You really won't believe anything that doesn't suit you IE.
Good to know.
"I have no idea who he is but he's regularly mentioned on here by plenty of bears.
They clearly take a keen interest in him."
You've got to be at the wind up after what I posted on this very thread a few posts ago
17 mins ago
""Don't read ph-ill (delete as appropriate) except when bears post it on here"
Beyond parody
"You really won't believe anything that doesn't suit you IE.
Good to know.
"
I like things to be factual, I know that doesn't suit you when your talking pash about all things rangers
I honestly have no idea who John James is ffs.
Everyone knows who Phill is, poor guy just wanted to help
Ph-I'll can't even help himself or others never mind rangers
Poor pensioner
OOFT....davie Murray shredding a few comfort blankets today 'ebt's gave us the opportunity to acquire players that we couldn't have afforded otherwise'
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Murray not coming out well under questioning by Findlay. Oops.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Curly 💩 - I'm mumpsimus and I know it.' (except on a Wednesday, that is my obstreperous day ) - ITS JIST A BIG CLIQUE N'AT (U1103)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by My POV-got my name back for a couple of days! (U10636)
posted 12 seconds ago
Murray not coming out well under questioning by Findlay. Oops.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And this is when the whole thing turns into an absolute farce
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would hope that we would eventually be able to join the dots for what actually happened after all this.
Doubt it right enough!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Don't know if you'll see this Curly, I understand how Findlay could be viewed as being conflicted, but do you think that would or could adversely affect the prosecution's case or the defence's case?
comment by My POV-got my name back for a couple of days! (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
Don't know if you'll see this Curly, I understand how Findlay could be viewed as being conflicted, but do you think that would or could adversely affect the prosecution's case or the defence's case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not conflicted at all. Cash before sash for donald. He will simply do the best job he can for his client as he has done before for sundry murderers, rapists,etc.
Whyte is far from the biggest sleazeball he has represented.
The prosecution should call donald as a witness and make him cross examine himself.
I can see how he can be perceived as having a COI. He was vice chairman for a while, which would possibly make you think he wouldn't represent his client correctly as he previously had leanings towards the Gers. But, it doesn't seem to be bothering him just now.
It's a smart move by Whyte. Get an insider albeit a bit out of the picture of past 15 years or so. If he wins the case great. If not have him as the plain sight orinj hand plant for when you crowdfund an appeal.
Legal aid before Orange aid...
Magnum makes a great point that Findlay has defended way worse scoundrels than Whyte. I'm not even sure Whyte is front of queue of worst people ever involved in running things at ibrox.
Think this is being perceived as being more personal for Findlay though. It's not like he's defending someone who killed something that he loved.
Oh. Wait.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
The Craig Whyte Trial
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 26/4/17
You really won't believe anything that doesn't suit you IE.
Good to know.
posted on 26/4/17
"I have no idea who he is but he's regularly mentioned on here by plenty of bears.
They clearly take a keen interest in him."
You've got to be at the wind up after what I posted on this very thread a few posts ago
posted on 26/4/17
17 mins ago
""Don't read ph-ill (delete as appropriate) except when bears post it on here"
Beyond parody
posted on 26/4/17
"You really won't believe anything that doesn't suit you IE.
Good to know.
"
I like things to be factual, I know that doesn't suit you when your talking pash about all things rangers
posted on 26/4/17
I honestly have no idea who John James is ffs.
Everyone knows who Phill is, poor guy just wanted to help
posted on 26/4/17
Ph-I'll can't even help himself or others never mind rangers
Poor pensioner
posted on 26/4/17
OOFT....davie Murray shredding a few comfort blankets today 'ebt's gave us the opportunity to acquire players that we couldn't have afforded otherwise'
posted on 26/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/17
Filtered
posted on 26/4/17
Murray not coming out well under questioning by Findlay. Oops.
posted on 26/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/17
comment by Curly 💩 - I'm mumpsimus and I know it.' (except on a Wednesday, that is my obstreperous day ) - ITS JIST A BIG CLIQUE N'AT (U1103)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by My POV-got my name back for a couple of days! (U10636)
posted 12 seconds ago
Murray not coming out well under questioning by Findlay. Oops.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And this is when the whole thing turns into an absolute farce
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would hope that we would eventually be able to join the dots for what actually happened after all this.
Doubt it right enough!
posted on 26/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/4/17
Don't know if you'll see this Curly, I understand how Findlay could be viewed as being conflicted, but do you think that would or could adversely affect the prosecution's case or the defence's case?
posted on 26/4/17
comment by My POV-got my name back for a couple of days! (U10636)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
Don't know if you'll see this Curly, I understand how Findlay could be viewed as being conflicted, but do you think that would or could adversely affect the prosecution's case or the defence's case?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not conflicted at all. Cash before sash for donald. He will simply do the best job he can for his client as he has done before for sundry murderers, rapists,etc.
Whyte is far from the biggest sleazeball he has represented.
The prosecution should call donald as a witness and make him cross examine himself.
posted on 26/4/17
I can see how he can be perceived as having a COI. He was vice chairman for a while, which would possibly make you think he wouldn't represent his client correctly as he previously had leanings towards the Gers. But, it doesn't seem to be bothering him just now.
posted on 26/4/17
Cash before sash. Haha.
posted on 26/4/17
It's a smart move by Whyte. Get an insider albeit a bit out of the picture of past 15 years or so. If he wins the case great. If not have him as the plain sight orinj hand plant for when you crowdfund an appeal.
posted on 26/4/17
Legal aid before Orange aid...
posted on 27/4/17
Magnum makes a great point that Findlay has defended way worse scoundrels than Whyte. I'm not even sure Whyte is front of queue of worst people ever involved in running things at ibrox.
posted on 27/4/17
Think this is being perceived as being more personal for Findlay though. It's not like he's defending someone who killed something that he loved.
Oh. Wait.
posted on 27/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 27/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Page 4 of 7
6 | 7