The Blame Game

O

Odd Son Edward

Guest
Putting the pain and suffering of Torbett's victims to the side for a moment; the claims of the solicitor representing at least one of the victims states that the Club has a vicarious responsibility to accept blame and as such compensate the victims. And if not, he'll be going to court.

As it will be a civil case, the finding will be based on the balance of probability. So let's look at the arrangements of CFC and CBC.

Two seperate entities. However, the latter was supported by the former to an extent. That is transparent. But is CFC vicariously responsible? No more than the headteacher who supports the local BB group by allowing them free use of the gym hall for Brigade nights and subsequent related functions.

Or the priest who allows the parish hall to be used for the Brownies and encourages the young of the parish to join via weekly announcements.

Neither the school head, Education Authority, parish priest or diocese is responsible for any crimes perpetrated by those in charge.

The support provided was given in the trust and confidence that the individuals concerned were fulfilling their duties honestly and not for a clandestine criminal purpose.

Nowadays, one would expect a supporting organisation to conduct a degree of due diligence, e.g. Disclosure Checks to confirm the trustworthiness of those seeking their support. But vicarious responsibility for their actions - away and bile yer heid. This was in an era where no such checks and balances existed.

Similarly CFC are reputationally victims of Torbett also. By allowing him use of the Celtic name, colours and providing various financial assistance and other supporting mechanisms - the club did so on the trust and understanding that Torbett was an honest and trustworthy individual doing a service for the community. His crimes have also exploded in the face of CFC. But responsible in anyway for his sickening crimes CFC is not.

A McDonalds branch franchise in Glasgow supports a youth football team via sponsorship providing strips and related funds. Is that McDonalds franchise or the McDonalds brand responsible for anything the coaches do?

Unfortunately, we live in a society of ambulance chasers. A Glasgow based solicitors (DB) directors being amongst the highest paid earners in the UK. Don't think for a second these unscrupulous lawyers intentions are victim centred. This is just about making money. The larger the compensation, the larger the fee and commission.

So unfortunately, the focus looks as if it will move from the despicable perpetrator and shift squarely and unfairly onto our beloved CFC.

In the modern blame culture, it is not anticipated that the actual perpetrator has significant finances at his disposal in order to pursue a civil compensation action. But CFC a victim by proxy, does.

Despicable in every sense both for CFC and the unfortunate victims.

That reminds me there are independent Celtic soccer clubs in operation througout the world. CFC allows elements of the brand such as the badge and strip to be used, and assists in other ways by endorsing and sponsoring events and even by providing hospitality. But does that mean CFC is vicariously responsible for any sins which may be committed by those running these organisations. Absolutely not.

As I stated earlier; the club undertakes a degree of due diligence now, much the same way companies do with their supplier chains. If it unwittingly comes to light that for example a supplier is involved in child labour exploitation, yes there will be a degree of blow back on the client company. But if it acted responsibly and took necessary steps to conduct due diligence, acted to bring pressure on the supplier and to disassociate with said supplier then, there is not much else it can do.

Celtic Football Club was duped by this vile individual and no doubt there is regret for the support provided by the club to CBC. But were Torbet's crimes foreseeable? Was CFC complicit? Did CFC create and support the platform for the disgusting purpose it was used? Not in any way.

And who will be the winners at the end? Regardless of any future developments, it won't be the victims or Celtic. What measures can be put in place to prevent this from happening in the future. Very little as there are already competent checks and balances in place and legislation to minimise these risks.

So ultimately, who will the winners be? Yes, the ambulance chasing solicitors. I hope they can sleep well at night. But of course they will. They are soliicitors after all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Putting the pain and suffering of Torbett's victims to the side for a moment; the claims of the solicitor representing at least one of the victims states that the Club has a vicarious responsibility to accept blame and as such compensate the victims. And if not, he'll be going to court.

As it will be a civil case, the finding will be based on the balance of probability. So let's look at the arrangements of CFC and CBC.

Two seperate entities. However, the latter was supported by the former to an extent. That is transparent. But is CFC vicariously responsible? No more than the headteacher who supports the local BB group by allowing them free use of the gym hall for Brigade nights and subsequent related functions.

Or the priest who allows the parish hall to be used for the Brownies and encourages the young of the parish to join via weekly announcements.

Neither the school head, Education Authority, parish priest or diocese is responsible for any crimes perpetrated by those in charge.

The support provided was given in the trust and confidence that the individuals concerned were fulfilling their duties honestly and not for a clandestine criminal purpose.

Nowadays, one would expect a supporting organisation to conduct a degree of due diligence, e.g. Disclosure Checks to confirm the trustworthiness of those seeking their support. But vicarious responsibility for their actions - away and bile yer heid. This was in an era where no such checks and balances existed.

Similarly CFC are reputationally victims of Torbett also. By allowing him use of the Celtic name, colours and providing various financial assistance and other supporting mechanisms - the club did so on the trust and understanding that Torbett was an honest and trustworthy individual doing a service for the community. His crimes have also exploded in the face of CFC. But responsible in anyway for his sickening crimes CFC is not.

A McDonalds branch franchise in Glasgow supports a youth football team via sponsorship providing strips and related funds. Is that McDonalds franchise or the McDonalds brand responsible for anything the coaches do?

Unfortunately, we live in a society of ambulance chasers. A Glasgow based solicitors (DB) directors being amongst the highest paid earners in the UK. Don't think for a second these unscrupulous lawyers intentions are victim centred. This is just about making money. The larger the compensation, the larger the fee and commission.

So unfortunately, the focus looks as if it will move from the despicable perpetrator and shift squarely and unfairly onto our beloved CFC.

In the modern blame culture, it is not anticipated that the actual perpetrator has significant finances at his disposal in order to pursue a civil compensation action. But CFC a victim by proxy, does.

Despicable in every sense both for CFC and the unfortunate victims.

That reminds me there are independent Celtic soccer clubs in operation througout the world. CFC allows elements of the brand such as the badge and strip to be used, and assists in other ways by endorsing and sponsoring events and even by providing hospitality. But does that mean CFC is vicariously responsible for any sins which may be committed by those running these organisations. Absolutely not.

As I stated earlier; the club undertakes a degree of due diligence now, much the same way companies do with their supplier chains. If it unwittingly comes to light that for example a supplier is involved in child labour exploitation, yes there will be a degree of blow back on the client company. But if it acted responsibly and took necessary steps to conduct due diligence, acted to bring pressure on the supplier and to disassociate with said supplier then, there is not much else it can do.

Celtic Football Club was duped by this vile individual and no doubt there is regret for the support provided by the club to CBC. But were Torbet's crimes foreseeable? Was CFC complicit? Did CFC create and support the platform for the disgusting purpose it was used? Not in any way.

And who will be the winners at the end? Regardless of any future developments, it won't be the victims or Celtic. What measures can be put in place to prevent this from happening in the future. Very little as there are already competent checks and balances in place and legislation to minimise these risks.

So ultimately, who will the winners be? Yes, the ambulance chasing solicitors. I hope they can sleep well at night. But of course they will. They are soliicitors after all.
This is the sort of piece we should see written in a national newspaper...unfortunately we already know the narrative the MSM in Scotland will take. When the scandal broke in England about abuse at boy clubs the media down here handled it well...they cared about the victims...they understood that the club's involved where also victims. Of course they stated that if anyone at the club was culpable in anyway they should be brought to justice. But at no time was the actual football club blamed for what was going on. This won't happen in Scotland. The media up there will come out with all sorts of little digs and comments regarding Celtic...just enough to fire up the hordes...just enough to drag our great clubs name through the mud. How much news pages will the solicitor demanding we apologise get. A lot more than any actual victim I bet.
 
This is the sort of piece we should see written in a national newspaper...unfortunately we already know the narrative the MSM in Scotland will take. When the scandal broke in England about abuse at boy clubs the media down here handled it well...they cared about the victims...they understood that the club's involved where also victims. Of course they stated that if anyone at the club was culpable in anyway they should be brought to justice. But at no time was the actual football club blamed for what was going on. This won't happen in Scotland. The media up there will come out with all sorts of little digs and comments regarding Celtic...just enough to fire up the hordes...just enough to drag our great clubs name through the mud. How much news pages will the solicitor demanding we apologise get. A lot more than any actual victim I bet.
Putting the pain and suffering of Torbett's victims to the side for a moment; the claims of the solicitor representing at least one of the victims states that the Club has a vicarious responsibility to accept blame and as such compensate the victims. And if not, he'll be going to court.

As it will be a civil case, the finding will be based on the balance of probability. So let's look at the arrangements of CFC and CBC.

Two seperate entities. However, the latter was supported by the former to an extent. That is transparent. But is CFC vicariously responsible? No more than the headteacher who supports the local BB group by allowing them free use of the gym hall for Brigade nights and subsequent related functions.

Or the priest who allows the parish hall to be used for the Brownies and encourages the young of the parish to join via weekly announcements.

Neither the school head, Education Authority, parish priest or diocese is responsible for any crimes perpetrated by those in charge.

The support provided was given in the trust and confidence that the individuals concerned were fulfilling their duties honestly and not for a clandestine criminal purpose.

Nowadays, one would expect a supporting organisation to conduct a degree of due diligence, e.g. Disclosure Checks to confirm the trustworthiness of those seeking their support. But vicarious responsibility for their actions - away and bile yer heid. This was in an era where no such checks and balances existed.

Similarly CFC are reputationally victims of Torbett also. By allowing him use of the Celtic name, colours and providing various financial assistance and other supporting mechanisms - the club did so on the trust and understanding that Torbett was an honest and trustworthy individual doing a service for the community. His crimes have also exploded in the face of CFC. But responsible in anyway for his sickening crimes CFC is not.

A McDonalds branch franchise in Glasgow supports a youth football team via sponsorship providing strips and related funds. Is that McDonalds franchise or the McDonalds brand responsible for anything the coaches do?

Unfortunately, we live in a society of ambulance chasers. A Glasgow based solicitors (DB) directors being amongst the highest paid earners in the UK. Don't think for a second these unscrupulous lawyers intentions are victim centred. This is just about making money. The larger the compensation, the larger the fee and commission.

So unfortunately, the focus looks as if it will move from the despicable perpetrator and shift squarely and unfairly onto our beloved CFC.

In the modern blame culture, it is not anticipated that the actual perpetrator has significant finances at his disposal in order to pursue a civil compensation action. But CFC a victim by proxy, does.

Despicable in every sense both for CFC and the unfortunate victims.

That reminds me there are independent Celtic soccer clubs in operation througout the world. CFC allows elements of the brand such as the badge and strip to be used, and assists in other ways by endorsing and sponsoring events and even by providing hospitality. But does that mean CFC is vicariously responsible for any sins which may be committed by those running these organisations. Absolutely not.

As I stated earlier; the club undertakes a degree of due diligence now, much the same way companies do with their supplier chains. If it unwittingly comes to light that for example a supplier is involved in child labour exploitation, yes there will be a degree of blow back on the client company. But if it acted responsibly and took necessary steps to conduct due diligence, acted to bring pressure on the supplier and to disassociate with said supplier then, there is not much else it can do.

Celtic Football Club was duped by this vile individual and no doubt there is regret for the support provided by the club to CBC. But were Torbet's crimes foreseeable? Was CFC complicit? Did CFC create and support the platform for the disgusting purpose it was used? Not in any way.

And who will be the winners at the end? Regardless of any future developments, it won't be the victims or Celtic. What measures can be put in place to prevent this from happening in the future. Very little as there are already competent checks and balances in place and legislation to minimise these risks.

So ultimately, who will the winners be? Yes, the ambulance chasing solicitors. I hope they can sleep well at night. But of course they will. They are soliicitors after all.
LLP nailed it OSE!

This is an objective op-ed at its finest

Magnificent work!
 
Torbett would have been in jail if rangers had reported him but they remained silent as children were abused in our boys club too.

Just think he would have been in jail and those poor kids would not have been abused

It does not matter who accepts responsibility but it matters that these kids do not fall on deaf ears and are compensated for lives ruined.
 
Putting the pain and suffering of Torbett's victims to the side for a moment; the claims of the solicitor representing at least one of the victims states that the Club has a vicarious responsibility to accept blame and as such compensate the victims. And if not, he'll be going to court.

As it will be a civil case, the finding will be based on the balance of probability. So let's look at the arrangements of CFC and CBC.

Two seperate entities. However, the latter was supported by the former to an extent. That is transparent. But is CFC vicariously responsible? No more than the headteacher who supports the local BB group by allowing them free use of the gym hall for Brigade nights and subsequent related functions.

Or the priest who allows the parish hall to be used for the Brownies and encourages the young of the parish to join via weekly announcements.

Neither the school head, Education Authority, parish priest or diocese is responsible for any crimes perpetrated by those in charge.

The support provided was given in the trust and confidence that the individuals concerned were fulfilling their duties honestly and not for a clandestine criminal purpose.

Nowadays, one would expect a supporting organisation to conduct a degree of due diligence, e.g. Disclosure Checks to confirm the trustworthiness of those seeking their support. But vicarious responsibility for their actions - away and bile yer heid. This was in an era where no such checks and balances existed.

Similarly CFC are reputationally victims of Torbett also. By allowing him use of the Celtic name, colours and providing various financial assistance and other supporting mechanisms - the club did so on the trust and understanding that Torbett was an honest and trustworthy individual doing a service for the community. His crimes have also exploded in the face of CFC. But responsible in anyway for his sickening crimes CFC is not.

A McDonalds branch franchise in Glasgow supports a youth football team via sponsorship providing strips and related funds. Is that McDonalds franchise or the McDonalds brand responsible for anything the coaches do?

Unfortunately, we live in a society of ambulance chasers. A Glasgow based solicitors (DB) directors being amongst the highest paid earners in the UK. Don't think for a second these unscrupulous lawyers intentions are victim centred. This is just about making money. The larger the compensation, the larger the fee and commission.

So unfortunately, the focus looks as if it will move from the despicable perpetrator and shift squarely and unfairly onto our beloved CFC.

In the modern blame culture, it is not anticipated that the actual perpetrator has significant finances at his disposal in order to pursue a civil compensation action. But CFC a victim by proxy, does.

Despicable in every sense both for CFC and the unfortunate victims.

That reminds me there are independent Celtic soccer clubs in operation througout the world. CFC allows elements of the brand such as the badge and strip to be used, and assists in other ways by endorsing and sponsoring events and even by providing hospitality. But does that mean CFC is vicariously responsible for any sins which may be committed by those running these organisations. Absolutely not.

As I stated earlier; the club undertakes a degree of due diligence now, much the same way companies do with their supplier chains. If it unwittingly comes to light that for example a supplier is involved in child labour exploitation, yes there will be a degree of blow back on the client company. But if it acted responsibly and took necessary steps to conduct due diligence, acted to bring pressure on the supplier and to disassociate with said supplier then, there is not much else it can do.

Celtic Football Club was duped by this vile individual and no doubt there is regret for the support provided by the club to CBC. But were Torbet's crimes foreseeable? Was CFC complicit? Did CFC create and support the platform for the disgusting purpose it was used? Not in any way.

And who will be the winners at the end? Regardless of any future developments, it won't be the victims or Celtic. What measures can be put in place to prevent this from happening in the future. Very little as there are already competent checks and balances in place and legislation to minimise these risks.

So ultimately, who will the winners be? Yes, the ambulance chasing solicitors. I hope they can sleep well at night. But of course they will. They are soliicitors after all.
Excellent piece of writing don't think I could ever dream of putting it so well
 
Torbett would have been in jail if rangers had reported him but they remained silent as children were abused in our boys club too.

Just think he would have been in jail and those poor kids would not have been abused

It does not matter who accepts responsibility but it matters that these kids do not fall on deaf ears and are compensated for lives ruined.
Where is the proof that oldco new what was going on??? You can't make a statement like that without unrefuted proof!!! Especially when you know that club went bust and can't defend its self
 
I really don't think we should go down the road of blaming whole football clubs for the abuse of children...even the scum...these crimes were committed by disgusting bastards who deserve nothing but pain and suffering for the rest of their horrible life's. Be them Celtic men or rangers men or fucking moon men. It shouldn't be about this club or that club. Let's not make it about whataboutary. If we do that we are no better than the animals who sing about big jock. Torbett was an animal who used a possession of trust to abuse children. If people within Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, hibs or who ever, knew about it let those PEOPLE be brought to justice...let's not blame a whole football club
 
Where is the proof that oldco new what was going on??? You can't make a statement like that without unrefuted proof!!! Especially when you know that club went bust and can't defend its self


Was it not reported on before. Did he not work there prior to celtic was that not why he was sacked?
 
Was it not reported on before. Did he not work there prior to celtic was that not why he was sacked?
Were was it reported??
So he worked there before??
Who said anything happened??
Is that officially why he was sacked???
So after all that where is your proof??
 
Its one of those things in the recess of my head. I have been told this at some point im sure. I am asking a friend at the moment when he gets back to me if what i have said is incorrect i will of course hold my hands up and say so.

Its not in my head for nothing.

Give me a lttle time and i promise i’ll get back to you, okay?
 
Where is the proof that oldco new what was going on??? You can't make a statement like that without unrefuted proof!!! Especially when you know that club went bust and can't defend its self


Jinky.

OMG. I got that so wrong but it was a genuine mistake.

I genuinely thought what i said was true, can’t get a hold of my friend so googled that scumbag and theres no record he worked at rangers so don’t know where the hell i got that from.

Hands up, im wrong. Sorry for causing offence.

I do believe however that the kids come first not the clubs.

The kids were failed and thats just not right. An adults duty is to ensure the safety of the children whether they be your kids or anyones elses.

I certainly don’t want my club dragged through the mud with this shite but its how we react to said situation that will ultimately define us.

And other clubs or institutions where these predators where.

If i send my son to school his school owes him a duty of care and as such i want him home the same as i dropped him off, now i know at school playing tig and stuff he can fall get a bump or 2. Thats in the realm of possibility and acceptability what is not acceptable is for some adult to commit such heinous acts as was perpetrated on victims of that other stuff.

I am sorry i got that wrong due to the nature of my allegation and it being incorrect. I was wrong
 
Were was it reported??
So he worked there before??
Who said anything happened??
Is that officially why he was sacked???
So after all that where is your proof??
OSE's op sets a premise........the key point at the moment is to place blame where blame lies.

Now that the case has been heard, tried and sentenced - there may be more clarity provided as to how these matters developed and evidence which may not have been deemed suitable due to legal issues are likely to be brought forward and discussed.

This is now a time for reflection and to consider liability and who is liable.

The important thing is to consider the survivors and allow them to digest what has just happened and how they wish to proceed.

Vicarious liability and corporate responsibility are very complex processes to navigate.

So we all have to take pause......Take a long deep breath, and provide as much support to these brave men as we possibly can.
 
OSE's op sets a premise........the key point at the moment is to place blame where blame lies.

Now that the case has been heard, tried and sentenced - there may be more clarity provided as to how these matters developed and evidence which may not have been deemed suitable due to legal issues are likely to be brought forward and discussed.

This is now a time for reflection and to consider liability and who is liable.

The important thing is to consider the survivors and allow them to digest what has just happened and how they wish to proceed.

Vicarious liability and corporate responsibility are very complex processes to navigate.

So we all have to take pause......Take a long deep breath, and provide as much support to these brave men as we possibly can.


???????????????
 
Its one of those things in the recess of my head. I have been told this at some point im sure. I am asking a friend at the moment when he gets back to me if what i have said is incorrect i will of course hold my hands up and say so.

Its not in my head for nothing.

Give me a lttle time and i promise i’ll get back to you, okay?
Sorry about late reply of course I'll give you time to look it up!!!! But you should have had the proper answers before you put up such a statement (just so you know I hate those rancid bastards just like any sane person should ) I'm not defending them. But I've grown up watching my Celtic and putting up with those horrible bastards throwing those accusations at me all my life
 
Sorry about late reply of course I'll give you time to look it up!!!! But you should have had the proper answers before you put up such a statement (just so you know I hate those rancid bastards just like any sane person should ) I'm not defending them. But I've grown up watching my Celtic and putting up with those horrible bastards throwing those accusations at me all my life
Even a hun over on the Celtic blog said Torbett had been passed from Hibs to rangers so who knows what to believe. But as someone said, we can find out more now that the trial is over. HHJinxy
 

Members online

Latest posts

Back
Top