David Whitehouse Submission to Scottish Justice Committee.

Is this document genuine in its entirety?

Did Whitehouse really submit a document and if do how much of this version of that document is made up bullshit.
 
guys looking for a payday by the sounds of it.using the pretence of clearing his name.there are charges still hanging over some people,not sure if he's one of them.this must have an affect on his proffessional life and name.
 
Barwon said:
It mentions the detective was a Rangers fan and was on fan forums. A member on here ?
Click to expand...

The more you read of this the more it needs filed under "Fantasy" the COPF did ask for feedback, link here

http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/101143.aspx

Yet one reply went "missing" and strangely turned up on the desk of John James, how lucky is that!!!

The language used is identical to any one his blogs (co-incidence)

That the Celtic Law Firm made a bid for Rangers is laughable

That a (relatively) low Detective was "In Charge" of a multi million pound investigation is laughable.

No In the cold light of day the blogger has sat up all night making this up, in my opinion (which is worth nothing)
 
If it’s genuine at all (which is up for argument) It looks a lot like it’s been “edited.” Some of the stuff in it seems extremely unlikely.
 
rossgers said:
Yes, the inference is that the charges brought and subsequent investigation were the actions of Rangers fans and others with conflicts against Duff and Phelps. This doesn't really add up in my mind. The other inference is that the investigation was a total cock up. This does add up.
Click to expand...

It was a tactic of the Rangers obssessed bloggers to take something that was true and mix it up with their own fantasy. It became difficult to separate fact from fiction.

It's possible that this is genuine. But it's also possible it's complete hokum. I'm puzzled about the comment over the police sergeant using a Rangers 'chant' to intimidate someone. I'm wondering how Whitehouse knows it was a Rangers 'chant' and what such a 'chant' would have been. The odd mention of Harper Macleod, or one of its partners, being a bidder for Rangers - when no-one has any recollection of such a thing and Harper Macleod were involved on the SPL's side against Rangers. Whitehouse seeming to have personal knowledge of the legal and political establishment of Scotland.

It's very odd.
 
Marty101 said:
This is supposedly a submission by one of the administrators to an Inquiry on the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. If it's genuine, it's basically saying the entire case against the administrators was misconstrued due to the police and the crown not understanding the law in relation to cases of this nature, and not knowing what they were doing. It also suggests evidence wasn't understood, or even read in some cases, before the charges were brought. It further suggests some of those involved were pursuing personal agendas when conducting the case.

Finally, it says that the core case against them was brought without the crown having an expert witness report supporting the charges against the administrators. When the Crown eventually did get such a report, they obtained it from a company Whitehouse says was conflicted. Even then, he says the Crown's report didn't support the charges brought anyway.

I say "if it's genuine" because from a quick google search the document seems to come from John James - so not exactly the best of sources, and some of the claims do seem pretty extreme. He may have picked it up from somewhere else though - it wouldn't be the first time he has claimed an exclusive for something some other site released first.

Even if it is genuine, it would be Whitehouse's document, and of course he's not exactly unbiased in the circumstances so has to be considered with caution.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. An excellent analysis which should of course be taken with caution.

Nevertheless, it is quite a damning statement and is not wholly unbelievable.
 
Marty101 said:
If it’s genuine at all (which is up for argument) It looks a lot like it’s been “edited.” Some of the stuff in it seems extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...
James Kirk will have been given this by Jack Irvine...he'll have added his usual lying slant
 
I am not a fan of conspiracy theories but the mention of Harper Mcleod and John Jack is enough for me to call the report fanciful at the least.
 
As if Rangers or our fans were ever going to see justice in a case prosecuted by the long discredited Glasgow Procurator Fiscal Office. ? We have a two tier judicial system now firmly embedded and institutionalised in Glasgow and these sectarian bigots despise Rangers.
 
Last edited:
So with all of these "Rangers fans" being up to their necks in the prosecution how come google eyes walked free? I'm confused.
 
FFS! No Rangers supporters were allowed on the jury and he is whinging the investigating police officers happened to be Rangers supporters.

To say there was no proper training for such a complex case is certainly true.
 
I wish I could find it, I remember someone tweeting right at the beginning of the investigation that it was a sham and everyone was completely out of their depth. I think the guy was from legal background with no connection to Rangers or football.
 
Interesting that he mentions one of the officers is a Rangers fan. I would be interested to know how many scum fans were involved in the process. They seem to be doing a good job of hiding.
 
To keep it simple, there's definitely been criminal acts took place in trying to destroy our club and with regards to the joke of a trial and taking into account the insidious nature of so many of the country's organisations these days you simply cannot trust that the correct procedures were followed to bring about a truthful and just conclusion to what occurred. There's been a deluge of misinformation generated to muddy the waters so much these past six years to make ever getting to the bottom of this matter extremely difficult but I don't think it's impossible and I don't think we've heard the last of this either.
 
ontheline said:
FFS! No Rangers supporters were allowed on the jury and he is whinging the investigating police officers happened to be Rangers supporters.

To say there was no proper training for such a complex case is certainly true.
Click to expand...
That's something that never sat correctly for me, How a judge can state that anyone who has ties to Rangers are exempt from sitting on the jury for Whyte's trial is sending a message that anyone with a Rangers background is not to be trusted sitting on the jury.

So the big question then would be did the same judge then repeat the same wording to anyone who had a Celtc background, Does anyone believe that people on a jury from a Celtc background would find Whyte guilty and does that mean that this judge is saying Rangers fans can't be trusted but Celtc fans could be relied upon to give a fair verdict on Whyte.

I don't ever recall any instance of this judge asking the same question of anyone from a Celtc background, If he thought Rangers fans on a jury weren't to be trusted to reach an honest verdict.. Did he really think Celtc fans would.

The whole case was an absolute sham from start to finish and said it all when Findlay stood up and stated he wouldn't be calling anymore witnesses despite having plenty lined up, The jury decision also stinks when you think how complicated the evidence was and the fact that most on the jury wouldn't have had any sort of experience in the field of finance at the degree it was including takeovers of businesses... But took them about an hour to debate and find Whyte not guilty

Making an absolute arse of the evidence that then couldn't be used to getting rid of anyone on the jury who had Rangers leanings but everyone else was fine including any Rangers haters... Absolutely stinks.
 
Is there also not an outstanding case against someone for selling Rangers under the market value... That stinks as well.
 
I don't think it would come as any surprise to anyone that the COPF were under qualified to handle this case properly. Why they didn't involve the SFO for assistance is anyone's guess.
 
lesleys said:
As soon as he said the Blue Knights didn't put in a credible bid (and by implication then that Charles Green's bid was the only one they could accept) then that just confirms my opinion that this guy was involved in the carve up of our club right up to his brass neck.
Click to expand...
Of course he was. They are all scum but Whitehouse is the most arrogant and horrible c@@t you could ever have the displeasure to meet. Unfortunately, money buys you lots of good lawyers and with him and his pals they knew how to play the game helping one another tie the Crown up in paperwork. That't not to say COPFS didn't make a total arse of the whole thing are they didn't put enough resources into preparing the case until it was too late.
 
Yet another damming example of life under SNP rule. The same level of havoc in that statement alos applies to schooling and hospital care which the SNP are in the process of wrecking. And dont start me on the SNP's handeling of the economy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top