PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

HorlockofFiretopMountain said:
Not sure if they were posted when you looked, but you need to read the replies to the tweet ..... a very underhand and snidey move by Mr Harris, which appears to have backfired on him
Click to expand...
Yes, posted before things developed but my point remains albeit in a slightly modified way!
 
It’s astonishing to read Harris’s Twitter output (via Stefan’s replies as Harris has blocked me) after having listened to the podcast. Stefan’s measured legal objectivity demolished Harris’s attempts at sensationalism but, fair dos, Harris was polite enough during the podcast.
However Harris’s wilful refusal to understand the concept of a litigation settlement and his subsequent pathetic attempts to belittle Stefan on Twitter and his frankly childish and embarrassing use of emojis totally undermines his credibility.
Whether or not City have breached the rules, Harris’s opinions on the subject are utterly worthless.
What a strange person he must be.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...
Take him to the cleaners, call the idiot out.

It's about time someone stopped this prick in his tracks as he is toxic with his views on city.

Do it mate.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...
It's a pathetic attempt by him to discredit you, which now, unfortunately, will be used by others of the same persuasion.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...

You should consider doing something about these comments. You’re a professional and also now have some presence in the media. These comments could impact future work offerings.
 
manimanc said:
He's an absolute barmpot. How can he have a civilised discussion with someone then hours later go on social media and turn everything around!!

I hope that other podcasts have noted what a bitter and twisted bellend this character is and stay well away. He's absolutely delusional.
Click to expand...
he'll more than likely get more work out of it as people will watch and laugh at him going on with himself
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...

I've felt a bit sorry for him in the past, even though he copied a section of a rant I had about him on here and posted it on his Twitter page. Obviously it was twisted to infer I was sending him abuse when it was nothing of the sort. I was just expressing the view many have that the club should sue him, albeit worded a bit more strongly lol. He said a sympathetic City fan sent it to him but I believe he pops on here himself.

The man seems to have a pathological hatred of all things City and anything or anyone related to City. It's very strange, I wonder why?

@projectriver , you're the legal man, but I don't think you can let what he's tweeted go. It could do irreparable damage to your reputation and career.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...

Fairy play mate, I've seen a few of your interviews and you represent yourself and City fans really well. You're measured, articulate and professional in how you conduct yourself, unfortunately not everyone holds themselves to the same standards and as other posters have mentioned, it's no surprise that the nonsense NH is now spouting on twitter wasn't put forward to you directly during the interview as he knows you'd have run rings around him.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...
I would seriously consider taking him to court and ensure he has retracted the comments and called out they were lies. Defamation of character i assume, although I'm no legal guru
 
norman said:
It’s astonishing to read Harris’s Twitter output (via Stefan’s replies as Harris has blocked me) after having listened to the podcast. Stefan’s measured legal objectivity demolished Harris’s attempts at sensationalism but, fair dos, Harris was polite enough during the podcast.
However Harris’s wilful refusal to understand the concept of a litigation settlement and his subsequent pathetic attempts to belittle Stefan on Twitter and his frankly childish and embarrassing use of emojis totally undermines his credibility.
Whether or not City have breached the rules, Harris’s opinions on the subject are utterly worthless.
What a strange person he must be.
Click to expand...
Prior to the game at Luton last night, I did and reacted exactly as you did - listened to the full podcast; thought Stefan handled calmly and brilliantly each and every attempt to accuse City of some level of wrong-doing; and gave Harris credit for responding to the debate in a polite manner.

Now, to read the subsequent Twitter posts that Harris has put into the public domain regarding Stefan's contribution to the discussion, together with (it seems to me) some rather random, unsubstantiated claims about his employment history, has frankly astonished me too.

Harris clearly isn't a full shilling..
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...

It isn’t debatable. It is the very definition of libel and I am stunned anyone with a background in journalism would publish it.

Worth adding that a retraction and apology on the same platform as the libellous was published (as is your right to request) would do more damage to him than any financial punishment.
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't wait to see if his attacks continue. He's not deleted it and you should demand an apology and retraction as the minimum.
 
norman said:
It’s astonishing to read Harris’s Twitter output (via Stefan’s replies as Harris has blocked me) after having listened to the podcast. Stefan’s measured legal objectivity demolished Harris’s attempts at sensationalism but, fair dos, Harris was polite enough during the podcast.
However Harris’s wilful refusal to understand the concept of a litigation settlement and his subsequent pathetic attempts to belittle Stefan on Twitter and his frankly childish and embarrassing use of emojis totally undermines his credibility.
Whether or not City have breached the rules, Harris’s opinions on the subject are utterly worthless.
What a strange person he must be.
Click to expand...
Why does he deserve credit for remaining polite on a podcast?
 
projectriver said:
Lie 3 is clearly libellous I'd say. It is an outright lie and carries an inference seeking to damage my reputation. I don't think it is even debatable.
Click to expand...

Just sue and finish him! What an absolute disgraceful lie. All because you made him out to be the fool that he is on a podcast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top