 1st, meaning 93% of all merchandise sold still goes to SD 😂😂😂😂😂😂

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Keith_M]

I think it's fair to say that any Rangers/The Rangers meltdown is well and truly over.

They no longer have the Ashley situation looming over them, can issue new shares and (allegedly) have the benefit of the money from retail sales again.

I realise they have the Soft Loans to pay off but I'd imagine that won't be an issue in the long term.

[Callum_62]

EXCLUSIVE: @RangersFC new deal with @SportsDirectUK does not begin until July 1st, meaning 93% of all merchandise sold still goes to SD [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Where you getting that?

Hilarious if true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ian cruise]

Where you getting that?

Hilarious if true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doing the rounds on Facebook, not sure how true it is. I'd imagine the club would have been very clear about the date it was beginning to receive a share after they were so public about the boycott

[Velma Dinkley]

Doing the rounds on Facebook, not sure how true it is. I'd imagine the club would have been very clear about the date it was beginning to receive a share after they were so public about the boycott

It's not true.

[Oscar T Grouch]

Doing the rounds on Facebook, not sure how true it is. I'd imagine the club would have been very clear about the date it was beginning to receive a share after they were so public about the boycott

Seems everyone bar the huns are saying it is true, huns are saying its a wind up/not true. I personally I'll believe the majority :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

Supreme Court decision will be released next Wednesday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HoboHarry]

Supreme Court decision will be released next Wednesday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Decision on what? I've lost track......

[Moulin Yarns]

Decision on what? I've lost track......

Big tax case

[Ozyhibby]

Caixinha "I no longer want my players to play in green boots"Reporter "what about the grass Pedro" Caixinha,"he'll still play left back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[livi hibs 1875]

Caixinha "I no longer want my players to play in green boots"Reporter "what about the grass Pedro" Caixinha,"he'll still play left back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And he is not allowed to wear green boots either

[oneone73]

Caixinha "I no longer want my players to play in green boots"Reporter "what about the grass Pedro" Caixinha,"he'll still play left back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like.

[Joe6-2]

Caixinha "I no longer want my players to play in green boots"Reporter "what about the grass Pedro" Caixinha,"he'll still play left back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

😂😂😂😂😂

[Deansy]

Caixinha "I no longer want my players to play in green boots"Reporter "what about the grass Pedro" Caixinha,"he'll still play left back


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A 'Daily Rectum' article, which will make members of the 'M***n-Loyal' happy and proud but at the same time, ensure that all the other fans of Scottish Football will be p***ing themselves laughing at a club which forces it's fully-grown, adult manager to utter such inane drivel !

[Spike Mandela]

Big Tax Case judgement today 9.45am ish:cb

[Ozyhibby]

Big Tax Case judgement today 9.45am ish:cb

https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/future-judgments.html
A link for anyone wishing to watch live.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crazyhorse]

I've just had a squint at the revised SFA Licencing requirements.

According to my reading, RFC had what is known as "indicators" in their accounts, ie that the Audit Report was not unqualified. Because of that, they are required to furnish the following:-

Where the Indicators apply, licence applicants must prepare and submit future financial
information in order to demonstrate to the Scottish FA their ability to continue as a
going concern until the end of the licence season.
Future financial information consists of:
a) A budgeted profit and loss account;
b) A budgeted cash flow; and
c) Explanatory notes including a brief description of each of the significant assumptions
(with reference to the relevant aspects of historic financial and other information)
that have been used to prepare the budgeted profit and loss account and cash flow
statement, as well as of the key risks that may affect the future financial results

I am assuming that they have supplied that information, as they have been granted an SFA Licence. I can't see any other way in which they might have breached the regulations, which is why there has been no complaint from anyone else.

The list of licenced clubs is forwarded to UEFA by 31st May, for their own review. That review will include the issues of the directors' funding. Whether or not that has been done, we can't tell. However, given that RFC are already in the draw, I'm not sure that there will be any expulsion or refusal. If they are punished, it will be financial.

I'm not saying I agree with the process,.... I'm just laying out the process as I understand it.

I bet they wish they hadn't been granted that license now hahaha....

[FilipinoHibs]

https://www.supremecourt.uk/news/future-judgments.html
A link for anyone wishing to watch live.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Live now - appeal dismissed. Still guilty of cheating.

[CropleyWasGod]

Appeal rejected

3-0 apparently. That's 5-0 on aggregate this week.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[LeithSqualk]

Cheats. Start the stripping

[Moulin Yarns]

Appeal rejected

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

But who is liable for each tax bill as a result of the ruling, The Liquidators of the deceased club or the employees who benefitted??

[CropleyWasGod]

But who is liable for each tax bill as a result of the ruling, The Liquidators of the deceased club or the employees who benefitted??
The assessment in this case was on the company. So HMRC will join the queue of creditors and get a small percentage.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Spike Mandela]

Who is going to put pressure on SFA now to look at the flawed LNS report. People like Campbell Ogilvie have to be held to account.

RANGERS CHEATED......OFFICIAL!!!

[CyberSauzee]

Summary of all the peepul who benefited courtesy of JJ:

https://johnjamessite.com/2017/07/05/tax-evasion-for-dummies/

As I anticipated, the BDO appeal failed. The rulings by the inner house of The Court of Session continue to hold sway. EBT were a means of disguising remuneration. Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster, the architects of the kangaroo LNS commission, will now climb up Bill Nimmo Smith's arse and hope that the storm blows over. Here's a newsflash for the corrupt officials: it won't. Justice will have to be seen to be done, including title-stripping, or Scottish football is going to hell in a hand basket. The SNP must intervene and insist that David Murray is stripped of his title.

£47m of evaded tax was used to attract players that Rangers could otherwise have not afforded to gain a competitive advantage and rack up 20 titles. Those who paid to watch games played on a level playing field had their eyes gouged by the following gallery of greedy tax-evading rogues:

THE LIST OF RANGERS EBT PAYMENTS
Alan Hutton, £364,000: Made debut in 2002 and played 94 games, before £9million move to Spurs.

Alex McLeish, £1.7million: Managed Rangers from 2001-06.

Alex Rae, £569,000: Midfielder arrived at Ibrox in 2004 and spent two years there. Played 34 games.

Andrei Kanchelskis, £145,000: Russian winger arrived from Fiorentina in 1998 for £5.5million.

Andrew Dickson, £33,000: Head of football administration since 2003. Previously financial controller at Ibrox.

Arthur Numan, £510,000: Dutch full-back arrived at Rangers from PSV Eindhoven in 1998 for £4.5million. Played 118 times.

Barry Ferguson, £2.5million: Former youth player who became Rangers captain. Played at Ibrox from 1996-2003 and 2005-09.

Bert Konterman, £300,000: Dutch defender signed by Dick Advocaat for £4.5million in 2000.

Bert Van Lingen, £65,000: Assistant manager under Dick Advocaat from 1998 to 2002.

Billy Dodds, £190,000: Arrived in a £1.5million deal from Dundee United in 1999.

Bob Malcolm, £125,000: Central defender started his career with Rangers in 1997. Played 88 games. Left for Derby County in 2006.

Carlos Cuellar, £448,255: Spanish centre-half arrived from Osasuna in £2.37million deal in 2007. Moved to Aston Villa in 2008.

Chris Burke, £55,000: Started career at Rangers, playing 96 games from 2002 to 2009. Left for Cardiff City.

Christian Nerlinger, £1.8million: German midfielder signed from Borrusia Dortmund in 2001 and left in 2004.

Claudio Caniggia, £1million: Argentinian signed from Dundee for £1million in 2001.

Craig Moore, £1.1million: Australian centre-half played more than 90 games from 1994-98. Returned in 1999 and stayed until 2005.

Dado Prso, £1.9million: Croatian striker was free transfer in 2004. Left for Dinamo Zagreb in 2007.

Dan Eggen, £68,000: Norwegian central defender signed in 2003 from Spanish club Alaves.

Sir David Murray, £6.3million: Owned club from 1988-2011, during which Rangers lifted 15 titles and 26 cups. Sold shares to Craig Whyte for £1.

Dick Advocaat, £1.5million: Rangers manager from 1998-2002. Spent almost £74million to win five trophies, including two titles.

Douglas Odam, £119,000: Finance director for 15 years. Left in 2003 to take up a role within 
Sir David Murray’s business empire.

Egil Ostenstad, £370,000: Norwegian forward signed from Blackburn on free transfer in 2003.

Fernando Ricksen, £684,225: Dutch right-back signed in 2000 from AZ Alkmaar for £3.75million.

Federico Nieto, £24,500: Argentine striker joined on loan deal in 2005 from Almagro. Scored once in three matches.

Gavin Rae, £376,000: Midfielder signed from Dundee in 2004 for a fee of £250,000. Moved to Cardiff in 2007.

George Adams, £30,000: Head of youth development between 2003-05.

Graeme Souness, £30,000: Received as a bung for buying players from Rangers.

Gregory Vignal, £173,000: French defender joined on loan from Liverpool in 2004. Moved to Portsmouth in 2005.

Ian McGuinness, £25,400: Club doctor sacked after Paul Le Guen left.

Ian Murray, £95,000: Midfielder was free transfer from Hibernian in 2006. Left in 2007.

Jan Wouters, £285,000: Former Dutch midfielder joined as a coach under Dick Advocaat, then Alex McLeish. Left in 2006.

Jean-Alain Boumsong, £630,000: French centre-half joined in 2004 on free transfer. Moved to Newcastle for £8million in a decidedly dodgy deal. Souness' snout caught in trough again.

Jerome Bonnissel, £48,000: French left-back arrived in 2003 from Bordeaux.
Jesper Christiansen, £320,000: Danish goalkeeper signed in 2000 as injury cover.

Joel Le Hir, £28,275: Paul Le Guen-appointed physiotherapist from 2006 to 2007.

John Greig £40,000: Played for club from 1961-78. Managed Rangers from 1978 to 1983. Later became a director. £40,000 for keeping quiet on the corruption?

John McClelland, £225,000: Appointed a director in 2000. Chairman from 2002 to 2004.

Julien Rodriguez, £638,000: French centre-half signed from Monaco in 2005 for £1million. Left for Marseille in 2007.

Kevin Muscat, £1million: Australian defender joined from Wolves in 2002 on free transfer. Joined Millwall in 2003.

Kris Boyd, £215,000: Signed from Kilmarnock in 2006 for £500,000. Left in 2010.

Libor Sionko, £178,000: Czech midfielder signed from Austria Vienna in 2006. Played 18 matches before signing Copenhagen in 2007.

Lorenzo Amoruso, £639,000: Italian defender signed from Fiorentina for £4million in 1997. Moved to Blackburn Rovers for £1.4million in 2003.

Martin Bain, £249,000: Chief executive of Rangers from 2005 to 2011. Resigned after Murray sold club to Whyte.

Marvin Andrews, £316,025: Centre-half from Trinidad and Tobago joined from Livingston in 2004.
Maurice Ross, £120,000: Played 78 games for Rangers from 2000 to 2005, before moving to Sheffield Wednesday.

Michael Ball, £1.4million: Left-back signed from Everton in 2001 for £6.5million. Moved to PSV Eindhoven in 2005.

Michael Mols, £260,000: Dutch striker joined Rangers under Dick Advocaat. He arrived in 1999 and spent five years at Ibrox.

Mikel Arteta, £674,603: Spanish midfielder joined in 2002 and played 50 matches, scoring 12 goals. Moved to Everton.

Nacho Novo, £1.2million: Spanish striker joined in 2004 from Dundee for £450,000.

Neil McCann, £500,000: Winger joined from Hearts in 1998 for £2million.

Nuno Capucho, £970,000: Portuguese winger who arrived in 2003 for £700,000.

Olivier Bernard, £224,000: French defender arrived on a free transfer in 2005.

Paolo Vanoli, £592,000: Italian left-back joined from Bologna in 2003 and played in 28 matches.

Paul Le Guen, £201,250: French manager replaced Alex McLeish in 2006. Left in January 2007 after a string of poor results.

Pedro Mendes, £1million: Portuguese midfielder joined in 2008 for £3million. Joined Vituria Guimares in 2010.
Peter Lovenkrands, £902,000: Danish winger arrived in 2000 from Akademisk Boldklub for £1.3million.

Ronald De Boer, £1.2million: Dutch midfielder joined in 2000 under Advocaat.

Ronald Waterreus, £510,000: Dutch goalkeeper joined Rangers in 2004 from Manchester City.

Sasa Papac, £319,000: Bosnian left-back arrived in 2006 from Austria Vienna for £450,000.

Sotirios Kyrgiakos £532,200: Greek centre-half signed from Panathinaikos in 2005.

Stefan Klos, £2million: German international keeper signed in 1999 for £800,000. Join Bayer Leverkusen in 2007.

Stephane Wiertelak, £28,275: French fitness-physiotherapy coach joined Rangers in 2006 under Le Guen.

Steven Smith, £7500: Defender came through youth ranks and made debut in 2004.

Steven Thompson, £485,000: Joined from Dundee United in 2003 for £200,000. Went to Cardiff City in 2006.

Tero Penttila, £140,000: Finnish defender joined in 1999 for £300,000 from Haka Valkeakoski. Left in 2002 to join HJK Helsinki.

Thomas Buffel, £1.2million: Belgian midfielder joined in 2005 for £2.3million from Feyenoord.

Tore Andre Flo, £1.3million: Norwegian striker joined from Chelsea in 2000 for £12million. Sold for £6.75million to Sunderland in 2002.

Yves Colleau, £106,200: Former French midfielder served as assistant to Le Guen at Rennes, Lyon and Rangers from 2006 to 2007.

Zurab Khizanishvili, £405,000: Georgian defender joined on a free transfer from Dundee in 2003.

Walter Smith: Received £50,000 as a bung for buying players from Rangers.

[heretoday]

But who is liable for each tax bill as a result of the ruling, The Liquidators of the deceased club or the employees who benefitted??

It sounds like it's the players and former employees of the club. Not the club as it is now.

[BroxburnHibee]

Plenty people arguing they didn't cheat on my Facebook/Twitter feeds but I don't really understand the arguments for/against.

[Bishop Hibee]

Quite a list from JJ site but how does he know the figures?

No chance of any titles etc being stripped sadly but Stewart Regan should resign.

[SlickShoes]

Some of the amounts there are staggering for what rangers got in return like £1million paid to Kevin Muscat, surely something else dodgy is going on there?

[hibbycraig]

They be going after the individuals then to claim the money?

[Spike Mandela]

Rod Petrie is Chairman of the SFA board.

We are in a unique position of being able to demand of him just what are the SFA going to do about this confirmed cheating within the Scottish game for so many years or will he be complicit in the whitewash.

[Spike Mandela]

Quite a list from JJ site but how does he know the figures?

No chance of any titles etc being stripped sadly but Stewart Regan should resign.

A BBC documentary investigation by Mark Daly outlayed these years ago.

[Bostonhibby]

Rod Petrie is Chairman of the SFA board.

We are in a unique position of being able to demand of him just what are the SFA going to do about this confirmed cheating within the Scottish game for so many years or will he be complicit in the whitewash.

Yep, he is a sporting integrity man our Rod is so depending on the outcome of the case he will surely want sporting integrity to come first, that may well mean removing that which was gained by cheating. Hopefully the other board members will not prevent it:faf::faf:

[LeithSqualk]

I know some people are a bit indifferent about the whole title stripping movement. I personally as a tax payer and former season ticket holder think they should be punished and as much of our money returned as possible.

What can we the fans of hibs and other clubs, (some who nearly went out of business trying to keep up with oldco) do to force punishment.

Email the board/sfa? Boycott Scottish cup games? I don't know but whatever it is I will get involved and fully support

[CropleyWasGod]

It sounds like it's the players and former employees of the club. Not the club as it is now.

No it isn't. It's the company that is in liquidation.

There has been talk of the recipients also being assessed for tax, but that is only hearsay at the moment. That's a separate issue from this case.

Another issue which hasn't yet been raised is the possibility of criminal charges against "somebody". Now that the case has been settled, HMRC's options are clearer. Personally, I think they won't; the case was about establishing a precedent for other similar cases, and criminal action will be less of a priority.

[CropleyWasGod]

I know some people are a bit indifferent about the whole title stripping movement. I personally as a tax payer and former season ticket holder think they should be punished and as much of our money returned as possible.

What can we the fans of hibs and other clubs, (some who nearly went out of business trying to keep up with oldco) do to force punishment.

Email the board/sfa? Boycott Scottish cup games? I don't know but whatever it is I will get involved and fully support

To strip titles, you would have to accept that they are the same club, no?

As far as financial recompense goes, who would that be from? If it's the old company, we'd get buttons. If it's the new, it would be tied up in the Courts for years; even if "we" won, the company would probably have to fold under the obligations, and we'd get very little again.

[kaimendhibs]

The GFA will do nowt. If this was any other sport the titles would be stripped. Reagan and co must be removed from office.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[LeithSqualk]

To strip titles, you would have to accept that they are the same club, no?

As far as financial recompense goes, who would that be from? If it's the old company, we'd get buttons. If it's the new, it would be tied up in the Courts for years; even if "we" won, the company would probably have to fold under the obligations, and we'd get very little again.

Oldco have have millions in the bank in compensation. So start there and go after the players/ directors for the rest.

I meant strip the titles from the old rangers, everyone Bar them know they are a new club.

[JeMeSouviens]

To strip titles, you would have to accept that they are the same club, no?

As far as financial recompense goes, who would that be from? If it's the old company, we'd get buttons. If it's the new, it would be tied up in the Courts for years; even if "we" won, the company would probably have to fold under the obligations, and we'd get very little again.

Not at all. You just have to realise you aren't stripping titles from today's Rangers. You're stripping them posthumously from the old dead Huns.

[Hibs Class]

To strip titles, you would have to accept that they are the same club, no?

As far as financial recompense goes, who would that be from? If it's the old company, we'd get buttons. If it's the new, it would be tied up in the Courts for years; even if "we" won, the company would probably have to fold under the obligations, and we'd get very little again.

Don't see why. The club that died won things before it died. History books still show them as having won those things. If they were won through cheating (& imo they were) then they can be stripped. At the very least there can be no doubt that what they won in their cheating years is totally tainted.

[Bostonhibby]

To strip titles, you would have to accept that they are the same club, no?

As far as financial recompense goes, who would that be from? If it's the old company, we'd get buttons. If it's the new, it would be tied up in the Courts for years; even if "we" won, the company would probably have to fold under the obligations, and we'd get very little again.

It's a good point and you are right as that's how the legal system works but I also think it's fair for the Scottish football authorities to send the cheats a message that they mean business when they talk about sporting integrity.

I do not see any reason why they cannot strike the now defunct Glasgow rangers honours from the records or at least issue a statement acknowledging they weren't fairly won, its a symbolic act but worth doing, especially if they want to be taken seriously going forward. I won't be sitting by the telly waiting for the announcement though. Too many snouts in the trough and too many blind eyes conveniently turned I fear.

[CropleyWasGod]

Oldco have have millions in the bank in compensation. So start there and go after the players/ directors for the rest.

I meant strip the titles from the old rangers, everyone Bar them know they are a new club.

This latest judgement means that those "millions" are shared amongst an even larger pool of creditors. At last count, IIRC, the expected dividend was around 10p in the £. Adding "our" claim (which, if my insolvency knowledge is correct, probably wouldn't be admitted at this stage), would reduce that even further.

There are no legal grounds for going after the recipients.

[Is It On....]

£1.5m fee for Billy Dodds..

[Billy Whizz]

This latest judgement means that those "millions" are shared amongst an even larger pool of creditors. At last count, IIRC, the expected dividend was around 10p in the £. Adding "our" claim *(which, if my insolvency knowledge is correct, probably wouldn't be admitted at this stage), would reduce that even further.

There are no legal grounds for going after the recipients.

The players don't have to pay up?

[Is It On....]

If these are loans under the guise of an EBT, do they need / can they be forced to be paid back to OldCo which is the creditor?

[CropleyWasGod]

It's a good point and you are right as that's how the legal system works but I also think it's fair for the Scottish football authorities to send the cheats a message that they mean business when they talk about sporting integrity.

I do not see any reason why they cannot strike the now defunct Glasgow rangers honours from the records or at least issue a statement acknowledging they weren't fairly won, its a symbolic act but worth doing, especially if they want to be taken seriously going forward. I won't be sitting by the telly waiting for the announcement though. Too many snouts in the trough and too many blind eyes conveniently turned I fear.

That's how I understand it.

Which, in terms of being a football supporter and having some sort of "symbol" to batter the opposing fans with, is fair game.

[BroxburnHibee]

Don't believe for one minute that any titles will be stripped. Or that anyone at the SFA will admit they cheated.

[tamig]

Remove a star or two from their outrageous badge.

[Ozyhibby]

If Petrie were to act as he should and demand the LNS decision be set aside then it's just possible that I may forgive him for relegation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://scotslawthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/commission-decision-28-02-2013.pdf
Here is Lord Nimmo Smith's decision. He makes it clear that rules were not broken as long as the EBTs were legal. They have now been found not to be. Rangers cheated. The titles need to be stripped.
It's up to the other clubs now to act. No more excuses. It's time show that sporting integrity is more than just a catch phrase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

If these are loans under the guise of an EBT, do they need / can they be forced to be paid back to OldCo which is the creditor?

Not as simple as that. Of course :greengrin

It wasn't Oldco that made the loans. Oldco made payments to Trusts. It was the Trusts who lent the money to the recipients.

[Ozyhibby]

Don't believe for one minute that any titles will be stripped. Or that anyone at the SFA will admit they cheated.

It's now possible for the fans to seek a judicial review if the SFA don't act. It will cost a few bob but I think they could raise it in about 2 hours if need be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

The players don't have to pay up?

Sorry, missed this, Billy. So many threads going on. :greengrin

The players "may" be subject of separate HMRC action. But that's separate to this case, which is the responsibility of the Oldco.

However, if there is such action, HMRC's hand has been strengthened by today's decision.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170705/8605012343ca1da0bf1ed477e09961a1.jpg
From the Rangerstaxcase blog


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Is It On....]

This latest judgement means that those "millions" are shared amongst an even larger pool of creditors. At last count, IIRC, the expected dividend was around 10p in the £. Adding "our" claim (which, if my insolvency knowledge is correct, probably wouldn't be admitted at this stage), would reduce that even further.

There are no legal grounds for going after the recipients.

I thought the ultimate responsibility for paying the correct amount of tax on income was with the individual? I.e. If your employer makes a mistake, then you have to make it good. It happened to me a few years ago when I moved job and I had to pay HMRC and then get it refunded from my employer.