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

I can just imagine their 'internal investigation' along the lines of

Kelly points finger and says........did you do it?

Naw

You?

Naw.

You?

Naw

OK, good.. No rancid perverts in here. Case closed.

Well, you get the picture.
More like:

Kelly- "Right, have you told anyone what we're up to?"

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

Naw.

"Right, must have been one of the wee bastards, get them telt"
 
Joke sentences handed out to paedophiles in SCOTLAND!

BAMHmOm.png
 
This is the crux of the matter. Everyone And their dog knows CBC was part of CFC. All the evidence unearthed shows that effectively they were the same and understood by everyone to be the the same. Morally CFC are obviously responsible. My fear is they may be able to wriggle out of it because of a technicality. Is there something like a legal document that needs to exist which ties them together. Or if it doesn’t exist, is all the proof unearthed here enough to make CFC responsible. I seem to remember from the Thomson pieces on telly there was soon to be a change in the law which would make CFC more liable. They will always be morally tarnished but I just hope in law the separate entity nonsense will be disproved.
Billy McNeil was on record in a newspaper clip shown on this forum stating that the abuse going on at the Boy's Club was an "open secret " and I believe it was an open secret because I used to hear people talking about it quite often back in the 60s / 70s , so if Joe public knew then celtc knew and BTW , BIG JOCK KNEW and did SFA about it .
 
In paisley centre at bottom of escalators at R.S.Mc call
There was a Trophy Centre in George Place, between Shuttle St and George St, not sure if connected to Torbetts outfit. Our local youth club used to get our trophies from there when I was a boy, am sure I was in there once.
 
This could be the motherload when it comes to rhats leaving the sinking ship. If the subject matter wasn't so harrowing, it was make for spectacular viewing. But it IS harrowing, so it's going to be more tragic and pathetic watching them trying to claim any sort of moral high ground when they had the chance to do the right thing for years, but didn't.

Hopefully, once all of this comes out and the poor souls who had their lives wrecked have their day in court, these individuals who knew and did nothing lie awake at night wracked with shame. Well, we can but hope.

A Pape NEVER has a Guilty conscience EVER mate.

It's in their blood.

Families have disowned their own for having the audacity for sticking in Paedo Priests.

Fck, in years gone by they've disowned daughter's or son's having children out of marriage.

They used to send children to convents to face abuse by Nuns and so on.

They have ZERO moral compass that lot when it comes to defending the good name (boak) of their Roman Church.
 
Just read about that poor guy from Preston abused by the priest beast Spencer.
The Stolkholm Syndrome at it's most severe in that the poor guy invited him to his wedding such was his denial.
Sued for £5million but only awarded £50,000 which is a disgrace given the period of time he sustained horrendous abuse.
Hope that the scum abuse survivors get proper settlements otherwise they won't pay much more than £1million.
 
Billy McNeil was on record in a newspaper clip shown on this forum stating that the abuse going on at the Boy's Club was an "open secret " and I believe it was an open secret because I used to hear people talking about it quite often back in the 60s / 70s , so if Joe public knew then celtc knew and BTW , BIG JOCK KNEW and did SFA about it .

I'm sure this Billy McNeil quote is unfounded.
 
I'm not saying sniff sniff but 20 posts in nearly 3 years and you decide suddenly to post on potentially the biggest thread ever

In fairness to the guy, I thought it was cleared up in this thread hundreds of pages ago that it wasn’t McNeil that said it. I’ve heard it attributed to a few people (that it was someone in court or it was Lou Macari that said it). But it was definitely talked about before and it seemed (from memory) that it wasn’t actually McNeil.
 
Just read about that poor guy from Preston abused by the priest beast Spencer.
The Stolkholm Syndrome at it's most severe in that the poor guy invited him to his wedding such was his denial.
Sued for £5million but only awarded £50,000 which is a disgrace given the period of time he sustained horrendous abuse.
Hope that the scum abuse survivors get proper settlements otherwise they won't pay much more than £1million.

Them being found guilty and paying out at all, is all that matters to their victims. They'll be forever tainted with CSA, not the"good" name they've tried everything to preserve.
 
In fairness to the guy, I thought it was cleared up in this thread hundreds of pages ago that it wasn’t McNeil that said it. I’ve heard it attributed to a few people (that it was someone in court or it was Lou Macari that said it). But it was definitely talked about before and it seemed (from memory) that it wasn’t actually McNeil.
I understand exactly what you're saying UU. I'm erring on the side of caution here. I know we are all new members at one point. I just find the post rather strange considering the timing.
 
I'm not saying sniff sniff but 20 posts in nearly 3 years and you decide suddenly to post on potentially the biggest thread ever

No, you can 'sniff sniff' away. The concern is that perpetuating unfounded myths will detract from the terrific work that's been AND being done.

You know how the game's played. They'll spot a flaw and say they whole thing is predicated on hearsay.
 
In fairness to the guy, I thought it was cleared up in this thread hundreds of pages ago that it wasn’t McNeil that said it. I’ve heard it attributed to a few people (that it was someone in court or it was Lou Macari that said it). But it was definitely talked about before and it seemed (from memory) that it wasn’t actually McNeil.
I believe it was photographer Hugh Birt that said it. I could be wrong.
 
No, you can 'sniff sniff' away. The concern is that perpetuating unfounded myths will detract from the terrific work that's been AND being done.

You know how the game's played. They'll spot a flaw and say they whole thing is predicated on hearsay.
 
No, you can 'sniff sniff' away. The concern is that perpetuating unfounded myths will detract from the terrific work that's been AND being done.

You know how the game's played. They'll spot a flaw and say they whole thing is predicated on hearsay.
No probs B&T.
There is no hearsay being provided as evidence at court.
You must admit that the timing of your post does leave a bit of suspicion.
After all, there has been numerous members been chopped recently.
One cannot be too careful these days.
If you are seriously concerned about the CSA and ongoing issues then I will humbly apologise.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top