The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[Footballfirst]

We will see how Findlay seeks to defend Whyte this morning. Yesterday, the Advocate Depute sought to keep the focus on the very narrow area of the SPA, saying that anything else before or after was irrelevant. He also made a surprising statement (if JD's tweets were accurate) "AD notes Whyte is not charged with failing to invest in Rangers after the takeover." which was at odds with his claims that Whyte had not met the conditions of the SPA.

 

 

I'd anticipate that Findlay will argue that the lead up to the takeover was highly relevant and that, despite what Murray said, it is almost inconceivable that Murray didn't know about Ticketus' involvement before the end of 2011, particularly when David Horne was aware that Ticketus' funding was being considered in late 2010. David Horne occupied the office next to SDM and was tasked by SDM to get the deal over the line.  I'd also expect him to highlight the position of Lloyds in all this and the benefit that SDM got by getting his Metals business back, by disposing of Rangers.

 

Is there enough there to allow Findlay to ask the Jury about "beyond a reasonable doubt" or to consider a "not proven" verdict?.

 

I'm sure that Lady Stacey will make her judgement on what should, or should not, be considered when she issues her directions to the jury on Monday. 

[Mysterion]

Thanks for your posts throughout FF.

 

They have been really good at taking a clear look at the situation as opposed to the "hearsay" that surrounds Rangers.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Mysterion

[jambovambo]

Slight delay in proceedings at Glasgow High Court, will update when case called.

#WhyteTrial

 

Doleman

[kingdannyb]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman  5m5 minutes ago

More

Findlay says all business negotiations involve "lying to each other"

 

Yup, nobody cares about the club, the fans, the shareholders.

Send them all to jail.

 

I feel genuinely sorry for the "normal" Rangers fans.

Legally shafted and nobody cares.

Edited June 2, 2017 by kingdannyb

[269miles]

Thanks for your posts throughout FF.

 

They have been really good at taking a clear look at the situation as opposed to the "hearsay" that surrounds Rangers.

Likewise.

[Sraman]

We will see how Findlay seeks to defend Whyte this morning. Yesterday, the Advocate Depute sought to keep the focus on the very narrow area of the SPA, saying that anything else before or after was irrelevant. He also made a surprising statement (if JD's tweets were accurate) "AD notes Whyte is not charged with failing to invest in Rangers after the takeover." which was at odds with his claims that Whyte had not met the conditions of the SPA.

 

 

I'd anticipate that Findlay will argue that the lead up to the takeover was highly relevant and that, despite what Murray said, it is almost inconceivable that Murray didn't know about Ticketus' involvement before the end of 2011, particularly when David Horne was aware that Ticketus' funding was being considered in late 2010. David Horne occupied the office next to SDM and was tasked by SDM to get the deal over the line.  I'd also expect him to highlight the position of Lloyds in all this and the benefit that SDM got by getting his Metals business back, by disposing of Rangers.

 

Is there enough there to allow Findlay to ask the Jury about "beyond a reasonable doubt" or to consider a "not proven" verdict?.

 

I'm sure that Lady Stacey will make her judgement on what should, or should not, be considered when she issues her directions to the jury on Monday. 

 

 

Could he not just go with "the purchase price for the club was one pound" as I do believe that both sides have stated this? Therefore, he had the funds to buy the club. Case closed, have a nice rest of your life Mr. Whyte.

[Mikey1874]

whyte is going to jail, this trial was about whether whyte used illegal means to buy rangers and the borrowing against the companies assets is illegal.

 

 

Maybe

 

Though thought that's what the Glazers did when they bought Man Utd

[Mikey1874]

Just a selection from Donald Findlay

 

"People are clearly giving evidence on what they know now" urges jury to consider what people knew at the time

 

Crown witnesses "are trying to protect their place in history"

 

"There was no crime"

 

"400,000 pages of evidence yet Crown focusing on 6 words"

 

"Crown suggest Whyte was in control of everything at the purchase - that is far from the case"

 

"Whyte and Murray have both been ill-served by their advisors"

 

Then talks about how a 12 week trial became shorter as Crown made case narrow. Trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle only looking at a few pieces.

[sairyinthat]

Just a selection from Donald Findlay

 

"People are clearly giving evidence on what they know now" urges jury to consider what people knew at the time

 

Crown witnesses "are trying to protect their place in history"

 

"There was no crime"

 

"400,000 pages of evidence yet Crown focusing on 6 words"

 

"Crown suggest Whyte was in control of everything at the purchase - that is far from the case"

 

"Whyte and Murray have both been ill-served by their advisors"

 

Then talks about how a 12 week trial became shorter as Crown made case narrow. Trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle only looking at a few pieces.

Floundering.

[269miles]

Just a selection from Donald Findlay

 

"People are clearly giving evidence on what they know now" urges jury to consider what people knew at the time

 

Crown witnesses "are trying to protect their place in history"

 

"There was no crime"

 

"400,000 pages of evidence yet Crown focusing on 6 words"

 

"Crown suggest Whyte was in control of everything at the purchase - that is far from the case"

 

"Whyte and Murray have both been ill-served by their advisors"

 

Then talks about how a 12 week trial became shorter as Crown made case narrow. Trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle only looking at a few pieces.

He ignored the advice from his own board who warned pre takeover the guy was unfit - as if he didn't already know the Whyte family in the first place. 

 

Strange that Findlay is being so kind toward SDM. 

[Mikey1874]

More from Donald Findlay

 

"Crown case is that money was not available on date of purchase 6 May 2011 and Whyte knew. That amounts to fraud"

 

"There was no loss to Murray...well you could say a pound"

 

Accuses Crown witnesses of buck passing "to preserve their reputations"

 

After the financial crisis David Murray made 2 mistakes 1. entrusted club to board "that didn't have a clue 2. trusted his advisors"

 

Big Tax liability would have been "the end of the club"

 

Mr Whyte came along with a business plan - how practical it was is not relevant.

 

Whyte portrayed as pantomime villain as if everything was fine before hand. Rangers was declining and no one knew what to do just borrow.

 

Murray wasn't interested where the money was coming from. Murray's lawyers didn't ask about the 'third party funding' in the Share Purchase Agreement.

[Mikey1874]

He ignored the advice from his own board who warned pre takeover the guy was unfit - as if he didn't already know the Whyte family in the first place.

 

Strange that Findlay is being so kind toward SDM.

Turning the blame to emphasis legal role of advisors perhaps

[The Gasman]

Given some of the evidence i wonder if Whyte may find himself in a position to sue David Murray.

 

There's been enough said by witnesses to demonstrate Murray wasn't acting in the best interests of Rangers Version1 by not paying the wee tax case.

I'd guess things might very quickly, become very uncomfortable, for SDM (and possibly some of his fellow Rangers Directors at that time) should any shareholder decide to sue over the Board failing to act in the shareholders / company's best interest.

[Deevers]

Turning the blame to emphasis legal role of advisors perhaps

Turning the blame to emphasis legal role of advisors perhaps

 

Just throwing up as much dust as possible to confuse the jurors. Much will depend on how savvy the jury actually are.

[Mikey1874]

Refers to deal that was dropped last minute because it involved building flats at Ibrox "why didn't advisors check in the first place? After that experience surely lawyers would have checked everything"

 

"Can I prove Murray knew about Ticketus? No I can't. Can I prove he should have known? Yes I can."

 

"It was more important to get the deal over the line"

 

Murray spent money marketing the club, on accountants for the tax case, had Dundas and Wilson. How much was spent on checking Whyte's background? Nothing, not a penny. To jury - "you are entitled to ask yourself 'why were they so inefficient?''"

 

The alarm bells were ringing but no one made enquiries, not the hardest job. Murray advisors focused on getting the deal done"

 

Previous potential buyers were checked out. "McGill view on Whyte - let's tell the press and let them investigate"

 

4 May 2011 email from David Murray (as David Fraser) "need to get this over the line...no realistic alternative...nothing is perfect..the fall out of no deal is really serious"

Edited June 2, 2017 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

The deal was more important than the detail.

 

When third party funding added to the agreement "no one cared, no one batted an eyelid"

[Unknown user]

It's really not the point if David Murray did x, y or z too, Whyte's on trial for breaking company law and for me it seems an open and shut case that he's guilty as charged.

The rest of it might be of interest to us but as far as the case is concerned it's just deflection IMO - "yeah, well, you know what HE did?"

[Mikey1874]

On to the Rangers board, Alistair Johnston etc - "not a penny of investment"

 

Paul Murray bid at 11th hour - failed as "it was nonsense and illegal"

 

Refers to Walter Smith saying squad needed strengthened but "bank had had enough". Things were very very bad, chances of European football diminishing dramatically.

 

View of Rangers board was "borrow more money, spend more money and everything will be alright". Would have been end of Rangers. "They were driving Rangers into a train crash and no one saw it, no one knew what to do". Iain McGill of Lloyds called the board 'dysfunctional'.

 

"Murray wanted to sell Rangers; there came a point where he had to sell"

 

Incentive to Murray to get his Metals business back.

 

"It was a con being run by people who didn't know what they were doing"

 

After Whyte takeover the bank was paid, stadium repaired, bought players including captain Lee Wallace. What more did they want him to do.

 

Season started with Malmo. If Rangers had been in Champions League we probably wouldn't be here today.

[Mikey1874]

Talk of intention to invest in players "PR window dressing". ?5 million would have bought very little in players. Just PR.

 

Break for lunch till 2 pm.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

I'd guess things might very quickly, become very uncomfortable, for SDM (and possibly some of his fellow Rangers Directors at that time) should any shareholder decide to sue over the Board failing to act in the shareholders / company's best interest.

 

Didn't King try and sue Murray about this ?20m 'Investment', so there is no love lost there between these two, watch this space.

[Craig Herbertson]

Surprised the defense didn't say that 'off the radar funds' could be seen in two ways.

[jambovambo]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 7m7 minutes ago

•  

Findlay: David Murray himself sat in that witness box and said no connection with Mr Whyte..then we saw the emails..how easily people forget

[Brick Tamland]

He ignored the advice from his own board who warned pre takeover the guy was unfit - as if he didn't already know the Whyte family in the first place. 

 

Strange that Findlay is being so kind toward SDM. 

Maybe a bit premature with the bit in bold...

[kingdannyb]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman  8m8 minutes ago

More

Findlay: I can't prove Murray knew about Ticketus but, I think I've proved beyond a reasonable doubt, they should have.

[Mikey1874]

Whyte's deal involved paying bank debt which he did. All other obligations were for the future. ?5 million for playing squad - McCoist confirmed he spent this. Health and safety liability was met. Appeal made on tax case. "Not a scrap of evidence working capital was not provided"

 

Paying bank debt saved ?1 million per year (interest)

 

In business the money you have is "money that is available to you. If it matters to someone where the money is coming from they can ask.

 

Ticketus would not have done a deal with Craig Whyte if they didn't know he had the resources to back it up.

 

Murray had the option to check the source of funds. "They chose not to, that's not Mr Whyte's fault"

 

Crown are saying secrecy around the Ticketus deal is 'sinister'. Ticketus were insisting on confidentiality to avoid upsetting supporters (eg a boycott). Repeats he can't prove Murray knew about deal but club dealt with them previously.

[Mikey1874]

Murray knew there were other investors. "Only conceivable question is to ask who are they...what they did? Nothing"

 

"Only conclusion is it didn't matter where the money came from, they didn't care"

 

Findlay shows emails and notes etc referring to ?15 million from Octopus. Eg "Octopus meeting discussing with CW ?15 million". "Who told them Whyte was talking to Ticketus"

 

"Only two conclusions. They didn't do their job properly or they didn't care"

 

Refers to bill for small tax case rising from ?2.2 million to ?2.8 million. "The hope was 'someone else will sort it out'...half a million thrown away for nothing"

 

"The notion this club was being run properly is becoming offensive...The whole thing was deteriorating getting worse and worse by the minute"

 

"Rangers Football Club was given away for nothing."

Edited June 2, 2017 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

Looks like Donald Findlay angling to continue on Monday.

[Mikey1874]

Findlay is saying they must have known about Ticketus

[Jamboelite]

Findlay is saying they must have known about Ticketus

He is right they did by the looks of it.

[269miles]

Didn't King try and sue Murray about this ?20m 'Investment', so there is no love lost there between these two, watch this space.

JJ blog has long been alleging this was money laundering - King ponied up ?20 million and got ?15 million back (IIRC). King could tell the SA taxman the money was lost. A win-win situation. 

 

All allegedly.  

[jambovambo]

http://files.heraldscotland.com/news/15325252.Craig_Whyte_trial__Former_Rangers_owner_being_made_fall_guy_over_takeover_deal__Findlay_tells_jurors/

 

Great summary of DF's summing up.

[jambovambo]

https://johnjamessite.com

 

Lordy

[RobNox]

https://johnjamessite.com

 

Lordy

Is there any realistic prospect of Murray being done for perjury?  I doubt it myself.

[Unknown user]

Is there any realistic prospect of Murray being done for perjury? I doubt it myself.

In short, no.

It's not enough to lie - the lie must be under oath, be known to be a lie, and must directly affect the outcome of the trial in question for it to be something he can be prosecuted for.

As I understand it, the result won't hinge on his testimony, so he wouldn't be charged with perjury.

 

Under Scots law, to secure a perjury conviction against the accused, the evidence against them must relate directly to the prosecution case and affect the outcome of the hearing.

http://www.scotslawblog.com/defamation/not-every-lie-amounts-to-perjury-lessons-coulson-acquittal/

Edited June 3, 2017 by Smithee

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Is there any realistic prospect of Murray being done for perjury?  I doubt it myself.

 

About as likely as that John James explaining why he pretended to be a Rangers fan.

[jambovambo]

Donald Findlay not missing any points in his summing up today.

 

These are only the most recent.

 

1. James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 39s40 seconds ago

1. Findlay "Rangers was heading for disaster one way or another" even without the tax case "sword of Damocles" hanging over it's head.

 

• Findlay: Rangers a "sad and sorry mess" King's money arrested, Paul Murray bid "pie in the sky and probably illegal.

[Hagar the Horrible]

Findlay Whyte's deal with Ticketus was "perfectly legitimate...nothing illegal about it"

 

I am not sure that will wash, it would open doors the City would not want openned as to protect shareholders, you cant use the resources of a company to buy the company first, you have to fund it yourself, then do what the heck you want with the resources include asset strip the company...such as sell Arsenal shares(not brought up in court?) 

[Hagar the Horrible]

DF finished his summing up,  I think this will come down to how the Judge directs the Jury?  its that close, It will be down to the techicals, not down to innocence of the law IS an excuse, its all the lawers fault for failing to do the lagalities right? 

 

If Whyte is inncocent then it will be down to the Jury beleiving SDM lied about not knowing about the ticketus deal?  so how can fraud be commited at the cost of a ?1?

 

But if he found guilty?  it will be because Whyte used the ticketus deal to fund the takeover with the reources of the company he was buying, and this is big, because all other city rules and the takeover panel will be watching this rule being tested?  Ticketus are the only victims, SDM could not care less, he just wanted the ?1 and out of Dodge,  Rangers itself was a basket case, and the big tax case would have been terminal regardless? 

[Glamorgan Jambo]

DF finished his summing up, I think this will come down to how the Judge directs the Jury? its that close, It will be down to the techicals, not down to innocence of the law IS an excuse, its all the lawers fault for failing to do the lagalities right?

 

If Whyte is inncocent then it will be down to the Jury beleiving SDM lied about not knowing about the ticketus deal? so how can fraud be commited at the cost of a ?1?

 

But if he found guilty? it will be because Whyte used the ticketus deal to fund the takeover with the reources of the company he was buying, and this is big, because all other city rules and the takeover panel will be watching this rule being tested? Ticketus are the only victims, SDM could not care less, he just wanted the ?1 and out of Dodge, Rangers itself was a basket case, and the big tax case would have been terminal regardless?

Not 100% correct. Murray also wanted the sale to go through so he could get his metals business back. Worth a lot more than a pound to him.

[BelgeJambo]

Was just catching up on all Dolemans tweets

Seem to be giving Murray a bit of a roasting

Edited June 5, 2017 by BelgeJambo

[Footballfirst]

Lady Stacey gave little away today during her directions to the jury.  She will finish her bit tomorrow morning when she will advise the jury on what verdicts are open to them. Then it will be down to the jury themselves.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Footballfirst

[Big Slim Stylee]

Lady Stacey gave little away today during her directions to the jury.  She will finish her bit tomorrow morning when she will advise the jury on what verdicts are open to them. Then it will be down to the jury themselves.

 

Is the jury able to return a "not proven" verdict in this type of trial?

[Footballfirst]

Is the jury able to return a "not proven" verdict in this type of trial?

Yes

 

He did what was alleged - Guilty

He didn't do what was alleged - Not Guilty

He might have done what was alleged but there is insufficient proof to convict - Not Proven

[The Gasman]

....Murray also wanted the sale to go through so he could get his metals business back. Worth a lot more than a pound to him.

This is the bit that has the potential to be awkward for SDM, should anyone (financial regulator, disgruntled shareholder, receiver, etc) choose to challenge whether he fulfilled his legal obligations to do what was best for Rangers and their shareholders.

[Big Slim Stylee]

Yes

 

He did what was alleged - Guilty

He didn't do what was alleged - Not Guilty

He might have done what was alleged but there is insufficient proof to convict - Not Proven

 

I have a gut feeling that could be a mighty tempting option here.....

[Mikey1874]

Donald Findlay repeated the 'we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the Malmo defeat"

 

I think that is the only thing he has said which isn't true

 

But just a reminder of the team that night for second leg

 

McGregor Papac Wallace Whittaker Ortiz Bougherra McCulloch Edu Davis Jelevic Naismith Sub Hemmings

 

If Rangers fans hadn't have been banned after crowd trouble they might have made a difference though the red cards for Whittaker and Bougherra didn't help.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

Not guilty on both counts

 

Is my prediction

[jambovambo]

Not guilty first charge

 

Guilty second

 

Mine

[Mikey1874]

Tough for the jury

 

Hope they can reach verdicts

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

Not 100% correct. Murray also wanted the sale to go through so he could get his metals business back. Worth a lot more than a pound to him.

While I have refrained from commenting on the case, I am curious about references I have seen from other posters about Murray's metals business.

 

How was it tied in to the Rangers entity of the time?