Manchester City Forums
http://www.mancityforum.co.uk/forum/

Tottenham Hotspur
http://www.mancityforum.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8725		 Page 11 of 12
Author:  South East Citizen [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:31 am ]
Post subject: 
Probably more damaging to his chances of getting the England job than anything else.
Author:  Winston_Smith [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Ignorance is no defence or mitigation (Darlo?), if he didn't pay tax on it then he will be found guilty IMO.

It should stop him from getting the England job but who knows with the FA, they seem happy to have Terry captain us at Euro 2012 with a racism charge hanging over him.
Author:  Barna Azul [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:47 am ]
Post subject: 
Winston_Smith wrote:
Ignorance is no defence or mitigation (Darlo?), if he didn't pay tax on it then he will be found guilty IMO.

It should stop him from getting the England job but who knows with the FA, they seem happy to have Terry captain us at Euro 2012 with a racism charge hanging over him.


Didnt stop Terry venables leaving spurs for England!:whistle:
Author:  Markered Man [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:52 am ]
Post subject: 
I am led to believe that they wouldn't have bothered prosecuting if there wasn't a pretty good chance of conviction. The pair them are making themselves loook like a right pair of bellends but that is better than doing porridge.
Author:  DarloBlue [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Winston_Smith wrote:
Ignorance is no defence or mitigation (Darlo?), if he didn't pay tax on it then he will be found guilty IMO.

It should stop him from getting the England job but who knows with the FA, they seem happy to have Terry captain us at Euro 2012 with a racism charge hanging over him.


It depends - if Redknapp is trying to spin it that his accountant was the one who committed the crime, then I'd imagine that that is potentially a workable defence if he really had as little input into his finances as he claims; that his accountant isn't on trial (to my knowledge) for aiding and abetting makes me question whether the investigators gave much credence to this defence though.

All merely speculation though.
Author:  Barna Azul [ Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
DarloBlue wrote:
It depends - if Redknapp is trying to spin it that his accountant was the one who committed the crime, then I'd imagine that that is potentially a workable defence if he really had as little input into his finances as he claims; that his accountant isn't on trial (to my knowledge) for aiding and abetting makes me question whether the investigators gave much credence to this defence though.

All merely speculation though.


He comes accross as a right imbecile if anything. How he manages football clubs ill never know. Sounds like he struggles to tie his shoe laces and then he opens his mouth and all is confirmed. :rolleyes:
Author:  Gallagheresque [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:34 am ]
Post subject: 
seems a verdict maybe immenent RE: Catflap.
Author:  KickerConspiracy [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:36 am ]
Post subject: 
DarloBlue wrote:
It depends - if Redknapp is trying to spin it that his accountant was the one who committed the crime, then I'd imagine that that is potentially a workable defence if he really had as little input into his finances as he claims; that his accountant isn't on trial (to my knowledge) for aiding and abetting makes me question whether the investigators gave much credence to this defence though.

All merely speculation though.


Whats he looking at if guilty?
Author:  Gallagheresque [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:37 am ]
Post subject: 
Not guilty of All charges
Author:  DarloBlue [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:37 am ]
Post subject: 
Not guilty. Our next England manager, then.
Author:  South East Citizen [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:38 am ]
Post subject: 
Wonder how many brown paper bags had to change hands to ensure that verdict.
Author:  KickerConspiracy [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:42 am ]
Post subject: 
Gallagheresque wrote:
Not guilty of All charges


Travesty.:mad:
Author:  BiscuitBlueCheese [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:43 am ]
Post subject: 
booooooooooooo
Author:  South East Citizen [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:48 am ]
Post subject: 
So it turns out his dog did open the account after all?
Author:  gibbonicus_andronicus [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
what the fuck? how the fuck is that dodgy fucking bastard not guilty?
Author:  Tresidentevil [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Obviously not proven beyond doubt that he was guilty. Actus reus clearly not an issue, because it wouldn't be in court otherwise (the guilty act)? Mens rea not so sure (the guilty mind)? Obviously he didn't intent to avoid tax, or if he did it couldn't be proven well enough.
Author:  Markered Man [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
That smells a bit dodgy to me.
Author:  gibbonicus_andronicus [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
more likely the jury was knobbled.

didn't intend to avoid tax? why did he fail to declare it then, why did he deny knowledge of going to bastard monaco to set the account up?

bollock chopped brown envelope filling barrow pushing wheeler dealering bastard.
Author:  Danny's Studs [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
ANY fucking knobber can see he is as guilty as OJ Simpson. How can this get off? Wanker.
Author:  BiscuitBlueCheese [ Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
this means he's going to be england manager in about 6 months, it's going to be hilarious
Page 11 of 12 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/