So I am ignoring your first response as it completely missed the point, other than to say:
Research for yourself the requirement to report fraud rather than ask me to justify it. I freely admit I may be wrong about anything, but you think I am wrong, show me why.
Imho, the SFO isn't going to get involved if there is an ongoing civil case which will determine if there has been a fraud or not. Why would they? They can wait until it's finished, review the evidence presented in the report and then decide whether or not to proceed on the basis of a higher level of proof. I doubt they have the time or resources just to open cases based on what is in the press.
And now your second response.
They haven't "chickened" out of using the word fraud. There is no need to. They have followed their procedure and simply referred to the IC a list of rules they allege have been breached.
And the reason it's taking so long? Every legal person in here said it would take 2, 3, 4 years and that is what is happening. Simply put, the PL has brought forward a complicated case.
Also, I never said I thought the PL themselves think they will prove these allegations. My hypothesis is that the club put them in a position where they had to shit or get off the can. And they chose to shit.
So well done for deliberately ignoring half my post.
You made a claim you cannot substantiate not me but let’s ignoring it.
As I say let’s assume they do not have a duty to report.
Don’t you think they would just because they should and to stop any subsequent bad publicity ? Wouldn’t the SFO investigate off its own bat for the same reason ?
I think in later posts by you or others it’s Ben suggested they do not have the evidence to deal with the SFO yet but surely they have to have something to bring the case to the panel ?
Do you not think someone else would ? Harris Delany Liverpool United a fan a journalists or pundit ? They dare not even use the word why ?
You say that the SFO etc won’t get involved when there is an active civil case but I think it is more the other way round civil case stops SFO get involved. It’s a crime certainly in regulated industries to tip people off to an investigation. Now it might be that no investigation so no tipping off and you might argue the original tipping off was done by der sperigel. But by affectively calling city frauds you have tipped them of to potential investigation by authorities and if they had done something wrong the need to cover one’s tracks
You say they haven’t chucked out of the word fraud but they still could have used the word and perhaps should have for clarity
I find it interesting that they have created rules that require the breaking of the law but won’t use the correct legal term and even they think people will break the law in order to get round down rules on spending in order to buy another over priced player or two despite having passed fit and proper persons test.
I don’t dispute that it’s complicated case as such or that it will take ages my point about time was more the initial investigation. To prove or even bring to tribunal such a case you would need a smoking gun if you had smoking gun you would not take so long to bring to tribunal
So we both agree that the premier league do not think they have a case I take it we both agree the accusations amount to fraud your just arguing that the lack of anything goin got connect to such an allegation does not prove anything.
Why do you think they decided to go with a case they don’t believe in ?
Would you make some predictions as to the outcome ?
Thanks for your considered response
