And who runs Mubadala?View attachment 99130
Always thought the same , basically they will be calling Mansour and Khaldoon liars . This goes well beyond a football club .
the problem with that strategy is that it usually indicates one of two things, it either indicates an absolute slam dunk of a case where they have no intention of letting the settle because everything is so watertight OR that the evidence is so shaky that you have gone for shock and awe tactics to make the other party so nervous that they take the charges because the other parties perceived confidence is so much that it isnt worth fighting which is the tactic of the bully, i would suggest the pl case falls very much into the latter category.
Which pretty well sums up most of the media (both) and red-shirt fans (just thick).Anyone who substantively conflates City and Everton is either thick, dishonest or possibly both.
the funny thing with the bobby one is that he has said that nobody has contacted him, i wonder why, surely if one of the main points of your prosecution is illegal payments to a person, the first thing youd want to do is talk to that person, they havent and that wouldnt be because it would blow their main charge out of the water would it?I would imagine that all evidence is disclosed in advance so City know exactly what is in front of them. The PL cannot just turn up on day one and say “Here’s Gladys who worked in the laundry room & in 2012 she saw Khaldoon handing Mancini £2m in cash & heard him say “FFS Bobby boy,don’t tell anybody””
As someone pointed out to me yesterday, IF we are found guilty it will be of breaching rule blah blah blah, nowhere will it ever mention the word fraud but it will mean exactly that. I seem to recall when Ashley was running Newcastle into the ground they got raided by HMRC, it all went quiet after that so not sure if it just fizzled out, but IF the EPL and fellow travellers like Parry and Gill had evidence we had committed fraud the rozzers would have raided the Etihad a long time ago. Unless there is a smoking gun, very unlikely, this is just a smear campaign that will run its course.IF the club was charged with fraud then realistically people are looking at jail time, this is what really makes me believe that the PL dont have anything, if they had the evidence for these charges they would and should have turned it over to the CPS who could have obtained a legal warrant to turn over everything they needed to prove criminality, why havent they?
Are you saying there aren't just three issues at the heart of this? Well obviously we don't know with 100% certainty but the evidence even in the wording of the charges seems to indicate that there are, as they specifically mention them.It really doesn't though.
I suspect that this is where it will end-up on appeal.I'd say a maximum 6-point deduction and a 2 year transfer ban, plus an agreed plan to get their finances under control, would have been the appropriate penalty.
Thanks for the time and effort to respond.My reply is incomplete. The full answer should continue as follows.
When the charges are in proper form, the party alleging misconduct should disclose its supporting evidence. The tactical burden shifts to the other side when the charges have been finalised, and all the evidence has been disclosed. The other side may then respond and, if necessary, call evidence in rebuttal. The burden of proving remains on the party alleging misconduct throughout. The case will only be established if, at the end of the hearing, the evidence shows that the allegations are likely true on the balance of probabilities, i.e. guilt is more likely than not.
The principles I describe above are based on notions of simple fairness. Without rules that modify them, the common law will require their application.
The problem with the current proceedings is that they have, as I understand it, been framed in such a way as to exclude a review by a judge for procedural irregularities and unfairness. The club will have to trust its vastly experienced team of lawyers to see that the proceedings conform to these basics.