Celtic face threat of multimillion pound compensation claim(The Times)

mountloyal said:
Read on a scum site that the documents are the CBC constitution.
These cvnts have hired a top legal team.
They will try everything and anything to try and wriggle of the hook.
Click to expand...
Top legal team. The chunts will need to do way better than that according to the evidence we've all seen from Spotlight. They can wriggle and squirm all they like, once caught, never off the hook. Caught.
 
jf1960 said:
A while back Septics Lawyers asked for a Court Case to be put back because .....
" The paperwork celtic hold that proves they were a separate entity cannot be found/missing/lost/didn't exist "
Stupid question I know but why would they have had the paperwork in the 1st place
Click to expand...
mountloyal said:
I think that you may have misquoted there jf1960?? I dont think Celtic ever claimed to have had the missing documents. I think they are implying that others had the documents which have now gone missing.
Read on a scum site that the documents are the CBC constitution.
These cvnts have hired a top legal team.
They will try everything and anything to try and wriggle of the hook.


As an aside I note that the scum sites seem to now be running with threads on the subject after years of ignoring it.
Apparently they are emboldened by a high court victory by Blackpool fc which overturned an initial court decision (awarding a victim £20000) and deemed the club could not be held vicariously liable for the abuse by their coach/scout at a feeder club. Folk can Google it.
The poor victims legal team had hoped to take the case to the supreme court but cannot find anything about that.
Click to expand...
An organisation wouldn't normally have documentation expressly disassociating itself from another, and it's highly unlikely that either Celtic or Celtic Boys Club did.

Perhaps more importantly, no paperwork that shows that their clear and obvious relationship was a contractual one has emerged - at least not publicly - emboldening Celtic in its 'separate entity' defence.

However, as Spotlight has revealed, there is a mound of evidence which proves that, in practice if not in law, Celtic had significant control of and responsibility for the Boys Club - sufficiently significant to make vicarious liability for the crimes of the latter's officials a charge that may stick.

Celtic has rather condemned itself, since page after page of the club's own newspaper once trumpeted the relationship and Celtic's pride in it. Only when the sexual abuse at the Boys Club became undeniable did Celtic decide to distance itself, to the point, apparently, of paying the Boys Club to change its name.

How things pan out legally remains to be seen, but whatever the law of the land might decide, Celtic will forever be guilty of allowing, even facilitating, the sexual abuse of minors on a scale unparalleled in the history of sport worldwide.

If you know your history then, indeed, Celtic are a club like no other. To its eternal shame.
 
mountloyal said:
I think that you may have misquoted there jf1960?? I dont think Celtic ever claimed to have had the missing documents. I think they are implying that others had the documents which have now gone missing.
Read on a scum site that the documents are the CBC constitution.
These cvnts have hired a top legal team.
They will try everything and anything to try and wriggle of the hook.


As an aside I note that the scum sites seem to now be running with threads on the subject after years of ignoring it.
Apparently they are emboldened by a high court victory by Blackpool fc which overturned an initial court decision (awarding a victim £20000) and deemed the club could not be held vicariously liable for the abuse by their coach/scout at a feeder club. Folk can Google it.
The poor victims legal team had hoped to take the case to the supreme court but cannot find anything about that.
Click to expand...
A constitution wouldn’t, couldn’t, absolve anybody of any crime.
 
Broxmeister said:
As i said earlier, Police Scotland have questions to answer concerning his claim to have been told to stick to his story. I don't know who the person to ask these questions would be though, maybe an MSP or MP?
Click to expand...
Scotland Yard

The SNP have the Police up here in their pocket.

This is a worldwide scandal and should be investigated by others not associated with anything to do with Scottish politics or the ‘justice’ system
 
shoulderpads said:
An organisation wouldn't normally have documentation expressly disassociating itself from another, and it's highly unlikely that either Celtic or Celtic Boys Club did.

Perhaps more importantly, no paperwork that shows that their clear and obvious relationship was a contractual one has emerged - at least not publicly - emboldening Celtic in its 'separate entity' defence.

However, as Spotlight has revealed, there is a mound of evidence which proves that, in practice if not in law, Celtic had significant control of and responsibility for the Boys Club - sufficiently significant to make vicarious liability for the crimes of the latter's officials a charge that may stick.

Celtic has rather condemned itself, since page after page of the club's own newspaper once trumpeted the relationship and Celtic's pride in it. Only when the sexual abuse at the Boys Club became undeniable did Celtic decide to distance itself, to the point, apparently, of paying the Boys Club to change its name.

How things pan out legally remains to be seen, but whatever the law of the land might decide, Celtic will forever be guilty of allowing, even facilitating, the sexual abuse of minors on a scale unparalleled in the history of sport worldwide.

If you know your history then, indeed, Celtic are a club like no other. To its eternal shame.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the mound of evidence of a contractual relationship went up in smoke when wee Fergus created his new Pacific Shelf corporation. He certainly moved to distance himself and the club from the endorsement of P# by Tommy Burns
 
mdingwall said:
Funny how they can always discover new stories about Stein years after his death with the aid of "researchers" but never on one particular topic.




Click to expand...

I have read more than once the said Archie saying that BJ did not know. How could he possibly know what BJ did and did not know. Such an assertion smacks of the response to the have you stopped beating your wife yet question.
 
laud55 said:
I have read more than once the said Archie saying that BJ did not know. How could he possibly know what BJ did and did not know. Such an assertion smacks of the response to the have you stopped beating your wife yet question.
Click to expand...

I call it the BJK paradox.

THEY created it. All the info has only ever come from THEM. THEY tied themselves up in an almighty knot with it and THEY know they are unable to untangle without further damaging reputations.

Hell mend all of them.
 
laud55 said:
I have read more than once the said Archie saying that BJ did not know. How could he possibly know what BJ did and did not know. Such an assertion smacks of the response to the have you stopped beating your wife yet question.
Click to expand...
Stein was lauded for fkn decades of being all powerful, the man with his finger on the pulse of all things Celtic, knew which pubs Johnstone was frequenting etc etc, yet we are expected to believe he was shocked at what was going on at HIS boys club. Aye right you are.
 
laud55 said:
I have read more than once the said Archie saying that BJ did not know. How could he possibly know what BJ did and did not know. Such an assertion smacks of the response to the have you stopped beating your wife yet question.
Click to expand...
One of the scum’s biggest defences is that Big Jock kicked, literally kicked, Torbet out of Parkhead.
What would that have been for?
 
Grigo Yossarian said:
You’re spot on K.

2019 case, les by Kim Leslie of Digby Brown.

The paedophile in that one was McCafferty.
Click to expand...
And it appears Scottish Football's governing bodies subsequently took no action because having written to them on this matter they refuse to communicate in any way as to what action they took against a member club surely bringing the fame into disrepute.
 
I'm not sure if I've asked before but has Sonia Poulton been involved in any way?
I'm sure she would ba a supporter.
 
tazzabear said:
One of the scum’s biggest defences is that Big Jock kicked, literally kicked, Torbet out of Parkhead.
What would that have been for?
Click to expand...
… and how did he have the authority to do it if there was a constitutional article by the CBC to say the Celtic FC had absolutely nothing to do with them ?

Apart from maybe the staff, players, scouts, kitmen, venues, strips, badge, club publications, gala events and no doubt generous funding
 
Last edited:
longtimedead said:
… and how did he have the authority to do it if there was a constitutional article by the CBC to say the Celtic FC had absolutely nothing to do with them ?

Apart from maybe the staff, players, scouts, kitten, venues, strips, badge, club publications, gala events and no doubt generous funding
Click to expand...
Very difficult to understand this separate entity defence.
More so when you consider the examples as depicted by the Spotlight teammate.
Even a hundred statements claiming they knew they were a separate entity can’t compensate for or beat the lack of paperwork which, I’d have thought would have been registered at companies house.
By the way, I’m only half a step up from illiterate in these matters so don’t trust my guesswork.
 
tazzabear said:
Very difficult to understand this separate entity defence.
More so when you consider the examples as depicted by the Spotlight teammate.
Even a hundred statements claiming they knew they were a separate entity can’t compensate for or beat the lack of paperwork which, I’d have thought would have been registered at companies house.
By the way, I’m only half a step up from illiterate in these matters so don’t trust my guesswork.
Click to expand...

Celtic began distancing themselves when the police became involved.
 
tazzabear said:
Very difficult to understand this separate entity defence.
More so when you consider the examples as depicted by the Spotlight teammate.
Even a hundred statements claiming they knew they were a separate entity can’t compensate for or beat the lack of paperwork which, I’d have thought would have been registered at companies house.
By the way, I’m only half a step up from illiterate in these matters so don’t trust my guesswork.
Click to expand...

Up until a few years ago, Celtic themselves were still advertising that they were financially funding the boys club. And then took measures to hide the evidence (not good enough).
 
Im not legally trained but even i cannot see any sense in CFC continuing this "seperate entity" fallacy with everything thats been uncovered by Spotlight.

Time for Thompsons to get tough on this and sit their briefs down and tell them to stop looking for imaginary bits of paper that do not exist...its BS...we know its BS...we have a mountain of evidence proving its BS.

Your move?

Watch them squirm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top