Coming up on Radio Scotland. (sex abuse cases)

The thing is, of course the SFA are going to conclude nobody knew.

Directors of celtic went on to hold positions at the SFA. If celtic knew, then the SFA knew by default.

It sickens me that people that were complicit in this are held up as heroes. The story of Stein throwing Torbett out was told by many as an example of the mans character until people realised it truly showed what sort of character he was. Nobody wants to even acknowledge it now. There's numerous other Chinese whispers / urban legends about various celtic employees that should be clarified.

Exactly their tactic.

Ignore Gordon Woods dad’s letter 6 years before Torbett was kicked out.

Ignore the 1986 ‘scurrilous’ investigation & 1994 McCann communications which are public.

Ignore Hugh Birt’s dismissal when Kelly brought two paedophiles into the meeting to sack the only man of honour in this whole tragedy.

The facts don’t tell a story they like, so let’s ignore them all mate.
 
So no actual hard evidence of our accusations of the handling any alleged involvement with Neely. No Police evidence to confirm of deny any report filed. Again how long ago was that? Police records could have been destroyed if classed as closed no further action after so long. After all Plod managed to lose hard evidence like blow up dolls covered in Rangers Minded regalia as evidence against scum fans and probably transcripts of interviews etc. So evidence can go missing become lost be shredded but it would have had to exist in the first place and that is currently speculation. Was the victim given a copy of his statement did the Solicitor keep a copy?
 
My understanding, is that the club lost the opportunity to set the narrative when one individual made an accusation of being abused when he was at Rangers, rather than investigate this accusation fully and treat the individual properly and fairly if the accusation was found to be true or accurate, someone at the club told him that the newco had no responsibility for these actions and to make a claim against the oldco.

If this is factual then we should hang our heads in shame, this was an excellent opportunity for us to deal properly with an isolated case and show the rest of Scotland and especially them and their cheerleaders how to address such accusations, it would've also given us the higher ground and heaped the pressure on them.

Obviously not dealing properly with these accusations has left the door wide open to us being dragged into this scandal as we all see whats happening now, I said at the time this would come back to bite us, why the powers at be at the club didn't see this is beyond belief, as obviously they would use any opportunity to drag us into regardless of the scale of whats happened at the cesspit.

I might add I'm unsure if this case relates to Neely or someone else.
The allegation was dealt with properly in 1991.

25 years later the man involved then raised the matter again along with it appears a claim for compensation.

The club disputes certain allegations made to the press and Mark Daly.


If you don’t know anything about the details I can’t see how you automatically conclude the club has done something wrong.
 
Listening to the Scottish media, I'm sure I heard there are 3 cases involving Rangers. I don't know if these are all involving Neely, other coaches or other children. Does anyone know the facts here? Rangers are undoubtedly looking into the facts of this so I am not surprised no knee-jerk response has been made so far.
 
Are there any victims currently relating to Rangers trying to get compensation? If there are and they are due it, it should be paid no question. But the only case I have seen is the Neely one, I believe? The one that was reported to the police. The one where the boys own father, a policeman himself, didn't want to take any further. Are there any more?
I agree . If there's a wrongdoing it's not Rangers . Any blame lies at the feet of Hibs for not divulging what sort of person Neely was, a fact constantly overlooked by the mhedia
 
I still can’t get my head round why Hibs never informed Rangers on the reason Neely was removed from Easter rd, then He joined us.
"Neely would never have got the job at Rangers had the Ibrox club been aware of the fact he had been axed by Hibs for molesting two boys on the club’s books. Hibs said on Monday that the club had “no record” of any complaints against Neely while he was an employee.

But sports journalist Ray Hepburn has now revealed that former Hibs chairman Kenny Waugh told him he sacked Neely after complaints from two sets of parents that he had sexually abused their sons. Worried at the negative impact a child abuse scandal would have on Hibs’ ability to recruit young talent, Waugh then decided not to involve the police.

The revelation comes in the week it emerged Neely is feared to have carried out a string of sexual assaults on young players while at Edinburgh youth side Hutchison Vale, before he started at Hibs. Hepburn, a close friend of Waugh, revealed: “Kenny wanted it dealt with swiftly to reaffirm Easter Road was a safe place for youngsters."

So Rangers were denied knowledge of Neely’s activities – and they would certainly never have employed him, had they known. Kenny told me the parents said their children had been molested.

He was a decent man and was rightly appalled. But he was very worried that if anyone found out, Hibs would lose out on the talent the club needed to try and compete with Hearts and the Old Firm."
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/missed-chance-to-stop-abuser/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=sharelink
 
Are there any victims currently relating to Rangers trying to get compensation? If there are and they are due it, it should be paid no question. But the only case I have seen is the Neely one, I believe? The one that was reported to the police. The one where the boys own father, a policeman himself, didn't want to take any further. Are there any more?

As I've suggested before, if it is proven that anybody was abused whilst at Rangers then the club should seek to pay them compensation and offer a full apology. Then sue HIVs for the full amount of the compensation for them deliberately with-holding the information that their ex-employee was a known paedophile.
 
on a side note ,given we all feel the the S.F.A report is set up to cover for celtic and make it appear that all clubs are equally to blame ,i dont think Rangers should endorse this narrative by giving the report any backing at all . The only way is to call for an independent inquiry with no restrictions
 
How much money did they pay to each of Savile's victims? Five grand each, more?

Maybe the club should ask them for advice on the matter
 
I still can’t get my head round why Hibs never informed Rangers on the reason Neely was removed from Easter rd, then He joined us.
According to the "Report" Hibs were aware of allegations but couldn't "prove" them, so said nothing when they shifted Neely on to Rangers.
The report states that "The review concludes that it is possible that a number of people in Scottish football had cause for suspicion about D's alleged activities at the time."

Person "D" is believed to be Neely.

So there you are in the highlighted text a number of people had cause for suspicion but aren't named in the report and there is no indication of how the compilers of report knew that there were a number of people who had suspicions.

But Rangers should apologise anyway instead of the unnamed "number of people" ?
 
According to the "Report" Hibs were aware of allegations but couldn't "prove" them, so said nothing when they shifted Neely on to Rangers.
The report states that "The review concludes that it is possible that a number of people in Scottish football had cause for suspicion about D's alleged activities at the time."

Person "D" is believed to be Neely.

So there you are in the highlighted text a number of people had cause for suspicion but aren't named in the report and there is no indication of how the compilers of report knew that there were a number of people who had suspicions.

But Rangers should apologise anyway instead of the unnamed "number of people" ?

@johnkp post above, 66, shows the previously released article that proves it was known.

And yet they ignore that publicly available evidence from years ago G36 ?

Funny, you’d think the Hibs chairman is SFA President if you didn’t know better ??????
 
In a different case altogether during the 1980s in page 16 Further information, it states the following:

(who took appropriate action in reporting this to the police at the time even though there were no formal protocols in place requiring them to do so)

It then appears ambiguous as to what steps were or were not taken. The question here is, has this case for concern or incident report also been been put to the Police for confirmation?
 
Last edited:
How many were from Neely when he was at Rangers ?
I believe the lad's Dad, brought it to the attention of Walter Smith who approached Graeme Souness, GS then dragged, literally, Neely along to Allistair Hood. GS also told Neely it would be better if he never met him again ( or words to that effect )
As far as the Club understood, it was an isolated incident
 
The best thing is for the club to call for a public enquire as it will deal with facts not stories by journo's who have an agenda
 
@johnkp post above, 66, shows the previously released article that proves it was known.

And yet they ignore that publicly available evidence from years ago G36 ?

Funny, you’d think the Hibs chairman is SFA President if you didn’t know better ??????
I read that post Grigo. I searched on the report for the word Waugh and would you believe it, "no matches found"
 
Surely everyone wants any and every victim to be componsated by those clubs who failed on the duty of care to these kids.

Has our club put anything out publicly about what has happened within our walls and if not why do we continue to remain silent. If it's because the victims don't want the media circus then come out and state that. It makes me really uncomfortable that we have said nothing, if that is the case.

I want to see our club be at the forefront of a campaign to ensure victims get their deserved justice and are compensated and more importantly an ongoing campaign to ensure that children are educated on how to identify these creeps and how to report them when they do.
 
No I'm sure it was along the lines of the police couldn't actually find the paper record of it after being stored and moved between buildings over the long period of time. That sort of record was never digitised and stored on computer. As far as I remember but happy to be corrected.
Basically they couldn't actually physically find it, which obviously sounds better than saying they could find no record of it which obviously implies that we lied about it.
Reporters are scum!
That is also my understanding. Police Crime Reports were recorded on flimsy 3 section carbonated paper until the mid-late 90's. They were then stored in a warehouse which was flooded several times and many of the Reports were destroyed.

I believe the official answer from the police is that "we can find no record of the matter being reported."

That leaves 3 options:
1. The club made a formal complaint, which was followed through by the boys father and a Crime Report was raised, but lost or destroyed over time.

2. The club contacted the police. However, the boys father did not want the matter taken further and no Crime Report was raised, so there will be no record.

3. The boys father told the club that he did not want the police contacted and would deal with the matter himself. Although the club did not technically contact the police, it could be argued that by speaking to the boys father, who was a serving Police Officer at the time, they could say that they had spoken to the Police and they were aware of the allegation.

Either way, if the club speak to the boys father and he decides that he does not wish the Police to be involved, the club are not really in a position to over-rule him. Yes, they can contact the Police and make them aware, but the Complainer would be the victim of the abuse, ie. the son and due to his age, his father would likely make the decision in relation to whether or not the matter was formally reported as a Crime.

Remember, the boys father was a serving Police Officer. Someone who had a good knowledge of the legal system and process. Someone who knew how stressful and embarrassing it would be for a young boy to give evidence of a sexual nature in a Court of Law (long before video links to make it easier for kids to give evidence were established). Someone who knew how difficult it would be to gain a conviction when a child is making an uncorroborated allegation against an adult. Someone who would ask himself, "is it worth the hassle of putting my son through this?"

The big difference between us and them is that a serving Police Officer was aware of the allegation against Neely and we erred on the side of caution and got rid of Neely immediately after the first allegation. Whilst there is clear evidence that even after repeated allegations, Celtic put pressure on the victims parents not to contact the Police and kept Torbett, Cairney & Co in their roles, free to continue abusing kids.

For those discussing liability, I can fully understand why the current Board made no comment, but can also understand those who are unhappy.

The Football Club and the holding Company are two different things. The Football Club was established in 1872 and a Limited Company was formed in 1899 to run the Football Club. When the Limited Company (later a PLC) was placed in liquidation in 2012, the Football Club continued to exist.

Any compensation for non-football events that occurred prior to 2012 would be a matter for the Oldco Administrators to deal with.

The current Board are only liable for anything that occurred after the date of Newco's inception in 2012 (plus previous football debt) and I would imagine that they have been given legal advice not to comment on the SFA Report, as legally it relates to another Company and they have no involvement.

Before anyone has a go, I can fully understand that some will feel that the Club still has a moral obligation towards the victim(s) of Neely.
 
It trully is beyond fucking disgusting that they try and portray this an OF issue
Rangers should get into the public narrative and demand a full public enquiry at a national level in order that transparency can prevail in this matter.
This is the only proper way to lance this social boil.

At the moment the veil of confusion regarding this issue allows enemies of the club to manipulate the public discussion in order to assist the guilty clubs in spreading the blame with innuendos and half-truths.

Rangers should have nothing to hide, no one should ever hide from the truth, no one should ever step away from the truth in such a serious criminal matter.

Take the bull by the horns Rangers and force this issue out from the darkness that suits the Scottish establishment of corrupt politicians, cowardly sly press and media operatives and skulking football officials and force it into the light of the public glare.
 
Rangers should get into the public narrative and demand a full public enquiry at a national level in order that transparency can prevail in this matter.
This is the only proper way to lance this social boil.

At the moment the veil of confusion regarding this issue allows enemies of the club to manipulate the public discussion in order to assist the guilty clubs in spreading the blame with innuendos and half-truths.

Rangers should have nothing to hide, no one should ever hide from the truth, no one should ever step away from the truth in such a serious criminal matter.

Take the bull by the horns Rangers and force this issue out from the darkness that suits the Scottish establishment of corrupt politicians, cowardly sly press and media operatives and skulking football officials and force it into the light of the public glare.
I believe your right, there are too many layers of coverup to work through. Get all of the facts straight on our part, then call it right out into the open by demanding a full independent public inquiry.
 
But it does seem worth noting that Celtic arranged for a second tour of kids arses as soon as the worms started tucking into Stein.

If you are referring to Torbett returning after Stein had died (Stein died in 1985), that is a myth which mysteriously went unchallenged for decades.

Torbett left in 1974.
Torbett returned in 1978, the same year in which Stein left.

Did Torbett come back as soon as the coast was clear (of Stein)?
Did Stein leave because Torbett was back or on his way back?
Either way, it is on record that Stein literally kicked Torbett out. Which means that he not only failed to call the police first time round, he then also choose to remain silent thus enabling a predator to come back in to do further damage.
So why would an apparently strong-willed man of the character of Stein, a man so angered to physically kick someone out the door, become mute four years later?

Add into mix the photo of Stein presenting Torbett with an award, believed to be around 1977.
Also the fact that Hugh Birt raised concerns about Torbett returning. Presumably this was also around the same time (1977-78).

The case of BJK really is a paradox.
 
If you are referring to Torbett returning after Stein had died (Stein died in 1985), that is a myth which mysteriously went unchallenged for decades.

Torbett left in 1974.
Torbett returned in 1978, the same year in which Stein left.

Did Torbett come back as soon as the coast was clear (of Stein)?
Did Stein leave because Torbett was back or on his way back?
Either way, it is on record that Stein literally kicked Torbett out. Which means that he not only failed to call the police first time round, he then also choose to remain silent thus enabling a predator to come back in to do further damage.
So why would an apparently strong-willed man of the character of Stein, a man so angered to physically kick someone out the door, become mute four years later?

Add into mix the photo of Stein presenting Torbett with an award, believed to be around 1977.
Also the fact that Hugh Birt raised concerns about Torbett returning. Presumably this was also around the same time (1977-78).

The case of BJK really is a paradox.
None of this supposed record of events stands up to scrutiny.
That is why the entire issue requires a proper forensic enquiry.
 
None of this supposed record of events stands up to scrutiny.
That is why the entire issue requires a proper forensic enquiry.

A proper enquiry is a must if the victims are to receive the justice they deserve..

It was Mark Daley who reported that Torbett had returned in 78 as well as highlighting the picture of Stein presenting Torbett with an award around 77.

It's infuriating that Daley (or any other journo) didn't follow-up with the obvious questions needing answers following his report. For starters, how was it possible that the Scottish media had wrongly reported for nigh on thirty years that Torbett only returned after Stein had passed away? And the bigger question: what really happened between Torbett, Stein and that club's decision-makers around 1977-78? Because as it stands, taking into account all the factual evidence in the public domain, it just doesn't stack up.
 
The allegation was dealt with properly in 1991.

25 years later the man involved then raised the matter again along with it appears a claim for compensation.

The club disputes certain allegations made to the press and Mark Daly.


If you don’t know anything about the details I can’t see how you automatically conclude the club has done something wrong.

What’s always puzzled me is why the kids dad never raised it with the police. Also what is the state of police retention of records on such things. Mark Daly was spooked by Desmond snarling at him if he supported Rangers. Daly has run for cover ever since where’s most decent journalists will have got the bit between their teeth. But then you also have to remember we are talking about the BBC who turned a blind eye to CSA for decades if Saville et al is anything to go by.
 
The thing is, of course the SFA are going to conclude nobody knew.

Directors of celtic went on to hold positions at the SFA. If celtic knew, then the SFA knew by default.

It sickens me that people that were complicit in this are held up as heroes. The story of Stein throwing Torbett out was told by many as an example of the mans character until people realised it truly showed what sort of character he was. Nobody wants to even acknowledge it now. There's numerous other Chinese whispers / urban legends about various celtic employees that should be clarified.
Daily Record (Glasgow, Scotland); 11/7/1998; McILWRAITH, GORDON
JOCK Stein and the Celtic board covered up allegations made against Boys' Club founder Jim Torbett,

Mr Birt said: "There was a lot of hearsay and it wasn't until Jim came back that I got involved because things started up again."

He told how he took the allegations against Torbett to the Celtic board and Stein and even told the then vice-chairman, Kevin Kelly, about them at a meeting in his car.
He said: "Although there were people who spoke to me I couldn't go to the police without actual proof of the allegations. When I joined as chairman, I was told by Jock Stein to keep the name of Celtic Football Club clean at all times."

Billy McNeil said, on oath in a court of law, "It was an open secret at Parkhead"



p8lNVtc.jpg
 
Daily Record (Glasgow, Scotland); 11/7/1998; McILWRAITH, GORDON
JOCK Stein and the Celtic board covered up allegations made against Boys' Club founder Jim Torbett,

Mr Birt said: "There was a lot of hearsay and it wasn't until Jim came back that I got involved because things started up again."

He told how he took the allegations against Torbett to the Celtic board and Stein and even told the then vice-chairman, Kevin Kelly, about them at a meeting in his car.
He said: "Although there were people who spoke to me I couldn't go to the police without actual proof of the allegations. When I joined as chairman, I was told by Jock Stein to keep the name of Celtic Football Club clean at all times."

Billy McNeil said, on oath in a court of law, "It was an open secret at Parkhead"



p8lNVtc.jpg

This has been posted on here before.

The last sentence was not part of the article quoted.
 
What’s always puzzled me is why the kids dad never raised it with the police. Also what is the state of police retention of records on such things. Mark Daly was spooked by Desmond snarling at him if he supported Rangers. Daly has run for cover ever since where’s most decent journalists will have got the bit between their teeth. But then you also have to remember we are talking about the BBC who turned a blind eye to CSA for decades if Saville et al is anything to go by.

The boy’s father was a police officer.

The family didn’t want Neely to be charged.
 
This has been posted on here before.

The last sentence was not part of the article quoted.
Correct.

May not have been part of the article quoted but McNeil did say that in court.
 
May not have been part of the article quoted but McNeil did say that in court.

I don't believe he did.

This has been covered on here several times before and no-one has ever been able to find the quote.

The general allegation also alternates between Billy McNeill saying it in court and in an Evening Times interview. I'm not sure if McNeill appeared in court during Torbett's trial.
 
Back
Top