Printable View
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 !Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
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 ??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
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)
YAWN! Has nothing else occurred in Scotland today?
Hey there's an election on!
I maybe wrong but my memory is that Findlay was singing the Sash which the Scottish Government stated was not sectarian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Wow!... just eff'n WOW!!!
Welcome back clown
:faf:
Aye. Sevco now have a director who believes that Rangers are deid.Quote:
Originally Posted by overdrive
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??
Murder an institution? Does murder not constitute death? But Rangers didn't die. They're the same club aren't they?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Uh oh! Quick- someone dig up Taggart. There's been a MURDER 🤤
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/201...cedbe5a126.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...75f333f134.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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
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
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mainstandman
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
he seems to have that rangers 'very youthful head of hair stuck on an Egyptian mummy look' that Dave King manages so successfullyQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
BumpQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
That is 100% actionable slander.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by magpie1892
What I'd agree is AJ is an eejit :greengrin:aok: (happy to defend myself in any raised action AJ :na na:)
Telt ye! They're deid..........:na na:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Confirmed that Dave King paid £25k for Charlotte Fakes material.
https://www.byline.com/project/72/article/1713
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
So did somebody somewhere misrepresent something to somebody else?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
That sounds like a line from a Jack Johnson song :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
Possibly, Mr Findlay, I cannot recall.😆Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
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
Fakes news?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The SFA could have followed procedures but it still means Rangers lied to them, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk