City launch legal action against the Premier League | Club & PL reach settlement | Proceedings dropped (p1147)

Dribble said:
I also question your desire to bow, scrape, doth cap & touch forelock in respect to professional authority without question. It's weird & worrying.

Perhaps you've been a disciple of Stefan long enough to be able to step in & provide an answer as to why the police, HMRC, SFO or Companies House (to our knowledge) have yet to descend on the Etihad in respect to our alleged serious fraud, tax evasion & money laundering criminality?

I'll wait...
Click to expand...

The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
 
Coatigan said:
I would normally not even bother responding to this pish.

But, without being a condescending prick, mate, not only have you completely misunderstood what Stefan has claimed here, but you have concocted some warped reality bubble of it all. At the very least, you are on the wrong fucking thread!

If you can't follow very basic points made, I suggest you don't bother expanding the shit out of it as you have done, and then looking for odd motivation in it.

Look, not that I am or would need to 'defend' Stefan here, I myself have disagreed with his take and argued with him. Sometimes politely, sometimes tersely, sometimes sarcastically, depending on his tone, my mood, the general forum atmosphere at the time.

But I'm sorry, this level of layering that just doesn't exist there, based on things that have not actually been implied, never mind said, I feel needs called the nonsense it is.

Nonsense.

There.
Click to expand...
Well perhaps you'd like to step in & explain what Stefan has claimed for him & why the authorities haven't yet descended on the Etihad regarding our alleged criminality?

Answer me this simple question & perhaps the whole premise of FFP, PSR & APT will become clear.

On a final note, can you show me which points I've disagreed with him on? Thanks in advance.
 
Chris in London said:
The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
Click to expand...
You forgot to mention that the SFO are a pile of wank when you wrote that.
 
Dribble said:
I also question your desire to bow, scrape, doth cap & touch forelock in respect to professional authority without question. It's weird & worrying.

Perhaps you've been a disciple of Stefan long enough to be able to step in & provide an answer as to why the police, HMRC, SFO or Companies House (to our knowledge) have yet to descend on the Etihad in respect to our alleged serious fraud, tax evasion & money laundering criminality?

I'll wait...
Click to expand...
Whoosh!
 
Chris in London said:
The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
Click to expand...
FWIW I agree with this wholeheartedly
 
waspish said:
- **Overestimation by the unskilled**: People who are not skilled in a particular domain often fail to recognize their own incompetence, leading them to have an inflated view of their abilities.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what we are dealing with here.
Dribble said:
I also question your desire to bow, scrape, doth cap & touch forelock in respect to professional authority without question. It's weird & worrying.

Perhaps you've been a disciple of Stefan long enough to be able to step in & provide an answer as to why the police, HMRC, SFO or Companies House (to our knowledge) have yet to descend on the Etihad in respect to our alleged serious fraud, tax evasion & money laundering criminality?

I'll wait...
Click to expand...
Why don’t you fucking tell us your legal, football, fraud and financial expertise and experience with similar cases, like Stefan did?

I’ll wait…
 
Coatigan said:
If you don't know the answers to those, then best you leave it there and stop with these tedious lengthy murky-water potboilers.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps if you wish to stick your beak in, you can take up the mantle & tell me why after all the Serious accusations of criminal fraud levied against us, why none of the statutory bodies are beating a path to the Etihad's doors, carrying out investigations, making arrests & prosecuting City?

It's a simple enough question & one which gets to the heart of the accusations levied against us & the industry that seems to have sprouted up around it.

I'll wait...
 
KS55 said:
I’ve answered that a thousand times on this thread. Try reading, if you can. It is a simplistic suggestion you could dismiss with two seconds thought. Here’s a word you might understand: evidence. Also look up the Fraud squad’s proposed change of policy.
Click to expand...
Admittedly I've not read every inch of this thread, so perhaps you could repeat your answer, as it'll save the back & forth. Why haven't the police, HMRC, SFO & Companies House investigated City in respect to our alleged fraud & criminality (to our knowledge)?

I'll wait...
 
Dribble said:
Admittedly I've not read every inch of this thread, so perhaps you could repeat your answer, as it'll save the back & forth. Why haven't the police, HMRC, SFO & Companies House investigated City in respect to our alleged fraud & criminality (to our knowledge)?

I'll wait...
Click to expand...
While you're waiting, have a read of the FAQ's in the 115 thread.
 
Chris in London said:
The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
Click to expand...
Thank you!

Does this also apply to the other statutory authorities too?

Does this also suggest/confirm there's a world of difference between PL rules & UK Law & the two aren't mutually exclusive?
 
Didsbury Dave said:
This is exactly what we are dealing with here.

Why don’t you fucking tell us your legal, football, fraud and financial expertise and experience with similar cases, like Stefan did?

I’ll wait…
Click to expand...
I don't need a professional legal qualification to ask why the authorities aren't investigating City for these many serious accusations of industrial scale fraud, money laundering & tax evasion.

Commonsense is all you need, & I suspect the answer will get us to the very root of the witch hunt (that I can see) against City.

Perhaps you'd like a stab at answering the question on Stefan's behalf?
 
pauls said:
Difficult to decide if he's the worst Client journalist shill ,or it's Herbert, Delaney,Cross x2,Wilson,Roney,Ducker,McConnell, Jackson, Curtis x2,Winter,Roan,Stone Cunningham,Slot,Sweeney or he's just a Rag ba*****!
Apologies if I've missed anybody out from our objective media!
Clear and organised!
Click to expand...
Wallace in on a par with the rest of the clowns and that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Chris in London said:
The following has been in the 115 charges FAQs thread since January 2024.

“If fraud is alleged, why haven’t City been charged by the criminal authorities?

It would have been unusual for (say) the Serious Fraud Office to commence an investigation in a case like this where what is alleged is a breach of the PL’s internal rules. However they tend not to announce it from the rooftops when they are commencing an investigation, especially if that would result in (for instance) evidence being destroyed.

If the charges are proved (and there is no appeal), it is quite probable that a criminal allegation would be launched. Given how high-profile this case is, it would be difficult for the SFO to resist the pressure to launch their own investigation.

However, the standard of proof in a criminal case is even higher – it is beyond reasonable doubt – and the age of some of the charges means that it would be very difficult to persuade a jury that the accounts signed off 12 or 13 years ago were knowingly/fraudulently mis-stated. Moreover, if City lost it is almost inevitable that there would be an appeal, which would mean that the events in question were even more historic.

Never say never, but criminal charges seems very very unlikely even if the PL charges are successful.“
Click to expand...
What could Manchester City have been guilty of in the real world? If companies in Abu Dhabi received money from external parties to sponsor Manchester City, it wouldn’t be a crime in England as long as the revenue was properly recorded, would it?
 
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