LNS – A Summary

ByTrisidium

LNS – A Summary

 

cropped-sfmSquare.pngLNS is currently back in the headlines. It might therefore be a good time to try to set out a timeline describing correspondence we had with the representatives of the authorities over discrepancies and anomalies that appeared to have arisen. None of this is necessarily predicated upon the recent findings of the CoS in the Big Tax Case, but stands on its own.

Back in February 2014 The Scottish Football Monitor wrote to Harper MacLeod, the law firm that the SPL had engaged to gather evidence for the Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) Commission investigating the full and proper registration of players paid by Rangers Football Club under Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) arrangements.

The initial set-up of the LNS Commission on 5th March 2012 by the SPL (View File) charged LNS with a look at EBTs from 1st July 1998 (when the SPL came into being).

In practice though, the Commission only looked at EBTs from 23 November 2000 onwards.

This change of date was based on the earliest side letter supplied by Duff and Phelps, although Harper MacLeod had requested ALL documentation from 1998 to March 2012 relating to ALL EBTs.

This prompted a series of letters to Harper MacLeod from The Scottish Football Monitor, although Harper MacLeod’s replies failed to address the issues raised.

The passage of time blurs memories but this archive is designed to remind readers of those blogs and correspondence, and the key points contained in them.

It also highlights the apparent inability or unwillingness on the part of the SPL and SFA to engage with us in any meaningful way.

NB: The SFA were informed of our correspondence by Harper MacLeod in October 2014.

It is extremely difficult to be concise in this situation. There are various strands of argument and details seemingly small, but vitally important – however the following is an attempt to make the material accessible and provides links to the relevant files in chronological order (links are in green).

 

  • Item 1: The first SFM letter of 19th February 2014 to Harper MacLeod
  • Item 2The Annexes containing the documents apparently not supplied to Harper Macleod in the spring of 2012 along with other pertinent information about the testimony given to LNS during the Commission.
  • Item 3The SFM response of 29 March 2014 to Harper MacLeod’s reply to the first letter.
  • Item 3.1: An SFM analysis of Harper MacLeod’s initial reply attached to response at 3.
  • Item 4: An SFM blog of 5th September pointing out how the documents not supplied had a direct impact on the advice given to the SPL Board to accept The Decision of The LNS Commission.
  • Item 5: The last letter of 4th October 2014 to Harper MacLeod answering points raised by them (see next) and thanking them for passing our correspondence to the SFA Compliance Officer who has so far deigned not to reply.
  • Item 5.1Harper MacLeod’s actual response to SFM 5th September letter.
  • Item 6: An SFM Blog (Inc. a transcript of an interview between Alex Thomson and Stewart Regan).
  • Item 6.1: Truncated version of above blog.
  • Item 7: A clearer extract of key document from Item 2 Annexes

 

Having no locus to demand answers from the SPL or the SFA, all we can do is provide information – information that we believe presents a prima facie case that LNS was deeply flawed even before the latest developments in the Tax Case came to light. The challenge for us is this: what can we do about it?

It is clear from the meagre response we have received that the authorities are unwilling to engage with us, so it is fair to assume that further correspondence will be met with the same lack of response.

Are we merely a bunch of obsessed nut-jobs with our own take on the Flat Earth conspiracy? If that is the case, surely a few words of explanation to dispel our doubts would have had traction with the rest of the football public. Indeed the lack of any reply undoubtedly serves as confirmation of our belief that something may be seriously wrong.

The questions have been posed. The SFA appears to think that not answering them is a wise course of action. Given that anecdotal evidence presents a compelling case that the general football public are widely in agreement with us, are there any journalists out there who will take the time to look at what we have observed and what we seek clarification on?

There are undoubtedly inferences to be drawn from the evidence we have, and from the silence of the authorities.

The statement by Celtic on Friday 13th November is certainly a start in the process we wish to begin, but it only mentions the elephant in the room. It gives no clue about how it could be transported to another place.

In the first instance we at SFM seek only explanations, and despite the inferences mentioned earlier, we are still eager to be satisfied that rules were followed and justice done.

Is there really  nobody in the MSM who has the courage to seek the answers we seek? I suspect not. What we do in the absence of that courage is important. We are at a crossroads. Either we give up on the game altogether and spend our Saturdays and Sundays doing other things – or we find a way to get these questions out of blog pages and into the mainstream.

We need an alliance of fans of all clubs to do that, and we will be looking to build that alliance. I would urge fans of all clubs to give this material to fan sites of their own clubs.

These are not just words. There can be no movement on this issue unless our reach is extended. SFM alone does not have the clout required to bring the clubs to the table or the MSM to fair and balanced reporting. We need that alliance of fans desperately. We don’t seek leadership of that alliance – but we are happy to provide it if required.

This is not a campaign to have Rangers punished. I understand that Rangers fans (since their club is in the middle of this mess) are reluctant to see us as anything other than a bunch of Rangers haters.

That is unequivocally not the case from the perspective of the moderators of this blog. SFM is committed to justice, and to the integrity of the sport we all love.

Justice is ON THE SIDE of Rangers and their fans – it does not conspire against them. A growing number of Rangers fans are coming round to our way of thinking and our tone must reflect that. This is not a Celtic or  Hearts or Aberdeen or anybody else v Rangers issue. This is a fans v corrupt authorities issue.

We all deserve answers, and hopefully our alliance will compel each individual club to act in the interests of the fans .

 

 

 

 

 

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

2,349 Comments so far

AllyjamboPosted on11:36 am - Dec 11, 2015


James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 2m2 minutes ago Judge responds to Internet chatter and tells court ” I have never been a mason”
_______________________________-

I get the opinion this judge knows more about ‘Rangersness’ than one might expect!

View Comment

tayredPosted on11:37 am - Dec 11, 2015


Er… is telling lies in court not an offence?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:38 am - Dec 11, 2015


James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 50s50 seconds ago Counsel for Sports Direct says RFC are still £500k short of funds to repay loan.
_____________________________

Surely King has that somewhere handy! He’s a multi millionaire, is ne not?

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on11:40 am - Dec 11, 2015


easyJambo 11th December 2015 at 11:34 am #Breaking: Counsel for Sports Direct says £5m loan has not been repaid Counsel for Sports Direct says Rangers have told him “funds are still being collected” to repay loan
=================
No surprise there as the SMSM had already told us that last week following their extensive investigations. 191919 15

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on11:40 am - Dec 11, 2015


This judge is amazing entertainment. Refreshingly, there’s virtually no abstruse impenetrable legalese, and he genuinely seems aware of the world outside the courtroom.  The poor old counsels are almost having to earn their money.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:40 am - Dec 11, 2015


I wonder how SD know how much RIFC are short of the £5m? Is that what RIFC have told them, or is that what RIFC offered ‘on account’?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:45 am - Dec 11, 2015


What happened to Dave’s £5m that was raised in an hour? Has some of it been spent on Xmas presents? Surely he didn’t mislead the shareholders at the AGM! Wasn’t it there that he announced this incredible feat, that went unquestioned by an award winning journalist and his mates? Will any of them think of raising this point in their next puff piece?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:46 am - Dec 11, 2015


Allyjambo 11th December 2015 at 11:31 am  _______________
Perhaps King’s policeman father should have kept  it zipped years ago!21

Fixed it for you AJ.  I am equally intrigued about SD directing the judge on the 500k shortfall.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on11:51 am - Dec 11, 2015


JC
Judge Smith’s sarky remark relates to this story from yesterday.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35058974

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on11:57 am - Dec 11, 2015


If the £5M has not actually been paid to Sports Direct, has DK not perjured himself i.e. lied in court yesterday?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:58 am - Dec 11, 2015


11th December 2015 at 11:46 am # Allyjambo 11th December 2015 at 11:31 am  _______________ Perhaps King’s policeman father should have kept it it zipped years ago!
Fixed it for you AJ.  I am equally intrigued about SD directing the judge on the 500k shortfall.
_______________________________

Seems strange that SD should know the amount they are short, or even that they are having difficulty in collecting it. Surely that’s something RIFC would keep close to their chests, unless the £500,000 figure is a somewhat optimistic ‘holding’ explanation for the delay!

I wondered when James Doleman tweeted that both counsel teams were holding a meeting before the proceedings got underway if this had something to do with the claimed loan repayment. Perhaps this is where the figures were passed on! Someone on JJ’s site had posted that he’d been in court yesterday and King had had a hasty word with his counsel after that had been announced.

This might also explain why no rag went with the joyous story, King had had a quick word and told them to print nothing!

Embarrassing for King and RIFC/TRFC!

Genuine thanks to James Doleman for his efforts to keep us informed.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on12:02 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Maybe MyCashley knew that it’s customary for DK to lie whenever he speaks, especially when in a court of law? All part of a cunning plan to show in public how “unfit and improper” an individual DK is?

View Comment

mungoboyPosted on12:08 pm - Dec 11, 2015


So, at the AGM King triumphantly announced that in just one hour of phone calling he’d raised £5m to repay Ashley’s loan.
Now we find that in court today it’s stated that it HASN’T been repaid and they are £500k short in the sum concerned.
glib and shameless or what?
Surely even the gullibles will see through this charade now? 
Nah…….me neither

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on12:09 pm - Dec 11, 2015


yourhavingalaugh 10th December 2015 at 3:34 pm #Just watched Sky Sports interviewing King,I hope for his sake the Judge does not see this before tomorrow ,anyone watching over Govan way must be embarrassed by their leader.
===================
Just a random thought, but is DK trying to engineer a departure along similar lines to the outlandish ploy used by CG to secure his exit from the pantomime?

CG exited stage left with a bag marked swag filled with enough RRM (real Rangers money) to purchase his dream chateau, whereas DK’s exit would be saving him from “spending” the FRM (fictional Rangers money) £30M warchest.

I’m struggling to expain DK’s recent behaviour, or is his sociopathy actually worsening the longer he carries on without proper public scrutiny, almost like the behavioural timeline of the head of a cult?

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on12:10 pm - Dec 11, 2015


    “James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 2m2 minutes ago Judge responds to Internet chatter and tells court ” I have never been a mason”
    ———————————————————————————————-
This judge is a bampot !   21
Right ! What one of you lot out there is the judge?…..  Mods, Check the IPs and get him outed. We need him up here to sort out the SFA.

View Comment

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on12:14 pm - Dec 11, 2015


JC
And this story too!
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/10/sports-direct-share-price-falls-following-guardian-working-practices-revelations

View Comment

nawlitePosted on12:27 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Yesterday, on the Bears’ Den, there was much hilarity (and worse) aimed at SD’s counsel for not being up to speed on the fact that the £5m loan had been repaid. You know the form…”Well done, Dave King!” and “GIRUY, Mike Ashley”.
It still seems very much the case that anything said by anyone at the head of TRFC* is still taken at face value by the majority of fans, as far as I can see. Sorry, Ryan.
I haven’t gone on today to see if there is any condemnation of King for either his AGM comments or yesterday’s in court. Btw, can you now lie with impunity in court? Will the judge take any action against King for doing so in his court?
Is it possible that this could be the reason for the judge wanting to see King in court in January or is that likely to be something else that we haven’t yet figured out what for?

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on12:32 pm - Dec 11, 2015


DCK informs us that the readies are sitting in the bank waiting for the lawyers to complete the transfer. Money he conjured up in an hour.
   On top of a possible perjury charge of lying to the man in the wig, What about his director responsibilities and lying to shareholders at an AGM?  I think that is going to be an armour piercing round stuck in the magazine when Uncle Mick has his tete a tete with the SFA over fit and properness.
   Will it be enough to provoke the SFA into stuffing him into the bow tubes as floatsam, to try to fool the circling destroyer on the surface to go away? 

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:41 pm - Dec 11, 2015


sannoffymesssoitizz 11th December 2015 at 11:51 am
—-
Thanks. I had seen the stories, but I can be very slow sometimes to make connections!

View Comment

Jungle JimPosted on12:41 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Could it be King’s contribution to the £5m that is causing the shortfall?  That could ruffle a few feathers.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on12:44 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Well well,the Bears in the den have just been shafted by their leader,nearly 320 hours after the boast of collecting £5m GBP in a single hour,we discover that 320 of these hours later the full amount is not there,OK Dave ,who rennaged on their part of the deal,surely not you,but who,and as for the Bears ,how embarrassing ,how utterly embarrassing .

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on1:02 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Is Mike Ashley even smarter than I previously thought?
Usually it is not a good idea to interrupt an enemy when they are making a mistake, but did MA shell out £200K yesterday just to allow DK to dig himself into a bigger hole?
Did MA anticipate that DK would spout off outside court as well as make some questionable statements in his affadavit, purely as a softening up excercise ahead of the real action to come?
Was the reported threat of gaoltime just a squirrel to distract from the real purpose?
DK appears to have underlined his reputation with the judiciary with yesterday’s performance, and all MA has done is possibly lost some loose change.

Yesterday’s statement by the SD brief that he was unaware that the loan had been repaid may have been far more important than it seemed at the time given today’s revelations. That statement would not have been made in court without yesterday’s hearing, and the non repayment may well have led to a change of plan for yesterday by MA/SD given their apparent ability to predict DK’s behaviour.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on1:11 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Wonder if they pay the living wage yet? 210312   
   Jeezo! What a riddy this guy is. What a riddy the SFA are. How much more?
PLENTY! I’m afraid. 

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on1:16 pm - Dec 11, 2015


So basically everything that was reported in the papers yesterday was a load of tosh.

Dave King / Rangers were not acquitted of anything, in fact this was more or less a preliminary hearing and the real case will be heard in January. In addition the payment of £5m to Sports Direct was simply a lie, not only have the club not repaid the loan, they don’t even have the money to do it. They are apparently £500,000 short.

Mike Ashley is a substantial shareholder in Rangers International Football Club PLC, Sandy Easdale owns or controls another substantial block of shares in that PLC. Either or both of them may be wondering why the Chairman lied to them at the PLC’s AGM, and did it very publicly, and to a standing ovation apparently. An EGM so soon after the AGM might be in order to discuss such a grave situation.

As an aside, given this has now been definitively proven, that the Chairman of a PLC lied to his own shareholders, does the SFA think that, allied to everything else, still constitutes a fit and proper person.

As another aside. If Rangers are £500,000 short of paying back the £5M which they claim to have already paid then how exactly are they paying their bills. They said they need £2.5m urgently, where is that coming from on top of the £4.5m they have raised specifically to pay Sports Direct back. Surely they haven’t gone to people to raise money for a specific purpose and are now using that money for day to day running costs.

View Comment

nawlitePosted on1:29 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Can you complete ths quote?
“Where’s your money, Mr ____?”
Hint – It’s a well used quote, usually addressed to a specific individual.

Fun aside, what does he have to do for the SFA to decide he might not be fit and proper after all?

View Comment

neepheidPosted on1:38 pm - Dec 11, 2015


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/rangers-falsely-claimed-5m-loan-6994648

Updated 13:17, 11 Dec 2015 ByRecord Reporter

MIKE Ashley firm’s legal team told today’s hearing into the alleged breach of a gagging order that the Ibrox club are still waiting to collect a further £500,000 before the loan is paid off.
RANGERS FC made a false claim in the High Court that a £5m loan from Sports Direct had been repaid in full, the court heard today.
William McCormick QC, representing the Ibrox club, claimed yesterday that the money had been returned to tycoon Mike Ashley’s sportswear giant.
But David Quest QC, representing Sports Direct, contradicted the claim after today, saying the cash strapped club was still searching for funds.
“Yesterday it was said the £5m loan had been repaid, which was something that came as a surprise to me”, he said.
“We investigated that and that’s not correct, the £5m loan has not been repaid.
“The position yesterday afternoon was they were still in the process of collecting the funds in order to make the repayment.
“They are still waiting to collect another £500,000.’

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on1:40 pm - Dec 11, 2015


£500,000! You have to ask, how much do they really have?  They had £5M at the AGM, £4.5M yesterday – let’s face it, they could be a couple of million short, or even have zilch!  Och, maybe we should just take his word for it, after all he is “a successful business man”!

View Comment

bfbpuzzledPosted on1:45 pm - Dec 11, 2015


One would almost think that DCK is unaware that the stuff he says needs to be the truth. The whole sequence of incorrect statements about the loan would be unacceptable at the best of times but to do so at the AGM and High Court suggests recklessness. 
The only benefit to him appears to me to be a positive response by his customers (victims?) without regard to longer term consequences.
His bravura performance about the SD Counsel yesterday was not the reaction of a serious person to what was in the process of being decided. Hubris is inexplicable in his set of circumstances when there is a maelstrom of difficulties still to be gone through.
Any sympathy for TRFC is being depleted. Rapidly.
In his case the road to hell is paved with bad intentions- DCK the poor man’s Donald Trump.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on1:50 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Oh Dear
I wonder what the man with the magic hat is thinking,here Dave take 500k from my transfer war chest and pay the loan off,where’s that Fulham phone number? ,will my half yearly bonus be paid,just sell a player we are ok with what we have,if I was Warby I would use the loaf and go for option 2.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:09 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Are we seriously being asked to believe that a company which needs at least £2.5m to get through the rest of the season, had trouble (we are now told) raising the £5m to pay off Ashley, but has (allegedly) just raised £4.5m of it, will actually use that £4.5m to pay off an interest free loan with no repayment date? Really?
What is the point of using every contact in DK’s filofax (he strikes me as a filofax man, somehow) to desperately raise £5m which doesn’t need to be repaid now, then pay it to Ashley, and then not pay December’s wage bill? That’s admin time, isn’t it?
The Ibrox fans are not being told the truth here, and neither is the court. Never mind what Ashley’s game is, what is King playing at? Is he really a compulsive liar? Does he just say stuff because he wants it to be true?The stuff about the £5m simply beggars belief. Yet our fearless hacks just lap it all up without question.
His claim in his sworn affidavit that he never opened an email attachment is surely vulnerable to forensic analysis. But then he’ll claim that if it was opened, it was but not by him, but by his butler or his personal sommelier, or somebody, anybody, who then didn’t show him it?
That judge in South Africa got it absolutely spot on 3 years ago- in my opinion.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on2:12 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Well at least Dave will probably jet in to Glasgow for the home game tomorrow ,least he can do after spending the clubs scarce funds on the high court case and update the rest of the board on what went on in London and how the judge had got it totally wrong ,and that silly man of a QC,he wasn’t listening to what I was saying to him,made me look like a lier ,I should have took the stand myself.
If only

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:16 pm - Dec 11, 2015


DCK 27 November 2015

“The main thing is that we say to them the money is there, it’s in the bank and just for the lawyers to sort out.”

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/14109203.Rangers_chairman_Dave_King__Decision_to_repay_Mike_Ashley_loan_was_the__right_thing_to_do_/?ref=mr&lp=20

That bank must have the same kind of storage facilities that magically made Green’s Dallas Cowboys emails disappear.

I am picking up the smell of burning Calvin Kleins.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on2:21 pm - Dec 11, 2015


If I was Ashley’s lawyer I would have gone about things quite differently.

1 King has been labeled by a High Court Judge as someone who is prepared to lie shamelessly to achieve his aims . Not only that he behaved in that manner in a court of Law and was further labelled by the Judge as someone not to be believed without corroborating evidence.

That surely opens up 2 lines of attack for Ashley. Firstly when King’s QC claimed the £5 million had been repaid, unknown to the Ashley QC, why did Ashley’s guy not get immediate verification of that from Sports Direct. He would then have been able to brand King a liar in court BEFORE the Judge made a decision on whether King should be jailed or not.
Secondly, introducing King as a witness would have enable the obvious questions to be asked. When King pulled his “could not remember” stunt, the clear line of questioning to King would have been on the untrustworthy nature of his character. When King has already been labelled an untrustworthy witness, it must have aided Ashley’s case to call King as a witness .

2 There appeared to be a significant lack of preparation by Ashley’s side. There have been many articles on the one sided nature of the agreement . When there is a confidentiality agreement signed then in law only those directly party to the agreement and their advisors are entitled to know the detail. You can almost 100% rule out advisors on both sides from being the source of a leak. Sports Direct are damaged by the leak. King should have been questioned on this and asked how Sons of Struth for example would know the details. The judge is surely entitled to draw a conclusion on the balance of probabilities ( or is there a burden of a higher level of proof )  

All in all it seemed a pretty mediocre performance 

View Comment

SmugasPosted on2:56 pm - Dec 11, 2015


neepheid 11th December 2015 at 2:09 pm #
That’s admin time, isn’t it?

Interesting hypothesis Neeps.  Who would technically “force” admin, the creditor who is owed or the debtor who very publicly in both an AGM and court of law promised it would be paid?  Ouch!

The plan, were there ever one but specifically post the Res 10 failure, looks increasingly like get in the £5m on the premise off paying off Mike.  Use it to pay the Dec creditors including wages, the original purpose of the £2.5m Campbell Dallas requirement.  Use it to get to January when the CIC monies are released to top out the Ashley loan, repay it and then let the ship run adrift until February March when they know, and know now, it has to run out of readies (since the original £2.5m wasn’t enough.

Double ouch.  Still, they might win the Petrofac.

Interesting comment from the Judge yesterday about an average full back at that level being £400,000.  Whats that you say?  Tavernier is above average?  And they’re £500,000 short.

If only I could see a solution!  Think dammit think!!! 

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on2:58 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Reference the 5 million has anybody contacted Mr Custard?

View Comment

tayredPosted on3:02 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Barcabhoy 11th December 2015 at 2:21 pm #

Aye, I think it is too poor a performance to be true. It’s difficult to imagine a QC going up against King and TRFC with such poor arguments. The potential angles of attack are so numerous! Yet he chose to use none, even when a blatant lie was apparently told.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on3:06 pm - Dec 11, 2015


On a related note Tayred, I heard an interesting view yesterday on John James approach and his apparent certainty of a custodial sentence.  It was mooted to be specifically to bluff King into an OOC settlement, or even resignation. 

Failed on both counts. 

View Comment

tearsofjoyPosted on3:07 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Given the factual inaccuracies of the (non) loan repayment , does this add weight to MAs impending court battle with the SFA ?

‘Look , mlud, here’s written evidence from a  very recent court case here in the UK  that underpins the whole “not fit for purpose argument” ‘. He couldn’t be trusted then and he can’t be trusted now ?

Could MAs briefs use yesterday’s farrago  as evidence against the SFA in court ?

View Comment

zerotolerance1903Posted on3:31 pm - Dec 11, 2015


tayred 11th December 2015 at 3:02 pm #Aye, I think it is too poor a performance to be true. It’s difficult to imagine a QC going up against King and TRFC with such poor arguments. The potential angles of attack are so numerous! Yet he chose to use none, even when a blatant lie was apparently told.

Admiral Ackbar knows the answer.

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on3:41 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Yesterday’s Hearing poses a few questions
 
Why did the top notch QC acting for SD not put DCK in the box?
It’s so odd even the Judge expressed surprise it hadn`t been done. Indeed he opined that it would have given him (the Judge) the opportunity to assess how he performed in the witness box. Was this the Judge saying in effect he would never convict an individual without hearing his side of the story? It looks that way from some of the remarks made by the Judge
If so why was this case brought to court at all?
And why was repayment of the £5m loan announced during the proceedings when it wasn`t relevant to the submissions being made by RIFC and was referred to as “news to him” by the QC for SD
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Was there a provisional deal deal made between the RIFC and SD a few days ago?
One that included a verbal agreement on courtroom tactics
A provisional deal that could not be finalised unless repayment of the £5m loan was stated in open court? 
If so
The timing of today events would be crucial i.e.
Attention James Doleman
Was reference to the repayment of the £5m loan made early on in the proceedings?
Sufficiently early for the QC representing SD to “change tack” and decide to base his case solely on written evidence?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
And is avoiding jail really a win win result?
Did both sides know there was no prospect of a jail sentence without the “accused” giving evidence in the witness box?
This would clearly suit DCK in the short term
But what if
Both sides also knew that the written evidence was likely to secure a guilty verdict on its own even if the punishment is not jail time?
And
A guilty verdict in a senior UK court was all that SD wanted? 
Does the SD  QC reckon that
The SA court would consider a court conviction in a major UK court as breaking the terms of the suspended sentence imposed on King by a SA Judge?

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on4:21 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Barcabhoy 11th December 2015 at 2:21 pm #If I was Ashley’s lawyer I would have gone about things quite differently.
===================
If you prove in court that DK is a congenital liar, would it then be impossible to prove that he intentionally breached a confidentiality order and was in contempt, as everything that he says now and has said (including the relevant interview etc) in the past should be regarded as a potential falsehood or fabrication? If DK said X to Y, surely Y would have wanted some corroborative evidence to back up DK’s disclosure of X, in a journalistic second source/cross reference way? (The reference to journalism was not intended to include the SMSM, of course.)

To quote from a previous report the refers to DK.
“Southwood said the court had seen King testify for four days and “are unanimous in finding that he is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is support by documents and other objective evidence”.
“It was remarkable that King showed no sign of embarrassment or any emotion when he conceded that he had lied to the (Sars) commissioner in a number of his income tax returns. In our assessment, he is a G&SL (edited to avoid the naugty step).”

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on4:32 pm - Dec 11, 2015


The Cat NR1 11th December 2015 at 12:09 pm #yourhavingalaugh 10th December 2015 at 3:34 pm #Just watched Sky Sports interviewing King,I hope for his sake the Judge does not see this before tomorrow ,anyone watching over Govan way must be embarrassed by their leader. =================== Just a random thought, but is DK trying to engineer a departure along similar lines to the outlandish ploy used by CG to secure his exit from the pantomime?
CG exited stage left with a bag marked swag filled with enough RRM (real Rangers money) to purchase his dream chateau, whereas DK’s exit would be saving him from “spending” the FRM (fictional Rangers money) £30M warchest.
I’m struggling to expain DK’s recent behaviour, or is his sociopathy actually worsening the longer he carries on without proper public scrutiny, almost like the behavioural timeline of the head of a cult?
=========================
Going back to my above post.
Does DK’s behaviour have something to do with the mystery Hampden Park visit?

Both DK and the SFA want DK out of the Blue Room ASAP. That seems fairly certain.
However, Mike Ashley doesn’t want DK out until he’s dealt with the SFA, so he’s happy enough to play with DK as a cat does with a trapped mouse. Neither DK nor the SFA want that scenario to continue.

Is DK trying to engineer the desired outcome for himself and his sponsors on the sixth floor?

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on5:09 pm - Dec 11, 2015


valentinesclown 11th December 2015 at 2:58 pm #Reference the 5 million has anybody contacted Mr Custard?
=====================
The RST are on the case.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:08 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Grant Russell ‏@STVGrant 19m19 minutes ago
Rangers spokesman on SD loan: “Matter is in hand, the money is there. There is a commitment for a bank transfer for the remaining £500,000.”
Rangers expect to have repaid Sports Direct, and had securities returned, by end of month.

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on6:24 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Awwww. Its a great pity DCK never chipped in when he said he would.

 https://www.enca.com/south-africa/rand-hits-new-low-it-touches-r16-dollar

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on6:38 pm - Dec 11, 2015


This latest farce could easily have been avoided if someone (possibly King himself advising the QC) hadn’t decided to throw in that the £5M had been repaid. You can only speculate what the motive was to make such a statement.  Was King really fearful that he would be jailed and thought that a demonstration of “good faith” by the club would help his case? All that was required was a statement that they expected to repay the loan and have the securities returned by the end of the month, then no-one would have batted an eyelid.
 
We now have questions about the liquidity of the club and its backers once again. They just don’t do themselves any favours, particularly when SD isn’t exactly flavour of the month, and with Judge Smith seemingly on the club’s side of the argument.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on6:55 pm - Dec 11, 2015


I see PMGB is suggesting in his latest blog that the word around SD is that RIFC/TRFC can only put together around £2.5m. I know this is, as so often the case, that we must consider it unsubstantiated; as we had to when he released the news that King had a meeting with Big Mike at the time of the EGM. This was, of course, substantiated in court yesterday.

I’m prepared to accept Phil’s account that the belief at SD is that King only has this £2.5m put together. Perhaps, though, their assessment is wrong.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on8:32 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Allyjambo 11th December 2015 at 6:55 pm #
Regardless of the sums involved it is surely as plain as the bluenose on a bears face that there is no evidence of a stash of investment cash sitting somewhere ready to be ‘gifted” to the football club for the purposes of over investment.

If T”Rangers fans believe things are all going fine then they need to book an Xmas break to fantasy island!

Like many I have thought the likes of Park were perhaps the best hope for a bit of sanity but the longer this goes on it looks like they are all just turning out to be a bunch of chances like King or spineless and incompetent.

Someone needs to ‘get real’ or the Big House is going to collapse again.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on8:44 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Anyone predict this
Before Justice Peter Smith
Mon 14 December
Court 21 10:30
For Committal part heard
SD v RIFC
And
Interim hearing list
Same v same

JD off yon plane.it was a trap.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:48 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Ross Brown ‏@thebhoy1979 57m57 minutes ago
Say what you want about this man,(photo of Craig Whyte)  but at least he didnt say ‘erm i have 90p in bank, just waiting on the other 10p’ pic.twitter.com/HUdlIb1qtT
   Auldheid ‏@Auldheid 32m32 minutes ago @thebhoy1979 @davidro50017125
No but in Sept 2011 he told UEFA under Art67 that RFC had paid £500k towards the overdue tax bill. Guess what?
  Auldheid ‏@Auldheid 30m30 minutes ago @thebhoy1979 @davidro50017125
He was referring to an amount HMRC had frozen in a ring fenced account that HMRC later allocated against the  Auldheid ‏@Auldheid 27m27 minutes ago @thebhoy1979 @davidro50017125 Millions in unpaid VAT/ PAYE that caused insolvency.
Bending truth to suit so far it breaks, is called a lie.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on9:13 pm - Dec 11, 2015


The point about the above post and DK is that the club/company operating out of Ibrox have, since 2000 at least, shown themselves to be incapable of honestly participating in Scottish football.
Like an abused partner who only remembers the odd happy occasion when  not being abused was justification for remaining in an abusive relationship, our media and football authorities want this relationship to continue, indeed think it a healthy state of being.
There must be an onslaught against that mind set if the abused are to value themselves.
We need “miracles and wonder”
we need
“Staccato signals of constant information”
and perhaps
“a loose affiliation of millionaires
And billionaires” 🙂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy5T6s25XK4

but whatever the method our game cannot be held hostage to the fortune of DCK and his acolytes. When exactly is enough, enough?

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on9:31 pm - Dec 11, 2015


goosygoosy 11th December 2015 at 3:41 pm #
Yesterday’s Hearing poses a few questions…why was this case brought to court at all?
=====================================================
Goosy…notwithstanding the widespread aversion/repulsion most contributors to this glorious blog have for both Messrs King and Ashley, this court action was “driven” by that most despicable of driving forces…the insurmountable male ego! 11

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on9:35 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Is it true that the judge asked if the DR had a journo in court today, and the answer was no?

I’ve seen a comment elsewhere that mentions it, but a definitive answer would help confirm my belief in the total lack of any journalistic inclination or credibility of the DR cut and pasters in all matters Ibrox related.

View Comment

Bogs DolloxPosted on9:36 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Listening to Hugh Keevins on SSB tonight was a revelation. Even the Shugster was calling King out and sugested that if TRFC were only a measly half mill short then surely King could poney up?.
Derek just sounded like the paid TRFC idiot he has always been and when invited to have a go at Ronnie D he does with no venom!!

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on9:41 pm - Dec 11, 2015


easyJambo 11th December 2015 at 6:08 pm #Rangers spokesman on SD loan: “Matter is in hand, the money is there. There is a commitment for a bank transfer for the remaining £500,000.”
===================================================
…translated as “the money has not yet arrived…we do not have cleared funds…maybe tomorrow”…09
Almost akin to the old “cheque in post” nonsense 21

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:00 pm - Dec 11, 2015


So another 2 for 1 for court aficionados on Monday.
Peter Smith obviously has no synch with my diary.
Hope JD stayed on.

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on10:18 pm - Dec 11, 2015


The truth and Dave Cunningham King should never be said in the same sentence. They are not just strangers.They have never met.

View Comment

jimboPosted on10:20 pm - Dec 11, 2015


I will say this for Peter Smith J he was humorous at times and understandable.  A bit like the three judges at the COS recently (understandable).  Unlike Nimmo Smith who got his knickers in a twist trying to make sense of Sandy Bryson.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:20 pm - Dec 11, 2015


ianagain 11th December 2015 at 10:00 pm #
So another 2 for 1 for court aficionados on Monday. Peter Smith obviously has no synch with my diary. Hope JD stayed on.
==================
It seems a bit puzzling that the action should continue on Monday when he set a trial date for January.  I wonder if the conflicting comments made yesterday and today have prompted the Judge to continue the hearing, or it could just be the formal (written?) communication of his decisions.

View Comment

Bogs DolloxPosted on10:22 pm - Dec 11, 2015


essexbeancounter 11th December 2015 at 9:31 pm #goosygoosy 11th December 2015 at 3:41 pm # Yesterday’s Hearing poses a few questions…why was this case brought to court at all?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think because SD thought it had to be – for the purposes of pushing The King out of Ibrox.
But something happened before Court that meant SD’s Counsel rowed back. Let’s face it – as a QC you don’t make yourself look like a clown before a Judge you may encounter frequently unless you are instructed and paid to.

View Comment

tangoedPosted on10:33 pm - Dec 11, 2015


James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 23 mins23 minutes ago
Judge after saying in court today he had never been a mason ‘But it would have been an honour to be nominated by a legend like John Greig”

James Doleman ‏@jamesdoleman 24 mins24 minutes ago
@NTH_Malcontent Honestly and truly. My jaw hit the floor. Delayed reporting it until I could check my notes

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on10:37 pm - Dec 11, 2015


helpmaboab 11th December 2015 at 10:18 pm #The truth and Dave Cunningham King should never be said in the same sentence. They are not just strangers.They have never met.
=========================================
That’s a very interesting point.
Many (if not all) of us refer to DK as a G&SL off the back of his SA court appearance and subsequent frequent mendacity in respect of Scottish football business related matters.
However, is this G&SLness a recent phenomenon, or is there historic evidence that confirms the tongue in cheek (I assume) comment above?

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on10:38 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Auldheid
Excellent post.And a classic as well.

View Comment

goosygoosyPosted on10:39 pm - Dec 11, 2015


easyJambo 11th December 2015 at 6:08 pm #
Grant Russell ‏@STVGrant 19m19 minutes ago Rangers spokesman on SD loan: “Matter is in hand, the money is there. There is a commitment for a bank transfer for the remaining £500,000.” Rangers expect to have repaid Sports Direct, and had securities returned, by end of month.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Ah………the glory of spin
This spokesman could have said something like
“Additional funds to meet the £500k shortfall will be transferred into  an RIFC bank account by Monday 14 Dec 2015.This provides RIFC with £5m to repay the SD loan
 RIFC have agreed with SD to transfer £5m into an SD bank account not later than Friday 18 Dec 2015. As soon as the £5m transfer has cleared, SD will return all securities associated with this loan.
………………………………………..
What they are actually making is three separate points
“Matter is in hand, the money is there”
 Somebody has demonstrated to RIFC that they have £500k. We believe this money is there.
Nothing about who is giving the money. Giving complete deniability on the source. So this person can renege on his promise without ever being named. Alternatively, some unforeseen issue could delay or prevent this promise being honoured. If so we aren’t promising to tell you why.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
“There is a commitment for a bank transfer for the remaining £500,000.”
The unnamed source has promised to give RIFC £500k. If they do, it will be in the form of a bank transfer.
Why refer to a bank transfer. ?.
Does this mean the loan cannot be made if a bank transfer is impossible?
Nope
This is subliminal wordage targeted at people who think technical phrases like “bank transfer” add integrity and credibility
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Conclusion?
A foreseen event currently known to RIFC is on the immediate horizon
This event will enable RIFC to renege on today’s Statement that the SD loan of £5m will be repaid and Securities returned by end Dec 2015
And
Sadly
Those RRM with integrity on the RIFC Board are being sucked into a web of deception. This is being orchestrated by a colleague who sees nothing wrong in lying to shareholders and customers
I expect
No repayment of the loan by end Dec 2015 for some “unforeseen” reason
At least two resignations by RRM Directors in the immediate term
An insoolvency event shortly after these Directors have resigned

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on10:42 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Bogs Dollox 11th December 2015 at 10:22 pm #essexbeancounter 11th December 2015 at 9:31 pm #goosygoosy 11th December 2015 at 3:41 pm # Yesterday’s Hearing poses a few questions…why was this case brought to court at all?+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++I think because SD thought it had to be – for the purposes of pushing The King out of Ibrox.But something happened before Court that meant SD’s Counsel rowed back. Let’s face it – as a QC you don’t make yourself look like a clown before a Judge you may encounter frequently unless you are instructed and paid to.
==================================================
BD…fair point. I have as a client a High Court judge (retired), who immediately prior to a (non-jury) commercial case would invite both sets of QCs into his chambers and literally lay down how he expected their submissions to proceed…likewise after they had made their submissions, but before delivering his verdict, he would explain what he thought of them (and their submissions to HIS court!)
Both QCs new exactly where they stood from the beginning…and at the end…and both new the “form”, should they ever to appear in front of him again…time wasting or similar tactics were akin to a professional death sentence…and surprisingly, seldom happened 02

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:45 pm - Dec 11, 2015


easy j
Committal.
Somehow we are back there.

View Comment

jimboPosted on10:46 pm - Dec 11, 2015


I think I have been on about 4 other sites this past 24 hours.  And a huge amount of posters are of the opinion that so poor was SD’s legal team’s display that there is an undercurrent to what they are doing.  ‘Softening them up’, ‘more to come’ ‘something up their sleeves’.  I don’t believe it.  They were rubbish full stop.  Didn’t have a case to begin with.  The big thing I would have been going with was the disclosure of the 7 years notice.  That is where the meat was.  That was a real disclosure by the Daily Record regarding any details of the contract.  Meetings and ‘unhappyness’ were nothing. 

7 Years notice, Why was this not investigated in court.  Who told whom?

View Comment

Bogs DolloxPosted on10:54 pm - Dec 11, 2015


The Cat NR1 11th December 2015 at 10:37 pm #helpmaboab 11th December 2015 at 10:18 pm #The truth and Dave Cunningham King should never be said in the same sentence. They are not just strangers.They have never met. ========================================= That’s a very interesting point. Many (if not all) of us refer to DK as a G&SL off the back of his SA court appearance and subsequent frequent mendacity in respect of Scottish football business related matters. However, is this G&SLness a recent phenomenon, or is there historic evidence that confirms the tongue in cheek (I assume) comment above?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If only it was possible to go back and look at his “investment” in Rangers in the Murray days?

I believe he even misrepresented that to BDO.

He is a seriously confused individual who under the spotlight of scrutinity of those who want transparency in our society is made to look a fool on a daily basis.

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on11:55 pm - Dec 11, 2015


Bogs Dollox 11th December 2015 at 10:54 pm #The Cat NR1 11th December 2015 at 10:37 pm #helpmaboab 11th December 2015 at 10:18 pm #The truth and Dave Cunningham King should never be said in the same sentence. They are not just strangers.They have never met. ========================================= That’s a very interesting point. Many (if not all) of us refer to DK as a G&SL off the back of his SA court appearance and subsequent frequent mendacity in respect of Scottish football business related matters. However, is this G&SLness a recent phenomenon, or is there historic evidence that confirms the tongue in cheek (I assume) comment above? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If only it was possible to go back and look at his “investment” in Rangers in the Murray days?
I believe he even misrepresented that to BDO.
He is a seriously confused individual who under the spotlight of scrutinity of those who want transparency in our society is made to look a fool on a daily basis.
============================
That may come out when the RFC liquidation is finally over and the conduct report is produced.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on12:04 am - Dec 12, 2015


Been an interesting week at SFM central. Auldheid returned from his Spanish retreat and paid us a visit, EddieGoldtop came around, John Clark braved the weegie culture for a while, and Ryan Gosling also popped in for a chat.

Amidst the conviviality of it all, we have this week been exposed to arguably the most inept, amateur, and inaccurate examples ever of journalism in the print media. Anti-journalism in fact. Get it wrong? No worries – we’ll just airbrush it out of the story and pretend it never happened. No-one will ever know – will they?

The court reporting yesterday was final proof, if proof were ever needed, that our sports (so-called) reporters are hopelessly underqualified for the job of understanding anything beyond the trite soccer cliché – and even worse, after over four years of this nonsense, their learning curve trajectory remains stubbornly parallel to the x-axis.

There is a case for saying that social media can, and often does get irresponsibly out of hand. Social media however, is evolving, and I like to think that we are part of that evolution, which, along with others like BellaCaledonia and Wings Over Scotland, are doing their damndest to save journalism from the disrepute brought to it by the likes of yesterday’s embarrassment.

Print media is in fact devolving. News is giving way to puff-pieces and ad hominem attacks both in print and the MSM social media extensions; evidence that the MSM understanding of social media itself is no better than their understanding of how print communication should work.

Their main weapon – in fact their only weapon – in their pursuit of the preservation of themselves and their skewed narrative, is the fact that for the majority of people, the mainstream is still the gold standard of credibility.

Put simply, we have to extend the reach of quality social media – all the way into the mainstream.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on2:16 am - Dec 12, 2015


We are actually already the mainstream.
We just need to improve our reach.
Who in the last month’ followed the papers vice JC or JD
I would guess 9-1 for the bampots.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on3:20 am - Dec 12, 2015


Oh level 5 are awake.
How do you feel.Confident  about Mon?

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on8:03 am - Dec 12, 2015


Rangers Supporters Trust to give fans the chance to buy merchandise in school opposite Ibrox.
is this a private school? Surely not a council resource.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on8:23 am - Dec 12, 2015


It’s a non denom council primary & nursery facility

View Comment

oddjobPosted on8:35 am - Dec 12, 2015


  • I presume they will be registering for VAT ?
View Comment

Comments are closed.