Doc 280 Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Ashley lawyers must have some brass neck to even spout this shite. The case against Dave King shows that they have brass neck in spade. Lets hope this judge sees through it too. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Ashley is desperate to get a ruling in a court of law, that can separate him from one or other of his companies that is involved in these dodgy deals to rip the club off. He owns the company has most of the shares, or all of the shares in the case of MASH. But wants a court to rule the company is one thing and Mike Ashley is another, but we all know he makes the decisions, gives the orders and gave the loans to the club. But it seems very important to him to have some minor distinction of separation that he can apply in any further court case against the club? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,599 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Ashley is desperate to get a ruling in a court of law, that can separate him from one or other of his companies that is involved in these dodgy deals to rip the club off. He owns the company has most of the shares, or all of the shares in the case of MASH. But wants a court to rule the company is one thing and Mike Ashley is another, but we all know he makes the decisions, gives the orders and gave the loans to the club. But it seems very important to him to have some minor distinction of separation that he can apply in any further court case against the club? I presume that he would use it to try and prevent the club from re-introducing the proposal that prevents him from voting at the AGMs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,599 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Ashley lawyers must have some brass neck to even spout this shite. Their QC, Craig Sandison, is highly rated. They appear to have switched after their last one performed so badly in the SD v King case. He's arrogant though (as most of them are) but doesn't tone it down which can piss off the judges. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,830 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) From SOS Craig Houston Has Somers committed perjury? Somers witness statement today in court claimed he had no dealings with MASH or Ashle y before the MASH loan was signed. Did he forget the email I exposed and he attempted to have me charged for putting out in December 2014? It told Ashleys lawyer they had to improve offer. Peter Watson (SE lawyer) contacted me on behalf of Somers and RIFC then I was later questioned at Helen St police office. I remember it well. Mr Somers and his lawyer invited Police Scotland to Ibrox to discuss the matter. They never at any time claimed the email was fake but only asked repeatedly for me to disclose the source. The claim that I had stolen it proved it was not a fake and allowed several newspapers to refer to the email in the following days. You are a liar Mr Somers, I expect to hear from your lawyers if i am incorrect in my description. You also claimed in your witness statement that Llambias was suggested by Ashley or Barnes yet you told us at the AGM he went through a selection process. Is lying via a witness statement in the court of session a crime of perjury??? Here is the email again Mr Somers, just in case it slipped your mind. It certainly hasnt slipped mine. I did expect time in a cell as I wouldnt reveal my source. You lost. Edited February 5, 2016 by BEARGER 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,830 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Not sure a witness statement untruth would be the same as lying under oath in court? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Not sure a witness statement untruth would be the same as lying under oath in court? If it's an affidavit it is. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Their QC, Craig Sandison, is highly rated. They appear to have switched after their last one performed so badly in the SD v King case. He's arrogant though (as most of them are) but doesn't tone it down which can piss off the judges. At the moment the judge seems totally pissed off with the SFA QC who, despite having dynamite evidence, is floundering. Unless that is just Doleman's slant on things. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Breaking: Rangers oldco administrators have five charges dropped in fraud case. Edited February 5, 2016 by andy steel 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Breaking: Rangers oldco administrators have five charges dropped in fraud case. Could be they helped the prosecutor with his enquiry? 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.