halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
Sent his boss :)
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Sent his boss :)
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
I couldn’t see why he would be a witness.
I think some misunderstand this case and expect Lord Pannick to put him on the stand and try and break the story of why PSR and the companies that control it.
This seems to me to be different to what the case is and I think our witness evidence etc. will be showing we are innocent.
The other may come a different day but I expect not.
Why ask for all the PL correspondence if you aren't going to question them about it?
Why ask for all the PL correspondence if you aren't going to question them about it?
I’m not saying no to PL, I’m saying I don’t think it will be Masters.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
I’m not saying no to PL, I’m saying I don’t think it will be Masters.
I would have thought it would absolutely be Masters, no? Can't think of one reason why it wouldn't be? May be one, I suppose.
The only disclosure from the PL would have been related to specific points - this idea that City asked for “all PL correspondence” has always been nonsense. Just doesn’t work like that.Why ask for all the PL correspondence if you aren't going to question them about it?
Seeing some people asking if city's evidence at the beginning is so strong could charges be dropped.
Different scenario but hopefully might produce some optimism.
I was in crown court on a 2 week trial (as the accused) on day 1, after the jury was sworn in, the prosecution presented its case against me and others. The judge called up the prosecution barrister and directly asked him what the case was against me. The barrister replayed a video of my actions, the judge pulled a de-niro type face saying 'really'.
I still had to go through all the process, cross examination and everything else.
The judge stated in his closing speech to the jury to basically not to find me guilty. The jury found me not guilty.
Think the point I'm making is even if it's a slam dunk for city on day one, I imagine the whole process will have to be completed and concluded.
Different scenario but hopefully might produce some optimism.
I was in crown court on a 2 week trial (as the accused) on day 1, after the jury was sworn in, the prosecution presented its case against me and others. The judge called up the prosecution barrister and directly asked him what the case was against me. The barrister replayed a video of my actions, the judge pulled a de-niro type face saying 'really'.
I still had to go through all the process, cross examination and everything else.
The judge stated in his closing speech to the jury to basically not to find me guilty. The jury found me not guilty.
Think the point I'm making is even if it's a slam dunk for city on day one, I imagine the whole process will have to be completed and concluded.
Mancini’s Pastilles
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2019
- Messages
- 2,382
- Team supported
- Manchester City
Media are in overdrive. Creaming themselves. "All our players are now plotting their exit, we will be banned from every competition, and will be lucky if the local sunday league will accept us...
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
If he hasn’t provided a witness statement then the default position is that he won’t give evidence.Having asked for all the emails, texts and Whatsapp messages in the PL's possession that mention City from 2008 onwards I would imagine it's very, very likely that Masters will be asked to explain the content of some of those, at least.
Might undermine the PL case if he doesn’t, of course. Like I say, difficult to know in the absence of sight of the evidence the PL is relying upon.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,091
Shame :)The only disclosure from the PL would have been related to specific points - this idea that City asked for “all PL correspondence” has always been nonsense. Just doesn’t work like that.
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Being an x rockape I can second thatRAF Regiment. Not allowed anywhere near the aircraft unless they are either a passenger, or guarding it. ;-)