Green, Whyte et al hearings thread (Aberdeen 21st Jan: 10am)

[pete 2,499]

I doubt we can wiggle out of the dodgy contracts unless it is proven Ashley was in cahoots with them all.

[colinstein 294]

I doubt we can wiggle out of the dodgy contracts unless it is proven Ashley was in cahoots with them all.

 

I suppose if we can show Lliambias, Leach and Easdale were working in the best interest of Sports Direct and not Rangers with these contracts, we might have a case. There seems to be previous with this sort of arrangement with other companies.

[calscot 0]

I suppose if we can show Lliambias, Leach and Easdale were working in the best interest of Sports Direct and not Rangers with these contracts, we might have a case. There seems to be previous with this sort of arrangement with other companies.

 

If that's not fraud then the law needs changed to include it. I can't see how we can allow that to be legal - not just for Rangers but for any business.

Edited January 6, 2016 by calscot

[boabie 230]

If that's not fraud then the law needs changed to include it. I can't see how we can allow that to be legal - not just for Rangers but for any business.

 

Had Green kept all the shares to himself and made a deal with Ashley there would have been no problem. The minute he received money from a share issue and began what seems very much like acting against the interests of the other shareholders I would reckon everything is up for scrutiny and challenge. That's to say nothing about the alleged earlier conspiracy between Whyte, Green and D&P.

[andy steel 0]

Looking at that the list of charges, you have to wonder about how thorough and (in)effective the process is when Lord Hodge subsequently asked D&P to provide an explanation/report regards the alleged conflict of interest that was made in the BBC documentary of May 2012.......Then didn't take it any further.

 

Of course they are just charges at this point, rather than declarations of guilt. But I'd like to read what, if any, reasons Lord Menzies gave for his decision.

[forlanssister 3,050]

Looking at that the list of charges, you have to wonder about how thorough and (in)effective the process is when Lord Hodge subsequently asked D&P to provide an explanation/report regards the alleged conflict of interest that was made in the BBC documentary of May 2012.......Then didn't take it any further.

 

IIRC Lord Hodge made it plain when he ok'd D&P's fees that that was not the end of the matter and pointedly reminded them they were still under his jurisdiction

[govan_derriere 3]

Confirmation that the hearings are continued in Aberdeen on 21st.

 

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current-business/court-rolls/court-roll?id=2d47fda6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

 

 

 

 

Aberdeen HC

Case Session Date Proceedings Case Reference PF Reference Court Name

HMA v Paul CLARK 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

HMA v Charles GREEN 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

HMA v David GRIER 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

HMA v David WHITEHOUSE 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

HMA v Craig WHYTE 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

HMA v Gary WITHEY 21-JAN-16 Preliminary Hearing Continued SCS/2015-152941 CO14000356 Aberdeen HC

 

 

There has been some suggestion by James Doleman on Twitter that Green, Whyte etc do not need to attend in person!

[Frankie 8,151]

[tweet]690103038871244800[/tweet]

[ian1964 10,419]

James Doleman will be there to keep us all informed,paid for by the BHEASTS!

[Bluedell 5,345]

What is Doleman? Why was he picked to be the one paid to report? Is he somehow qualified to do it?