BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) Is it just me or do others find this whole spectacle particularly unedifying and embarrassing at a time when we have not been short of embarrassments? I agree with the objectives of the SOS: 1) Keep the stadium in clubs name to avoid Coventry situation 2) clear accounts which prove proper running of the club 3) a board that keep the club off the front pages and are above reproach who wouldn't; but what is the point of having an objective to keep the Club off the front pages if at the same time your own activities put it on the same front pages? Did Mr Houston think he could approach Mr Easdale at the Director's Box after the match and not find pictures and a report in the Record; or did he just not think at all? If Mr Houston somehow thinks he is a martyr because he refuses to be told that you cannot call a person with a spent conviction for VAT fraud a crook or allow others to use your web site for that purpose and letters go to his parents house and he publishes the whole sorry saga, then I think he is sadly mistaken. All he needed to do was say sorry, it won't happen again. He and others can have whatever opinion they like of Mr A Easdale but there are limits to what you can publish or allow to be published and it seems he may have crossed that line. It's clear that he has little sympathy on here at least. Why not just point out the error to the lawyers and give them your address for future communication. Surely that would be the obvious way to stop further correspondence going to his parents house? The lawyers aren't going to serve papers by email. Sending Sheriff Officers does sound a bit extreme but the answer to that lies in Mr Houston's hands. As Bluebear rightly points out if Mr Houston has evidence, even prima facie evidence, of a breach of the Data Protection Act then he should write to the Information Commissioner not confront the alleged culprit in public. Of course Mr Easdale could clear all this up quite easily simply by stating how he obtained Mr Houston's parents' address. However the fact that apparently he doesn't feel obliged to do that doesn't make him guilty of any offence. That said surely he should have stood down from his position as Chair of the Football Club Board whilst the investigation was taking place and if there is a further investigation then he should think about the Club first and his own vanity second. Mr Houston might want to consider whether pursuing this in the manner that he has done aids or hinders the otherwise worthwhile SOS campaign. Edited March 15, 2014 by BrahimHemdani Put suggested response in italics 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 Rather than putting all this in the public domain, it would be a better idea to provide a summary of events to the Information Commissioner asking for an investigation. http://www.itspublicknowledge.info/ContactSIC/Contact.aspx Data protection is a very serious issue, and to my layman's eyes, there would appear to be a case of offences having being committed under the Data Protection Act (1998) Bluebear is absolutely correct. A serious breach of the Data Protection act is liable to a fine of up to half a million pounds and may, depending on what is done with the information, constitute a criminal offense. I would write a wee letter to the Information Commissioner: http://ico.org.uk/complaints/handling As for sending sherrif officers to your parents house, I'd be fairly relaxed about the likelihood of that. They only have powers to enforce a court order or deliver papers so if they did go to your parents house they'd have exactly the same powers to interrogate your folks as I or next door's Beagle would have. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 If i suspected Mr Easdale had illegally given out my parents address I suspect I would to seek him out for talks. As would many I'm sure. As for approaching the authorities that's explained in the text and the aims of the sos. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 At least this guy is actually trying to do something and is tackling things head on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 Did Mr Houston think he could approach Mr Easdale at the Director's Box after the match and not find pictures and a report in the Record; or did he just not think at all? Surely your ire should be aimed towards Sandy Easdale for it was he who agreed to Craig Houston via a steward approaching him for a chat? It's not like he's chasing away good Bears who want to invest £millions in Rangers then boasting about the fact eh? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) At least this guy is ........ is tackling things head on. No one could accuse him of being shy that's for sure. BTW, I spoke to Craig in the street before the match and said as much to him, which he agreed. I also said that whilst I agreed with the SoS objectives I did not always agree with their methods. If I get the chance I will tell him my view on this as well; so I am not hiding. Edited March 14, 2014 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 Is it just me or do others find this whole spectacle particularly unedifying and embarrassing at a time when we have not been short of embarrassments? Nope its not just you BH. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 (edited) Surely your ire should be aimed towards Sandy Easdale for it was he who agreed to Craig Houston via a steward approaching him for a chat? It's not like he's chasing away good Bears who want to invest £millions in Rangers then boasting about the fact eh? I wasn't aware of that but I don't think it really matters because I don't think Mr Houston should have approached him in public, with or without permission. I did also say that Mr A Easdale should have stepped down whist the internal investigation was taking place; should step down if there is an IC investigation; and IMO his position as a Director of the Football Club would be untenable if he is found guilty of such an offence. Whislt I am confident that your last remark is not aimed at anyone in particular; nonetheless the irony of the situation was not lost on me. Edited March 15, 2014 by BrahimHemdani 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 14, 2014 Share Posted March 14, 2014 perhaps both should step down from their roles involving the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 15, 2014 Share Posted March 15, 2014 perhaps both should step down from their roles involving the club. Both the Easdales or Mr A Easdale and Mr C Houston? 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.