Resolution 12 Update

Imatim

Well-known member
...........................

Nailed it! Great article.

Either fight for what is right Mr Lawwell or go.

No more pandering to those who hate us. You’re either with us or against us.

We will not sit at the back of the bus
 

Thai Tim

Well-known member
That is all we have ever asked for mate..THE TRUTH..

HH.
I have to say, even if Res 12 gets nowhere, the fact the Res 12 guys have made certain corrupted people sweat their erses, might make these same people, or people of their ilk, think twice about trying the same type of corruption in the future. No matter the outcome, no one should say all these Res 12 guys efforts have been a waste of time. Indeed, their efforts should be applauded and recognized in some way.
 

jinxy67

Well-known member
I have to say, even if Res 12 gets nowhere, the fact the Res 12 guys have made certain corrupted people sweat their erses, might make these same people, or people of their ilk, think twice about trying the same type of corruption in the future. No matter the outcome, no one should say all these Res 12 guys efforts have been a waste of time. Indeed, their efforts should be applauded and recognized in some way.
. I agree with the whole statement above but the only thing they want Is the backing of
THE BOARD
Sorry to say can’t see that happening Hail! Hail!
 

boab1916

Well-known member
The problem is Celtic FC (the board) have let this drag on too long and the cheating club that benefited from this have been liquidated, so no compensation likely. I would imagine criminal activity has taken place, so what I think would be fair and reasonable would be arrests and criminal charges, although making allegations that you have been robbed 8 years after the theft wouldn't go down to well in any court. The SFA should be severely censored, and anyone involved still working with the SFA should be sacked without compensation. It was good to see The Herald actually reporting on Res 12 but it's all a bit late in my opinion. If I was a major shareholder I would have put forward a vote of no confidence in the board years ago, I think the Res 12 activists tried to do that, I can't remember.

Slightly related, the transference of trophies from the old club to the new club should also be rigorously challenged by our board. There is nothing wrong with supporters of Sevco treating their new club as if it is the same club as the old club, that is up to them, but to have that delusion officially recognized by the SFA is blatant corruption and should have been fought much more rigorously. This set up where they can blame the old different club for previous misdemeanors whilst benefiting from being officially recognized as a continuation of the old club is a stain on Scottish football. The fact our board allowed this to happen is another reason to censor them for their meek resistance to the obvious corruption and their shameful complicity.
You have forgotten one thing that the SFA know and that is a fraud cases in Scottish law have no time stature attached, the SFA have attempted to throw this into the long grass but they knew this day might be coming, when they gave the date for their statement on events, they have yet to honour, but nevertheless Maxwell did state this will come back in the no to distant future, AJ flipped his lid and could not contain himself with his bold statement of get it up you Celtic this is the same club and the SFA's bold fuck you Celtic heres a three match ban and we are not punishing our own club, we are at the stage were we are simply waiting on the other halfs side of events, no doubt they will be sold on Feb 14th 2020.
 

boab1916

Well-known member
I have to say, even if Res 12 gets nowhere, the fact the Res 12 guys have made certain corrupted people sweat their erses, might make these same people, or people of their ilk, think twice about trying the same type of corruption in the future. No matter the outcome, no one should say all these Res 12 guys efforts have been a waste of time. Indeed, their efforts should be applauded and recognized in some way.
I would not be too quick to give the SFA a second chance and future, their is still a lot of fessing up to be done, someones head will roll or they will all roll.
 

boab1916

Well-known member
Shareholders have a solid case and should not be too difficult to prove "an intention to deceive" the evidence has already been made public knowledge in the High Court, step forward Campbell Oligivie and Alastair Johnston.

Common law fraud
Fraud is committed when someone achieves a practical result by the means of a falsepretence. In other words, where someone is caused to do something they would nototherwise have done by use of deception.
Proving an intention to deceive is essential in all cases, and can often be inferred from the actions of the accused.
The range of ‘false pretences’ observed in Scottish courts isincredibly wide, from outright lies to sinistersilence, and the practical results that havebeen achieved are equally diverse.
If thepractical result is not achieved there may be a prosecution for attempted fraud
 

Winning Captains Bolingoli

Administrator
Staff member
Shareholders have a solid case and should not be too difficult to prove "an intention to deceive" the evidence has already been made public knowledge in the High Court, step forward Campbell Oligivie and Alastair Johnston.

Common law fraud
Fraud is committed when someone achieves a practical result by the means of a falsepretence. In other words, where someone is caused to do something they would nototherwise have done by use of deception.
Proving an intention to deceive is essential in all cases, and can often be inferred from the actions of the accused.
The range of ‘false pretences’ observed in Scottish courts isincredibly wide, from outright lies to sinistersilence, and the practical results that havebeen achieved are equally diverse.
If thepractical result is not achieved there may be a prosecution for attempted fraud
Never mind Fraud. Have a look at the legal definition for Uttering.
 

Imatim

Well-known member
................................

There is little doubt in most minds now that illegal activities were at play and High Court evidence has established this is the case.

It then begs the question - If there is indeed an indemnity re the Huns written in to the secret 5 way agreement, was this indemnity added to this agreement as a means of protecting those guilty of potential illegal activities?

If this is established, then it would appear that the parties/signatories to this secret agreement, have potentially colluded to pervert the course of justice.

Could this scenario legally implicate and include all those who were consulted and gave their blessing, so to speak, to this alleged indemnity.

Could this possibly explain why we are witnessing such resistance to Resolution 12 from those we would have expected to be on Board with it?

What’s your take on this Boab?....and anyone else?
 
Last edited:

michael duffy

Well-known member
................................

There is little doubt in most minds now that illegal activities were at play and High Court evidence has established this is the case.

It then begs the question - If there is indeed an indemnity re the Huns written in to the secret 5 way agreement, was this indemnity added to this agreement as a means of protecting those guilty of potential illegal activities?

If this is established, then it would appear that the parties/signatories to this secret agreement, have potentially colluded to pervert the course of justice.

What’s your take on this Boab?....and anyone else?
Think it was a get out of jail card Imatim,with peter lawwell's fingerprints all over it, to perpetuate the "old firm" rivalry, it's all about the money!, then again. ah'm pished! 🥴 🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺🍺
 

boab1916

Well-known member
................................

There is little doubt in most minds now that illegal activities were at play and High Court evidence has established this is the case.

It then begs the question - If there is indeed an indemnity re the Huns written in to the secret 5 way agreement, was this indemnity added to this agreement as a means of protecting those guilty of potential illegal activities?

If this is established, then it would appear that the parties/signatories to this secret agreement, have potentially colluded to pervert the course of justice.

What’s your take on this Boab?....and anyone else?
I do not think that the five way agreement makes any difference to the case, its the initial act of submitting false documents regards the licence that is the crime, for this is were the shareholders are decieved and deprived through fraud of what is rightfully theirs.
Were Celtic could be in bother (if it materialises they knew before the admittance in the high court and now in the public domain) I would imagine is been privvy to information and known a fraud has taken place did not act in the interest of their shareholders and in doing so fraudently or naively failed to carry out the dereliction of their duty and failed to represent the shareholders.
 

Nick66

Well-known member
............................

These Bhoys aren’t for giving up.....I’m convinced there’s a plan in place with or without the help of the Celtic Board.....and when it all comes to pass.....the collateral damage to those involved who are guilty of committing fraud.....and those who have colluded in matters.....will be outed and pay the price.....that’s what I think
Nor should they give up. However, any form of justice has to come via a club presenting evidence to the football authority, or via the public presenting same evidence to the police. If the police are the only recourse for justice, then so be it. Res12 must be taken to the limit of law. Supported by all fans of all clubs to the betterment of our game. Publish, prosecute and damn them all. HH
 

Imatim

Well-known member
I do not think that the five way agreement makes any difference to the case, its the initial act of submitting false documents regards the licence that is the crime, for this is were the shareholders are decieved and deprived through fraud of what is rightfully theirs.
Were Celtic could be in bother (if it materialises they knew before the admittance in the high court and now in the public domain) I would imagine is been privvy to information and known a fraud has taken place did not act in the interest of their shareholders and in doing so fraudently or naively failed to carry out the dereliction of their duty and failed to represent the shareholders.
......................

Yep!

I made an addition to my last post on this if you care to have a look.
 

boab1916

Well-known member
Nor should they give up. However, any form of justice has to come via a club presenting evidence to the football authority, or via the public presenting same evidence to the police. If the police are the only recourse for justice, then so be it. Res12 must be taken to the limit of law. Supported by all fans of all clubs to the betterment of our game. Publish, prosecute and damn them all. HH
The only thing i can think of in Celtics defence is CO dealing at the SFA with registrations and he would not be revealing to anyone that the registrations are not Kosha.
However, i vaguely remember Craig Whyte had a meeting with the SFA i believe in the city centre over lunch, I am sure i read right he revealed to them the extent and seriouness of Rangers and the potential for Admin, i believe this was calculated as the SFA were about to make their TV deal, so alarm bells were ringing, but not in the way they should have been. This may have been the catalyst to ensure the TV deal included by hook or by crook an old firm.
A wee visit to the downfall of rangers might be the point of reference to gather in the facts and a wee visit to the vaults of Random Thoughts might be of interest.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top