Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

  1. #1

    Default Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Some reckon this could last 14 weeks !!!!!

    The waistcoat in the dock soon to be followed by the gardner, and questioned by the sash singer Findlay.

    You couldny make this shit up !!!

    ONLY in masonic scoddland :-)

  2. #2

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Going aff them tweet things it seems like the gardner and bigot cardihun are going with the " I cant remember" defence.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    The cardigan has already been proven to have been lying today and the gardener it seems is being his cheeky chappy self. Hope the pair of them get ripped to shreds.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by pual View Post
    The cardigan has already been proven to have been lying today and the gardener it seems is being his cheeky chappy self. Hope the pair of them get ripped to shreds.
    Was that under oath?

    If it was, why has he not been charged with perjury.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle View Post
    Was that under oath?

    If it was, why has he not been charged with perjury.
    Yeah. He denied something and then the other lawyer produced a transcript of a meeting he was at when he was talking about it. He then said he didn't remember saying it. He's a sleekit hun cunt.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Any one following this and read that Swally McCoist thought David Weir was captain during his spell?

  7. #7

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jameeyy View Post
    Any one following this and read that Swally McCoist thought David Weir was captain during his spell?
    Thats what I meant when I said he was being a cheeky chappie. He's a smug hun cunt. The worst type of hun imo.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Today the sash singer said the hun board knew about tax bill in January but hadn't "agreed when to pay it" when Whyte took over in March.

    Thats the licence issue right up in the air now eh :-)

  9. #9

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle View Post
    Today the sash singer said the hun board knew about tax bill in January but hadn't "agreed when to pay it" when Whyte took over in March.

    Thats the licence issue right up in the air now eh :-)
    But it's been obvious for years and even our board don't seem arsed about taking them to task over it

  10. #10

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by jake10 View Post
    But it's been obvious for years and even our board don't seem arsed about taking them to task over it
    Which makes me wonder how many people actually knew about it. I honestly believe that we did.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Roofs were, "in a dilapidated state and in places have become unsafe" 6 years ago, it'll be ok they put nets up

  12. #12
    Semi-Benevolent Dictator Euskadi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    I wasnt born, so much as I fell out

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by pual View Post
    Which makes me wonder how many people actually knew about it. I honestly believe that we did.
    If we knew about it wouldn't we have made the same extensive use of the exploitations at hand?
    You've probably not even bought a share in your whole entire life
    ~~ Admitting Peter Lawwell into my consciousness since 2015 ~~

  13. #13

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by jake10 View Post
    But it's been obvious for years and even our board don't seem arsed about taking them to task over it
    Because its not in the interest of the appointed Board members.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Euskadi View Post
    If we knew about it wouldn't we have made the same extensive use of the exploitations at hand?
    What? Like accommodating them a licence? You need to extinguish this illusion that our Board would exploit them.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by pual View Post
    Which makes me wonder how many people actually knew about it. I honestly believe that we did.
    We did, its public knowledge from Phil MacGiollaBhains book.

  16. #16
    Semi-Benevolent Dictator Euskadi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    I wasnt born, so much as I fell out

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jameeyy View Post
    What? Like accommodating them a licence? You need to extinguish this illusion that our Board would exploit them.
    For some reason I thought he was on about EBTs

  17. #17

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by pual View Post
    Which makes me wonder how many people actually knew about it. I honestly believe that we did.
    And I bet the SFA were fully aware of it.

    To my mind the prosecution has proved that Whyte was liable to pay the wee tax case bill 2.8M and the roof repair bill of 1.7M.......................... and didny LOL

  18. #18

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Euskadi View Post
    For some reason I thought he was on about EBTs
    How could we exploit them when the EBTs were legal? They failed to pay the income tax on them.

  19. #19
    Semi-Benevolent Dictator Euskadi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    I wasnt born, so much as I fell out

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Jameeyy View Post
    How could we exploit them when the EBTs were legal? They failed to pay the income tax on them.
    You can exploit something which is legal

  20. #20

    Default Re: Whyte's acquisition (court case)

    Quote Originally Posted by Euskadi View Post
    You can exploit something which is legal
    Did you read my whole post? I stated they never paid the income tax... That by definition is exploiting their situation and as a result they went into liquidation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •