"I have in my hands a piece of paper"

[D'Artagnan 173]

Perhaps the only thing which surprised about Charles Greenâ??s appearance before the SFA beaks last week is that the case was declared â??Not Provenâ?.

 

Green had been charged with bringing the game into disrepute for suggesting, during a media interview, that the current outcome and sanctions of the investigation into Rangers use of EBTâ??s had already been pre-determined by the SPL.

 

Unfortunately for the governing bodies of Scottish Football documentary evidence exists which supports Greenâ??s assertion.

 

Reports in some of the tabloids of course suggest that Greenâ??s defence was helped by SFL Chief Executive David Longmuirâ??s testimony â?? I wonder if the aforesaid Mr Longmuir took the stand and declared in true Chamberlainesque fashion â??I have in my hands a piece of paperâ?.

 

Perhaps that was more than enough for the judicial panel.

 

But thatâ??s not enough. Not nearly enough.

 

A fundamental principle of Scottish and European Law has been breached â?? the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. And yet there seems to be dearth of discussion around this fact. Sure there has been some criticism in some quarters of the SFA/SPL handling of the whole Rangers crisis, but few seem to be prepared to comment on this breach of a fundamental rule of law.

 

In fact Iâ??m surprised that internet legal eagle Paul McConville has not brought this up on his blog â??Random thoughts on Scots Law. After all, a quick review of his topics of discussion show that he has managed 291 random thoughts on Rangers alone, notwithstanding 109 random thoughts on Charles Green, as well as other matters and individuals concerning our club. It will of course come as no surprise to many of you that this apparently fundamental breach of Scottish Lawâ??s most basic of principles by Scottish footballâ??s governing bodies has not managed a single bleep on the random thought radar of Mr McConville. Or do I do him a discredit ? I wouldnâ??t be the first of course.

 

That presumption of innocence is of course essential to ensuring a fair trial or hearing, which again is a fundamental rule of both Scottish and European Law.

 

Failing to adopt such a stance at the beginning of any investigation is likely to prejudice any future case. It affects briefings, it affects investigations and, of course, it affects investigators. In recent times convictions have been quashed because the appellant has been able to demonstrate that some evidence has been withheld during trials. Investigators have to be objective, fair and present all evidence to the prosecuting authorities.

 

This can only be done if they are correctly briefed at the outset of any investigation and maintain an open mind throughout. One wonders what kind of briefing the investigators from Harper MacLeod legal firm received from the SFA/SPL at the outset of the Rangers enquiry.

 

So if we were to take a hypothetical situationâ?¦for instance one of those open-minded, fair and impartial investigators were to say to Rangers representatives â??You bastards have been cheating us for yearsâ?â?¦.. then I very much doubt that would demonstrate that a fair, open minded and impartial investigation had taken place.

 

Perhaps one day in the future before another court, Mr Longmuir will get to present that piece of paper. And when that day comes I have a feeling it wont be the reputation of Rangers FC which is on trial.

[Zappa 0]

Another great read D'Artagnan!