Glasgow United, you know who, and GCC

[ClydeTon]

20 minutes ago, KirkyRobRoy said:

It does matter though doesnt it?

IF they had gone through a criminal trial and been found guilty, he would either be in jail, and there isnt a club in the land that would go near him.

IF he had been found not guilty in a criminal trial, then it would be bordering on harassment if he was  prevented from living a normal life having been found not guilty

There is CCTV, there is also supportive evidence (for DG) from both the taxi driver and flatmate that consent was given (the civil case swung on whether or not you accept the girl in question was in a fit state to give it)

"Balance of probabilities" doesnt give conclusion to either party in the sorry situation.

Bit of irony coming from your "part-time lawyers" comment, you clearly fancy your chances.

DG & DR both claimed to be taking the woman to different places. One instance, they claimed it was to her mother's. Another instance, it was to her home. It's abundantly clear she was not in control of where she was going.

They got her drunk off of her head so she didn't have a clue, and in turn, they could rape her.

The court case involved 20 witnesses, and the woman's memory pretty much begins the next morning, in a house she didn't recognise, in a town she hadn't been in for a year, with pain around the vagina and thighs.

DNA samples were taken, and a friend of the victim was able to identify the David's (or at least one of them), and they were seen on CCTV between bars/clubs. Even by the victim's own admission, she was drunk out of her mind.

There is absolutely no chance on the earth that she wasn't raped. To sit and say "oh but it wasn't in a criminal court", to be incredibly blunt, is moronic and downright disgusting.

Thank you.

PS: To anyone who has a similar view of the case to the quoted poster, read the f**king court's judgement. https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=d22e28a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

EDIT: You know you've got them when they give up arguing their point and just resort to disliking everything anyone else says 

Edited July 24, 2023 by ClydeTon

[Hillonearth]

Ooft...this thread.

Sticking purely to the football side of it, I'm just glad they got emptied from our division last year and in all likelihood we won't have to play them. I'm sorry for the clubs that will though...

Given that the league are essentially powerless to stop a signing like this and Shettleston now seem intent on doubling down, the sides they will be playing are however not completely powerless to show they're not tarred with the same brush as another team in their league.

The ones that want to can make the fact incredibly clear TBH...each team in their division could reach out to a local rape charity/crisis centre and offer to display signage at their ground, they can hand out literature before games against Shettleston and blanket coverage of the charities in all their socials on the run up to that game. Likewise, most/many usual sponsors would probably be fine about switching their match programme adverts to some more of the above for one week only.

Shit - invite some local women's groups to the game to make it a genuinely uncomfortable experience

[Zen Archer (Raconteur)]

Police Scotland investigating leaked confidential documents shortly after the podcast released.

Unsure who is responsible for the leak.

[Rugster]

42 minutes ago, KirkyRobRoy said:

It does matter though doesnt it?

IF they had gone through a criminal trial and been found guilty, he would either be in jail, and there isnt a club in the land that would go near him.

IF he had been found not guilty in a criminal trial, then it would be bordering on harassment if he was  prevented from living a normal life having been found not guilty

There is CCTV, there is also supportive evidence (for DG) from both the taxi driver and flatmate that consent was given (the civil case swung on whether or not you accept the girl in question was in a fit state to give it)

"Balance of probabilities" doesnt give conclusion to either party in the sorry situation.

Beast 

[rainbowrising]

15 minutes ago, ClydeTon said:

Bit of irony coming from your "part-time lawyers" comment, you clearly fancy your chances.

DG & DR both claimed to be taking the woman to different places. One instance, they claimed it was to her mother's. Another instance, it was to her home. It's abundantly clear she was not in control of where she was going.

They got her drunk off of her head so she didn't have a clue, and in turn, they could rape her.

The court case involved 20 witnesses, and the woman's memory pretty much begins the next morning, in a house she didn't recognise, in a town she hadn't been in for a year, with pain around the vagina and thighs.

DNA samples were taken, and a friend of the victim was able to identify the David's (or at least one of them), and they were seen on CCTV between bars/clubs. Even by the victim's own admission, she was drunk out of her mind.

There is absolutely no chance on the earth that she wasn't raped. To sit and say "oh but it wasn't in a criminal court", to be incredibly blunt, is moronic and downright disgusting.

Thank you.

PS: To anyone who has a similar view of the case to the quoted poster, read the f**king court's judgement. https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=d22e28a7-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

I presume the guys at Glasgow United are more knowledgeable of the case and evidence put forward than the Supreme Court judge, Lord Armstrong and his finding that was "cogent, persuasive and compelling".

Glasgow, far prefer DGs "staunch" stance. Lord Armstrong obviously has no idea what he is talking about. 

[KirkyRobRoy]

16 minutes ago, Rugster said:

Beast 

Amazing how easily that term trips off the tongue of some on here

[PossilYM]

18 minutes ago, rainbowrising said:

I presume the guys at Glasgow United are more knowledgeable of the case and evidence put forward than the Supreme Court judge, Lord Armstrong and his finding that was "cogent, persuasive and compelling".

Glasgow, far prefer DGs "staunch" stance. Lord Armstrong obviously has no idea what he is talking about. 

More knowledgeable?

It's an old Junior team that has changed it's name and ended up playing in a public park on the wrong side of the railway tracks and oh, they have zero support.

They ain't Digby Brown.

[ICTChris]

Who is on charge of this club and their weird aggressive statements? 

[sophia]

I must say, the effort to stay in character for these pieces of p&b performance art, delivered over an extended period of time, is something to be admired.

[Shanner]

30 minutes ago, Rugster said:

Beast 

 

He's undoubtedly an absolute dafty but that's uncalled for.

[ClydeTon]

35 minutes ago, KirkyRobRoy said:

Amazing how easily that term trips off the tongue of some on here

Indeed.

F*d would be more accurate.

Edit: Point proven                                          ↓

Edited July 24, 2023 by ClydeTon

[philpy]

I genuinely believe that some folk on this thread are genuine simpletons who should not be allowed an opinion or be allowed near the Internet. The level of thickness and unwillingness to grasp the fact that he was JUDGED TO BE A RAPIST BY A JUDGE is utterly astounding. See also the levels of whataboutery. Going on about martindale for instance. The guy has shown genuine remorse, held his hands up, done his time and has done something with his life in his role at livi. Has goodwillie done any of that?? Has he f**k.  Civil court or not, mud still sticks. 

[F_T_Y]

Alright, the martindale comment was daft on my part  but having to pay 100k to lawyers is the punishment he was given, apart from a public flogging like some on here would like to see what else can be done legally.

The league has no power to tell teams who can play for them, that is the crux of the matter and relevant to the OP.

[CityDave94]

Observing this thread's growing contributions is like watching a motorway multi car pile up in slow motion.

[Pareidolia]

4 hours ago, HorseyGhirl said:

@Pareidolia Can I suggest you end this topic my friend. 

The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

That's a decision for mods, imo, than me. Its toxic but maybe necessary for some collective education on the state of play of supporters in lower level leagues when it comes to sporting situations of public interest.

Unfortunately if there's something I'm learning, and admittedly I did fear, is individuals who literally describe themselves by their team (and de facto representing them) has the same worrying attitudes to this whole debacle. As someone who has plans to support KRR once they return to Kirky, who has had longstanding concerns about inclusivity/equality/diversity in lower level leagues, this is putting me off putting my hand into my pocket for the team when its "representatives" have such attitudes that I know I will be more exposed to in small crowds than having the relative anonymity of a 50000 stadium.

The silence from WoSFL (and looking at the committee - not exactly a diverse bunch of people), doesn't help. Maybe they have the same opinions as some of the contributors here? It's not completely out of the question if supporters here have similar views.

Might as well stick to my "big" team which also has plenty concerning attitudes but is somewhat diluted by the cooperate and mainstream aspects of supporting a team with greater ambitions than being community-focussed, and at least have (albeit niche and half-heartedly) attempted to address some of the issues being raised in this thread.

Hey ho.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Pareidolia

[Thejackdaw]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion on here for sure however for someone to call the kirkyrobroyguy or whatever ever he's called a ' beast ' is quite fucking disgusting for me by the way..

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Pareidolia said:

That's a decision for mods, imo, than me. Its toxic but maybe necessary for some collective education on the state of play of supporters in lower level leagues when it comes to sporting situations of public interest.

Unfortunately if there's something I'm learning, and admittedly I did fear, is individuals who literally describe themselves by their team (and de facto representing them) - as my previous contributor is for example - has the same worrying attitude to this whole debacle. As someone who has plans to (coincidentally) support KRR once they return to Kirky, who has had longstanding concerns about inclusivity/equality/diversity in lower level leagues, this is putting me off putting my hand into my pocket for the team when its "representatives" have such attitudes that I know I will be more exposed to in small crowds than having the relative anonymity of a 50000 stadium.

The silence from WoSFL (and looking at the committee - not exactly a diverse bunch of people), doesn't help. Maybe they have the same opinions as some of the contributors here? It's not completely out of the question if supporters here have similar views.

Might as well stick to my "big" team which also has plenty concerning attitudes but is somewhat diluted by the cooperate and mainstream aspects of supporting a team with greater ambitions than being community-focussed, and at least have (albeit niche and half-heartedly) attempted to address some of the issues being raised in this thread.

Hey ho.

I know I said I was finished. But want to thank you for shining a light on 21st century Scottish maledom (yes I know what maledom is).

Still a place where women should know their place and be thankful for it, a place where it only became unlawful to force your partner to have sex with you 50 odd years ago.

Proud indeed.

[BFTD]

This is going swimmingly, I see. If all the rape apologists could explain their views to all their family and colleagues, that would be great. No doubt some will agree, but at least the rest will know never to let their guard down when they have to be around you.

As for the footballing rapist, the Saudis appear to be throwing money at has-beens from all over the globe, so that seems a perfect solution. Wouldn't advise committing any more rapes while you're there, though.

[Rob1885]

Just now, BTFD said:

This is going swimmingly, I see. If all the rape apologists could explain their views to all their family and colleagues, that would be great. No doubt some will agree, but at least the rest will know never to let their guard down when they have to be around you.

As for the footballing rapist, the Saudis appear to be throwing money at has-beens from all over the globe, so that seems a perfect solution. Wouldn't advise committing any more rapes while you're there, though.

What on earth is that first paragraph btw

[scottsdad]

Isn't there a mod somewhere that can shut this fucking awful thread down??