115 Charges - FAQs

cheekybids said:
And the reporting making out we got off on a technicality.
Click to expand...
The "technicality" being that there was no evidence.

To me the statement of having no evidence is not a technicality, it is a simple matter of fact. But these cunts can't or won't accept facts, they try to justify their false claims failing by claiming "technicalities".
 
Yeah but this time they don’t need evidence. They just have to think we probably did what we’re accused of. Theyl Fuck us over big time! But as someone else said on here earlier, it will all end up in a real court one day. One of the most powerful men in the world has his reputation on the line here. No way he’ll take it lying down
 
ayrshire_blue said:
This one? Again with credit to Stefan, as you can see his twitter handle watermarked.

View attachment 106107
Click to expand...
Not read that for a while but it's a reminder that UEFA's case was based on innuendo and collapsed very quickly because there was just no evidence. An absolute disgrace. If it was a criminal case or even a normal civil dispute this would never have even got to court let alone result in a sanction. And yet just last week that snake Ceferin stated: "We were right."
 
Bald fraud said:
Yeah but this time they don’t need evidence. They just have to think we probably did what we’re accused of. Theyl Fuck us over big time! But as someone else said on here earlier, it will all end up in a real court one day. One of the most powerful men in the world has his reputation on the line here. No way he’ll take it lying down
Click to expand...
As is clear from the CAS judgement UEFA did not even know who the recpient of the first email was because it was marked for the attention of HH which could have applied to a number of different people. CAS also stressed that the first email was sent two years before FFP was brought in so there was no issue with any of the content of that email. That is about as "irrefutable" as it gets as Khaldoon has pointed out. So why did the PL leadership decide to re-open the investigation? It can only have been a decision in bad faith. When this is over the leadership of the PL must be held accountable. It is very similar to the Post Office scandal where the organisation did its own investigation and acted in bad faith.
 
Last edited:
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.