Correct re the burden of proof However the KCs will want to be absolutely certain that the evidence is 100% correct it’s not some corner shop they are judging upon the people involved couldn’t be any more powerful and influential with stellar reputations The KCs have worked hard for their reputations and will not be prepared to damage themMy use of the term "kangaroo" may trigger legal professionals however many have posted on here that City's fate will be determined by the "interpretation" and "judgements" of just three individuals. In addition, the IC where the standard of proof is less than a court of Law means the risks for City in this context ie existential, are too high. The prospect of relegation, loss of ECL revenue and compensation costs to N other clubs is existential. If the case can be heard in a Court of Law re false accounting we should try that option to raise the required standard of proof.
I wonder what Master's recommendation will be, as a penalty, to the in dependent panel?The very definition of clear and organised. I'm sure that those involved won't be swayed by an orchestrated, relentless and one-sided media campaign against our Club...
...oh wait.
It is, but has anyone ever stopped to think why would City continue to remain quiet other than their opening statement while allowing these jackasses in the media to continue running their mouths?As I said in a previous post, I cannot see how City can have a fair hearing when every Tom, Dick and Harriet across the media has already pronounced us guilty and passed sentence.
There is a reason why, in proper trials before the King's courts, the media are not allowed to do this. Imagine being accused of (say) murder and every paper, every online source spent months saying how guilty you are and how you deserve 50 years inside. You would not stand a chance before a jury, which is why this sort of trial by media is illegal and called contempt of court. The judge would throw the case out of court if such a prejudice arose.
The process is a fucking disgrace.
Assuming City are guilty then?We are a major problem. To the fa's love affair with the rags and the dippers we will be removed one way or another.
Unfortunately I can't see anything other than relegation.
Not that I'd care no var or tourists
If the rules they're accusing us of breaking require that we'd have had to committed fraud then they do need to prove we were fraudulent. Thank god some of you are not a part of our defense team...The commission isn't set up to find us guilty of fraud. We only stand accused of breaking PL rules. That's the only thing commission will look at.
WTF is wrong with you mate?We are a major problem. To the fa's love affair with the rags and the dippers we will be removed one way or another.
Unfortunately I can't see anything other than relegation.
Not that I'd care no var or tourists
Cityitis. It’s a terrible disease.WTF is wrong with you mate?
I'd say...Cityitis. It’s a terrible disease.