ShorehamCitizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2023
- Messages
- 1,375
- Team supported
- Man City
All while Johnny Taxpayer fits the bill?But who will feed the kids and sort out books for them to read ?
All while Johnny Taxpayer fits the bill?But who will feed the kids and sort out books for them to read ?
I hope he has a show on a radio station now.They used the term "boss" in order to be vague about who the article is pointing the finger at.
Me finks its higher up, a club owner from the south was spotted, leaving a police station a few months ago.
[Mods feel free to delete or edit if inappropriate]
I just wonder how many haven't been caught where the offences have been known about but supressed umder a "D" notice?Would be interesting if someone ran an article and investigation on the behaviour of BBC star employees ?
Yes, some eventually got caught for their abhorrent behaviour, but they were protected by the upper echelons...
I thought we stopped paying him because he broke his bail conditions and that meant he wasn't able to play. We were playing him long after the allegations were known to the club. I say playing him. I mean giving him his customary 1 game every couple of months before he gets injured again.Think we stopped his pay due to bringing club into disrepute. His contract conveniently came to an end as the trial finished. Think that is why he is suing us. Think our learned resident boffins would know better.
And interviewed by the Met Police so involved with a Cockney Club
Plus you can't actually sue the police for being incorrectly charged and investigatedFrom Wikipedia: "On 14 April 2023, Greater Manchester Police confirmed that no further action would be taken against Gylfi. Gylfi's lawyer said that the player would not sue British authorities over the investigation."
Looks like they've ruined his career for a case they couldn't prove. But strange that he's not suing, suggesting that he's not too confident a civil court would side with him?
We stopped playing him as soon as he was charged. Quite rightly, but it does open the club to a potential legal problemI thought we stopped paying him because he broke his bail conditions and that meant he wasn't able to play. We were playing him long after the allegations were known to the club. I say playing him. I mean giving him his customary 1 game every couple of months before he gets injured again.