rbr 1,247 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 http://www.clyde1.com/on-air/superscoreboard/listen-again/ 6 mins 30 secs in on the thursday 28th show , brilliant 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,117 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Thanks for that. I feel a whole lot better having listened to that. This is far from over. A new chapter begins. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,279 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 ALAS, someone seems to act. Go on Brian, you'd get my money to finance you investigation! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
foggy dewhurst 0 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 well spoken brian a man after my own heart 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Thoroughly enjoyed SSB last night.... Jim Ra Tim & Andy Walker desperately clinging to the view that we committed a most heinous crime - we were furtive, sleekit & DELIBERATELY didn't tell the SPL about the tomes of extra financial & legally binding documentation. In fact the situation was more like "do we need to tell the SPL about these letters??? Nah, they're fine!!!" 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTP 0 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I think Andy Walker is still stressing how SERIOUS the crime was ............................ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker 886 Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Thoroughly enjoyed SSB last night.... Jim Ra Tim & Andy Walker desperately clinging to the view that we committed a most heinous crime - we were furtive, sleekit & DELIBERATELY didn't tell the SPL about the tomes of extra financial & legally binding documentation. In fact the situation was more like "do we need to tell the SPL about these letters??? Nah, they're fine!!!" I actually think that if the fine from yesterday was legally contested it would probably be overturned. The insinuation was, like you say, that the payments weren't declared in order to avoid drawing unwanted attention to the EBT scheme. Whether that's true or not, I don't see how it can be proven. SDM has already responded by saying that the reason they weren't declared was simply that, since they were loans, the rule didn't apply to them. That's a cast-iron defence as far as I can see. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bazaar Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I actually think that if the fine from yesterday was legally contested it would probably be overturned. The insinuation was, like you say, that the payments weren't declared in order to avoid drawing unwanted attention to the EBT scheme. Whether that's true or not, I don't see how it can be proven. SDM has already responded by saying that the reason they weren't declared was simply that, since they were loans, the rule didn't apply to them. That's a cast-iron defence as far as I can see. Perhaps, but crazy (IMO) as what would you wish to highlight any error in the investigation? It could perhaps lead to others saying if the fine is wrong, the whole investigation is undermined too. P.s. I have no legal training, just my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post 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.