bennett Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 "Yoor day will come wee man....yoor day will come" !! "Fucking scumbag"!! "Basterd ye,,,,, fuckin' scumbag" !!! "Your gonna get everyhin' ye deserve ya wee f**k"!!! "Yer no gonna be safe anywhere ye scumbag"!!!! "Yoor DEAD..." !! Breach of the Peace... Threatening Behaviour including an explicit death threat.... Incitement to endanger person(s) through violence.... Public disorder offences.... Cops: " He'll be back on Monday OK ? Away ye go" Quality effort from Police Scotlands' Finest.... They were telling the Sons of Struth guy "he'd back on monday" if he didn't back off. I think it's pretty clear that the legal system is quite interested in the Rangers takeover, given they've arrested all the main figures involved in it. All the Murray stuff can wait for another day. Right now it's just complicating things, if the evidence is there then hopefully he'll face a future court appearance. Yon post from Youngsy never gets old. Tbf my view at the time was that Whyte was a chancer who seen the possible profit in taking over, winning the BTC and then selling up for a hefty profit. I was wrong too, as were many people if we're all being honest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmy Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Difference between what you suspect and what you can prove. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So if the paper's are to be believed none of Whyte's actions when he "was Rangers" are going to be on the charge sheet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So if the paper's are to be believed none of Whyte's actions when he "was Rangers" are going to be on the charge sheet. If you can believe the papers, correct. That's a big "if", of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 If true, and as you say Rodent it's a big if, that'll upset the current narrative emanating from most of Beardom at the moment somewhat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The legal beagles are out in force today, if only Paul McC was still around he could have gave us the benefit of his experience.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 The legal beagles are out in force today, if only Paul McC was still around he could have gave us the benefit of his experience.... Doesn't take a law degree to read the front page of the Sun a week or two ago, Benny. That paper's style guide requires articles to be written in language that an eight-year-old can understand, so there's a chance that even you could grasp it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 So if the paper's are to be believed none of Whyte's actions when he "was Rangers" are going to be on the charge sheet. so many different stories flying around, from the beeb The businessman faced a string of allegations during a private hearing in courtroom number three on Friday. These included claims he funded a controlling share in Rangers by selling off season tickets - after pretending to then chairman Sir David Murray he had cash of his own. It is also alleged a failure to pay outstanding VAT and National Insurance payments plunged Rangers into administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Doesn't take a law degree to read the front page of the Sun a week or two ago, Benny. That paper's style guide requires articles to be written in language that an eight-year-old can understand, so there's a chance that even you could grasp it. You read the sun Lol... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 (edited) so many different stories flying around, from the beeb The businessman faced a string of allegations during a private hearing in courtroom number three on Friday. These included claims he funded a controlling share in Rangers by selling off season tickets - after pretending to then chairman Sir David Murray he had cash of his own. It is also alleged a failure to pay outstanding VAT and National Insurance payments plunged Rangers into administration. That's a bit of an odd assertion by the Beeb - they've clearly had a look at the charges and they lay them out in full, below the bit you're quoting.... The fraud charge Mr Whyte faces span from January 2010 to February 2012. Legal papers claim he pretended to Sir David Murray and the board of directors that he had "sufficient funds to acquire controlling shareholding" in Rangers. This is said to have "induced" the board to agree to the sale to Mr Whyte. He is then accused of pretending he would provide £5m to buy players, that he would pay £2.8m for a tax liability and use £1.7m to settle "agreed capital expenditure". Other allegations listed in the charge include an accusation that Mr Whyte was part of a claim to the Ticketus firm that David Murray was aware the purchase was being funded by selling season tickets. Ticketus are said to have then entered into an agreement to acquire three years of season tickets. It is further alleged Mr Whyte pretended to the SFA that he had not been disqualified from being a director leading them to believe he was a "fit and proper person" to take control of a club. The charge concludes that Mr Whyte got the shareholding by fraud and that he failed to provide contracted funds for the "continued operation" of the club and withheld payment of VAT, PAYE and NI contributions from HMRC. It is said this caused the club to enter into administration. The second charge under the Companies Act is over a number of days in May 2011. It is claimed funds from an agreement with Ticketus were used to "to meet obligations as purchaser of the club" - in particular £18.2m was paid to Lloyds Bank. The charge also states funding of the "acquisition of the controlling shareholding" was made by "selling an asset of the club" - the income from the sale of season tickets." Mr Whyte was in court after four other men appeared in the dock last week in connection with the case. David Whitehouse, 49, Paul Clark. 50, David Grier, 53, and 50-year-old Gary Withey also faced a charge of being involved in a fraudulent scheme. Mr Withey also faced an allegation under the Companies Act http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-30242028?print=true The charges as laid out in full include everything previously claimed by the Sun but don't, as far as I can tell with my limited understanding, relate at all to non-payment of tax. Maybe the BBC know more than they're letting on. Edit: Nope, missed this - here's the relevant part: The charge concludes that Mr Whyte got the shareholding by fraud and that he failed to provide contracted funds for the "continued operation" of the club and withheld payment of VAT, PAYE and NI contributions from HMRC. But that's clearly relating to the initial takeover, isn't it? It's Whyte agreeing to do something, then not doing it. So again, it's about misrepresenting his cash and intentions in the takeover. Edited November 29, 2014 by flyingrodent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 (edited) The charges for fraud span a period from Jan 2010 to Feb 2012, included are that he failed to provide contracted funds for the "continued operation" of the club" by withholding VAT, PAYE and NI from HMRC. That may well be true, but I'll be surprised if it is. I've seen nothing except that vague claim on the BBC's website to indicate it's correct but then, they've clearly got access to the documents. Edit: Ignore this - see previous post. Edited November 29, 2014 by flyingrodent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Not a chance of me piping down as you put it son. Free speech in a democratic country and all that. Hope that doesn't upset you too much either. We don't live in a democratic country, also free speech is a myth 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 By the way, has Dave "Inveterate Liar" King been called as a 5-star witness yet? As a director of Deidco, he should be an expert on dodgy corporate management. On a lighter note; as the trial is likely to be peak-hour viewing over many months, may I suggest that some enterprising programme producer choose this as the theme-tune for the daily round-up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingrodent Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 AFAICS, all this relates to the initial takeover of Rangers - Whyte saying he had money when he didn't and agreeing to take on responsibilities that he couldn't or wouldn't take care of. I'll happily own up to it if I'm wrong - it certainly wouldn't be the first time or the last. I am biased after all, and I could just be horrified by the very suggestion that destroying Rangers FC could ever be seen as a crime in and of itself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeeHectorPar Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 (edited) AFAICS, all this relates to the initial takeover of Rangers - Whyte saying he had money when he didn't and agreeing to take on responsibilities that he couldn't or wouldn't take care of. I'll happily own up to it if I'm wrong - it certainly wouldn't be the first time or the last. I am biased after all, and I could just be horrified by the very suggestion that destroying Rangers FC could ever be seen as a crime in and of itself. Businessmen know how business works and all Whyte would have been obliged to do was tell SDM that he had the means to pay off the bank. SDM may have actively encouraged CW to use Ticketus as a fast-track means to provide funds. Let's face it, that other Scottish billionaire, McCall, seems to have his money tied up in such a way that his business partners wouldn't let him invest directly in Sevco, so where is the problem? Whyte and SDM could have legitimately expected money from the CL to cover any shortfall. But then, Ally fucked the whole thing up, just as he has been fucking things up since he took over as manager. Rangers had been living on borrowed meney for years and then, suddenly, Sally fed it cyanide instead of oxygen. Edited November 29, 2014 by WeeHectorPar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 However there is a clear dere I hope Rangers directors have clear evidence of themselves performing 'due diligence' and confirming he provided adequate proof of funds. This could get messy !! Might finally hear a word from the greatest ever Ger John Greig 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 thats a nice t shirt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The boatman Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 thats a nice t shirt I have a link.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 You're the missing link.... I have a link.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 You're the missing link....ha ha Bennett made a funny. Shame it only happens once every few years. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.