Do you think he is a major cog ? I wouldn’t be shocked if he ends up as a fall guy for othersYup, his lawyer just has to find a little dirt on another seven or so victims then he can walk free.
He’s still what he was before today, a major cog in the Celtic Paedophile ring and the victims along with their families mustn’t let this get them down.
Do you think he is a major cog ? I wouldn’t be shocked if he ends up as a fall guy for others
A major protest on his release. It’s a must.Bbc now reporting that cairney could qualify for early release as a result of todays decision, reporting at pains to emphasized that it was a miscarriage of justice! If this is the case, it surely has be the undoing of this shambolic form of justice that we have in Scotland. This is now becoming surreal, what does it take for the public to see how utterly wrong this is. This has to be the turning point
sorry but really angry that they can just stick a finger up at us ...how high does this go...
Ian Livingstone is the former BT Group chairman and is apparently a season ticket holder at the sty and has been that for many years.Is Ian Livingston a non-executive director of Celtic F.C. not high up in BT ? Almost sure he was at one time if not still
He was caught on camera saying something along the lines off " I suppose I was as bad as the rest of them . " Said in a very matter of fact way . In any normal society this would require a visit from the Police for clarification of said statement .Given the length of time Cairney was around Celtic, the number of other convicted paedophiles involved with the club and the apparent geographic scattering of abuse locations, yea, I’d think he should be treated as a major cog by investigative authorities.
For certain if that is the case, he’d maybe have great incentive to be the fall guy. I mean, he’s already got rent free lifetime occupation of the house he formerly owned, courtesy of Neil Watt of Ross Liddell factors. What other nice wee assets has he salted away out of reach of the victims?
And how many other facilitators like Neil Watt are out there, protecting the ‘good name’ of their beloved club?
Good Chance Lord Carloway is a beast as well. Certainly seems to be OK with it going by his track record.It’ll come as no surprise to many on here that Lord Carloway was a member of the appeal board.
Would it be too much of a stretch of the imagination for those judging on the appeal to ponder the fact that perhaps this guys life had gone done a particular path more than likely as a direct effect of the slimey beast that they are hearing the appeal on behalf of?By that they are calling the victim a liar, unreal, just because someone has been guilty of dishonesty how does that even merit a sentence reduction for Cairney, maybe he became dishonest due to what happened to him.
Would it be too much of a stretch of the imagination for those judging on the appeal to ponder the fact that perhaps this guys life had gone done a particular path more than likely as a direct effect of the slimey beast that they are hearing the appeal on behalf of?
Off to bang my head off the nearest wall .
Scottish justice... They’re having a laugh FFS
We were in contact with Michelle yesterday Jan. To say she was angry and upset would be an understatement.
Understandable as that decision yesterday was sickening to the bottom of your stomach.We were in contact with Michelle yesterday Jan. To say she was angry and upset would be an understatement.
Just for clarity, I'm sure that was McCafferty as he was entering the Belfast Police station. Easy mistake to make all the same, with so many paedophiles, enablers and facilitators linked to this club the facts seem entwined in some way.He was caught on camera saying something along the lines off " I suppose I was as bad as the rest of them . " Said in a very matter of fact way . In any normal society this would require a visit from the Police for clarification of said statement .
yes mate , my mistake , got them mixed up it was McCaffery .Just for clarity, I'm sure that was McCafferty as he was entering the Belfast Police station. Easy mistake to make all the same, with so many paedophiles, enablers and facilitators linked to this club the facts seem entwined in some way.
FORMER Celtic Boys Club manager Frank Cairney has been cleared of a sex attack on a teenage boy because of a failure to reveal the victim's crimes of dishonesty ahead of his trial.
Cairney, 84, was given a four year jail sentence after he was convicted of nine charges of abusing young footballers.
More follows
Clearly a reduced sentence to buy his silence.For 9 charges of abusing children, or even 1 charge, I honestly can't see how a society's legal system can deem a 4 year sentence appropriate.
I haven't seen how many charges out of the 9 were linked to the lad whose evidence they deemed unreliable yesterday... But if it has went down from 9 charges to 8... Or even to 1... Under what normal human thought processes can that warrant a 25% reduction of a 4 year sentence for child abuse.
What is almost as sickening is how it's absolutely no surprise at all that the Scottish courts have cut his sentence.
Clearly a reduced sentence to buy his silence.
I hope this 3 part expose is going to include all the different organizations involved including the judicial side of things.For 9 charges of abusing children, or even 1 charge, I honestly can't see how a society's legal system can deem a 4 year sentence appropriate.
I haven't seen how many charges out of the 9 were linked to the lad whose evidence they deemed unreliable yesterday... But if it has went down from 9 charges to 8... Or even to 1... Under what normal human thought processes can that warrant a 25% reduction of a 4 year sentence for child abuse.
What is almost as sickening is how it's absolutely no surprise at all that the Scottish courts have cut his sentence.
It does go to show once again though that when a public enquiry is finally held, it is vital that overseas involvement is pushed very hard for.
I utterly detest this country now. Ruined by Nationalist racists and Republican bigots. Getting devolution was the worst thing to happen to us. Just think what life under independence would be like ?
You never asked them to name anyone, you simply asked if anyone had been disiplined, should respond and make it the point you didn't ask to name anyone and simply asked them to clarify if a member of their staff has been dealt with for leaking information.Reply back from HMRC FOI:
S1715
Freedom of Information Team
6 Floor
Central Mail Unit
Mr ************ Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE98 1ZZ
By email: *******@btinternet.com
Email foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Web www.gov.uk
Date: 28 November 2019
Our ref: FOI2019/02455
Dear Mr *****
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
Thank you for your request, which was received on 14 November, for the following information:
“Can you tell me if any HMRC employee, who has worked on the Rangers Football Club's tax case between the years 2001 and 2013 ever been disciplined for leaking sensitive information about the case?”
Some information held by HMRC is exempt from release under FOIA. This is because it relates to an identifiable person, including living individuals and legal entities, that we are legally required to keep confidential under the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA). The FOIA therefore acknowledges that, where another law prevents the release of information, it is exempt and should not be released. There are specific circumstance in the CRCA where confidential information can be released, but this would never be under the FOIA. We will always respond to a request under the FOIA, but where the information being sought is exempt, we will ensure our reply does not release any confidential information or even indicate if anything is held.
Under section 44(2) of the FOIA we can therefore neither confirm nor deny whether information falling within scope of your request is held by the department. The legal position for this is provided below.
Outside of the FOIA, you may find HMRC’s Information Disclosure Guide useful as it explains the restrictions around disclosing HMRC information and the limited circumstances in which we can lawfully disclose information about our customers.
Legal position
Section 44 of the FOIA applies when the requested information, if held, would be prohibited from disclosure by another piece of legislation.
In this instance, section 18(1) of the CRCA gives HMRC a duty of confidentiality which applies to all information it holds in connection with its functions. The prime examples of a function are the assessment and collection of tax; and the payment and management of tax credits. This is to make sure that information held on people and businesses would be protected and released only in controlled and limited circumstances.
Information is available in large print, audio and Braille formats. Text Relay service prefix number – 18001
When deciding whether we are prohibited from releasing information under FOIA by our duty of confidentiality, CRCA section 23(1) sets the following two questions:
Would the requested information be held in connection with a function of HMRC?
Would the information relate to a "person" who could be identified from the information requested?
The term "person" includes legal entities such as companies, trusts and charities, as well as living individuals (see Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978).
In this case, the answers to both questions is "Yes". Our duty of confidentiality therefore applies under CRCA section 18(1) and we are exempt from releasing the information under FOIA section 44(1)(a).
Sometimes even just confirming whether we hold the information could tell you something about this person. So FOIA section 44(2) exempts us from either confirming or denying whether we hold information as it would also breach the duty of confidentiality set out in section 18(1) of the CRCA.
If you are not satisfied with this reply you may request a review within two months by emailing foi.review@hmrc.gov.uk, or by writing to the address at the top right-hand side of this letter.
If you are not content with the outcome of an internal review you can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
Reply back from HMRC FOI:
S1715
Freedom of Information Team
6 Floor
Central Mail Unit
Mr ************ Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE98 1ZZ
By email: *******@btinternet.com
Email foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Web www.gov.uk
Date: 28 November 2019
Our ref: FOI2019/02455
Dear Mr *****
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
Thank you for your request, which was received on 14 November, for the following information:
“Can you tell me if any HMRC employee, who has worked on the Rangers Football Club's tax case between the years 2001 and 2013 ever been disciplined for leaking sensitive information about the case?”
Some information held by HMRC is exempt from release under FOIA. This is because it relates to an identifiable person, including living individuals and legal entities, that we are legally required to keep confidential under the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA). The FOIA therefore acknowledges that, where another law prevents the release of information, it is exempt and should not be released. There are specific circumstance in the CRCA where confidential information can be released, but this would never be under the FOIA. We will always respond to a request under the FOIA, but where the information being sought is exempt, we will ensure our reply does not release any confidential information or even indicate if anything is held.
Under section 44(2) of the FOIA we can therefore neither confirm nor deny whether information falling within scope of your request is held by the department. The legal position for this is provided below.
Outside of the FOIA, you may find HMRC’s Information Disclosure Guide useful as it explains the restrictions around disclosing HMRC information and the limited circumstances in which we can lawfully disclose information about our customers.
Legal position
Section 44 of the FOIA applies when the requested information, if held, would be prohibited from disclosure by another piece of legislation.
In this instance, section 18(1) of the CRCA gives HMRC a duty of confidentiality which applies to all information it holds in connection with its functions. The prime examples of a function are the assessment and collection of tax; and the payment and management of tax credits. This is to make sure that information held on people and businesses would be protected and released only in controlled and limited circumstances.
Information is available in large print, audio and Braille formats. Text Relay service prefix number – 18001
When deciding whether we are prohibited from releasing information under FOIA by our duty of confidentiality, CRCA section 23(1) sets the following two questions:
Would the requested information be held in connection with a function of HMRC?
Would the information relate to a "person" who could be identified from the information requested?
The term "person" includes legal entities such as companies, trusts and charities, as well as living individuals (see Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978).
In this case, the answers to both questions is "Yes". Our duty of confidentiality therefore applies under CRCA section 18(1) and we are exempt from releasing the information under FOIA section 44(1)(a).
Sometimes even just confirming whether we hold the information could tell you something about this person. So FOIA section 44(2) exempts us from either confirming or denying whether we hold information as it would also breach the duty of confidentiality set out in section 18(1) of the CRCA.
If you are not satisfied with this reply you may request a review within two months by emailing foi.review@hmrc.gov.uk, or by writing to the address at the top right-hand side of this letter.
If you are not content with the outcome of an internal review you can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
As your well aware BB, the frustrating thing for us is the time it takes to get answers when dealing with MSP’s. This has gone on for a long time and you are correct when you say we work tirelessly.Listen that rat bastard Cairney is a set back and a kick in the teeth for survivors but let’s not take the eye of the prize and focus on the facts,facts and truth are keystone in this and the they were up to their knees in sex cases in and around their club and that wont change ever and their directors and business ties connections as well.
BN94 and others have worked tirelessly behind the scene’s,they have led folk this far so trust these guys.
The amount that of didgital data that has been removed to save and protect these bastards is unreal and shows not only their guilt,but the whole fûcking religious cult brotherhood of them is truly disgusting.
a new PR mob into “limit the damage” coppers bagging evidence,the list goes on and on,a book or movie should be made one day on Epstein fc and all proceeds should go to survivors.
it’s still early in the fight guys unfortunately for survivors,let’s get those writs served now.
Cairney now is not active case that’s the last I think??
let’s get onto the Nazi party and get this exposed more before the GE.
Votes before justice for survivors!
As your well aware BB, the frustrating thing for us is the time it takes to get answers when dealing with MSP’s. This has gone on for a long time and you are correct when you say we work tirelessly.
It also doesn’t help when your up against a certain level of corruption that govern Scotland. Especially a justice secretary that puts his beloved club before his actual duty.
I’ve also had posters saying that nothing is happening behind the scenes and that we are wasting our time. They couldn’t be further from the truth. There are certain individuals that have been brought to light that was our doing, but we’re not here for a pat on the back or praise. We are here for the victims and families.
We also believe the issue goes deeper than the individuals already convicted. Our aim is to uncover each and every last one of them no matter what it takes or what we come up against, and believe me there has been a lot of effort to hide these guilty individuals tracks.
It’s no secret what’s gone on at Celtic for longer than 40 years. We strongly believe there are still more guilty individuals and apologists that are hiding the facts. Our aim is to find them and some on this forum definitely know we’ve done ok so far.
Like I’ve said previously, there is nothing more than what we would like than to put everything on here but by doing that would not achieve anything.
I urge people again to be patient. This is a very complex issue. I noticed recently a few posters saying as long as the nationalists are governing, then there will be no independent inquiry. That maybe so. Our aim is to keep working until they have no choice.
One of the most frustrating issues is the devolved government that exists. We believe an inquiry would be well underway if it wasn’t for this. It’s so angering when we get the reply from Westminster MPs that they can give us a personal opinion but can’t act professionally.
The upcoming election also hasn’t helped reference action from MSP’s. This could also be beneficial though when it’s over as hopefully there are different MSP’s in place. I would then urge everyone who has been active to go at it again and keep this subject in the limelight.
As your well aware BB, the frustrating thing for us is the time it takes to get answers when dealing with MSP’s. This has gone on for a long time and you are correct when you say we work tirelessly.
It also doesn’t help when your up against a certain level of corruption that govern Scotland. Especially a justice secretary that puts his beloved club before his actual duty.
I’ve also had posters saying that nothing is happening behind the scenes and that we are wasting our time. They couldn’t be further from the truth. There are certain individuals that have been brought to light that was our doing, but we’re not here for a pat on the back or praise. We are here for the victims and families.
We also believe the issue goes deeper than the individuals already convicted. Our aim is to uncover each and every last one of them no matter what it takes or what we come up against, and believe me there has been a lot of effort to hide these guilty individuals tracks.
It’s no secret what’s gone on at Celtic for longer than 40 years. We strongly believe there are still more guilty individuals and apologists that are hiding the facts. Our aim is to find them and some on this forum definitely know we’ve done ok so far.
Like I’ve said previously, there is nothing more than what we would like than to put everything on here but by doing that would not achieve anything.
I urge people again to be patient. This is a very complex issue. I noticed recently a few posters saying as long as the nationalists are governing, then there will be no independent inquiry. That maybe so. Our aim is to keep working until they have no choice.
One of the most frustrating issues is the devolved government that exists. We believe an inquiry would be well underway if it wasn’t for this. It’s so angering when we get the reply from Westminster MPs that they can give us a personal opinion but can’t act professionally.
The upcoming election also hasn’t helped reference action from MSP’s. This could also be beneficial though when it’s over as hopefully there are different MSP’s in place. I would then urge everyone who has been active to go at it again and keep this subject in the limelight.
Cheers Will. The beer in Rotterdam has obviously affected meBlueNose94; You have made a slight error in this post & post 18359; with regards
to" hopefully there are different MSP's". This election is only for MP's for HM
Government at Westminster, not the plastic house in Edinburgh, though hopefully
their day will come soon and F*CK the SNP NAZIS.
Reply back from HMRC FOI:
S1715
Freedom of Information Team
6 Floor
Central Mail Unit
Mr ************ Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE98 1ZZ
By email: *******@btinternet.com
Email foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Web www.gov.uk
Date: 28 November 2019
Our ref: FOI2019/02455
Dear Mr *****
Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA)
Thank you for your request, which was received on 14 November, for the following information:
“Can you tell me if any HMRC employee, who has worked on the Rangers Football Club's tax case between the years 2001 and 2013 ever been disciplined for leaking sensitive information about the case?”
Some information held by HMRC is exempt from release under FOIA. This is because it relates to an identifiable person, including living individuals and legal entities, that we are legally required to keep confidential under the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA). The FOIA therefore acknowledges that, where another law prevents the release of information, it is exempt and should not be released. There are specific circumstance in the CRCA where confidential information can be released, but this would never be under the FOIA. We will always respond to a request under the FOIA, but where the information being sought is exempt, we will ensure our reply does not release any confidential information or even indicate if anything is held.
Under section 44(2) of the FOIA we can therefore neither confirm nor deny whether information falling within scope of your request is held by the department. The legal position for this is provided below.
Outside of the FOIA, you may find HMRC’s Information Disclosure Guide useful as it explains the restrictions around disclosing HMRC information and the limited circumstances in which we can lawfully disclose information about our customers.
Legal position
Section 44 of the FOIA applies when the requested information, if held, would be prohibited from disclosure by another piece of legislation.
In this instance, section 18(1) of the CRCA gives HMRC a duty of confidentiality which applies to all information it holds in connection with its functions. The prime examples of a function are the assessment and collection of tax; and the payment and management of tax credits. This is to make sure that information held on people and businesses would be protected and released only in controlled and limited circumstances.
Information is available in large print, audio and Braille formats. Text Relay service prefix number – 18001
When deciding whether we are prohibited from releasing information under FOIA by our duty of confidentiality, CRCA section 23(1) sets the following two questions:
Would the requested information be held in connection with a function of HMRC?
Would the information relate to a "person" who could be identified from the information requested?
The term "person" includes legal entities such as companies, trusts and charities, as well as living individuals (see Schedule 1 of the Interpretation Act 1978).
In this case, the answers to both questions is "Yes". Our duty of confidentiality therefore applies under CRCA section 18(1) and we are exempt from releasing the information under FOIA section 44(1)(a).
Sometimes even just confirming whether we hold the information could tell you something about this person. So FOIA section 44(2) exempts us from either confirming or denying whether we hold information as it would also breach the duty of confidentiality set out in section 18(1) of the CRCA.
If you are not satisfied with this reply you may request a review within two months by emailing foi.review@hmrc.gov.uk, or by writing to the address at the top right-hand side of this letter.
If you are not content with the outcome of an internal review you can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Team
A fine effort nevertheless. A lot of heroes on this thread in my humble opinion.What an awfully long way to say "Go f**k yourself"
He obviously abused the person whatever he might be now when that person was a child so there is no way on this earth did Cairney NOT sexually abuse the guy when he was a vulnerable youngster unable to defend himself . Whatever he turned to be may well be due to Cairney’s abuse of him and how any Court could find Cairney “Innocent” enough to get a year chopped off the paltry sentence he is serving is beyond belief and shows the World just what a laughing stock the Justice system in Scotland really is . It’s like sending a message out Worldwide “ IF YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE THEN SCOTLAND IS THE PLACE TO BE ! "I'm sickened by this dirty paedophile sentence being reduced, howerever it does not change the facts, the rat b@stard was a leading member of the Celtic FC Paedophile Ring.
Well done mate and all who are exposing theses sick individuals and a football club ( CELTIC FC ) that has no shameAs your well aware BB, the frustrating thing for us is the time it takes to get answers when dealing with MSP’s. This has gone on for a long time and you are correct when you say we work tirelessly.
It also doesn’t help when your up against a certain level of corruption that govern Scotland. Especially a justice secretary that puts his beloved club before his actual duty.
I’ve also had posters saying that nothing is happening behind the scenes and that we are wasting our time. They couldn’t be further from the truth. There are certain individuals that have been brought to light that was our doing, but we’re not here for a pat on the back or praise. We are here for the victims and families.
We also believe the issue goes deeper than the individuals already convicted. Our aim is to uncover each and every last one of them no matter what it takes or what we come up against, and believe me there has been a lot of effort to hide these guilty individuals tracks.
It’s no secret what’s gone on at Celtic for longer than 40 years. We strongly believe there are still more guilty individuals and apologists that are hiding the facts. Our aim is to find them and some on this forum definitely know we’ve done ok so far.
Like I’ve said previously, there is nothing more than what we would like than to put everything on here but by doing that would not achieve anything.
I urge people again to be patient. This is a very complex issue. I noticed recently a few posters saying as long as the nationalists are governing, then there will be no independent inquiry. That maybe so. Our aim is to keep working until they have no choice.
One of the most frustrating issues is the devolved government that exists. We believe an inquiry would be well underway if it wasn’t for this. It’s so angering when we get the reply from Westminster MPs that they can give us a personal opinion but can’t act professionally.
The upcoming election also hasn’t helped reference action from MSP’s. This could also be beneficial though when it’s over as hopefully there are different MSP’s in place. I would then urge everyone who has been active to go at it again and keep this subject in the limelight.
Martin Henry SFA Review into Football Child Abuse Chairman: Roles at LGBT Youth, which he founded with James Rennie paedophile, and RC Church compromise any SFA Report.
Martin Henry’s Child Protection Bonafides Martin Henry is SFA Review Chairman tasked to be leading the SFA Independent Review of Sexual Abuse in Football. Mr Henry’s track record in chi…footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com
He obviously abused the person whatever he might be now when that person was a child so there is no way on this earth did Cairney NOT sexually abuse the guy when he was a vulnerable youngster unable to defend himself . Whatever he turned to be may well be due to Cairney’s abuse of him and how any Court could find Cairney “Innocent” enough to get a year chopped off the paltry sentence he is serving is beyond belief and shows the World just what a laughing stock the Justice system in Scotland really is . It’s like sending a message out Worldwide “ IF YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE THEN SCOTLAND IS THE PLACE TO BE ! "
I would qualify this to what cult you belong to and what you know(!!!!)He obviously abused the person whatever he might be now when that person was a child so there is no way on this earth did Cairney NOT sexually abuse the guy when he was a vulnerable youngster unable to defend himself . Whatever he turned to be may well be due to Cairney’s abuse of him and how any Court could find Cairney “Innocent” enough to get a year chopped off the paltry sentence he is serving is beyond belief and shows the World just what a laughing stock the Justice system in Scotland really is . It’s like sending a message out Worldwide “ IF YOU ARE A PAEDOPHILE THEN SCOTLAND IS THE PLACE TO BE ! "