|
The Media
|
|
Topic Started: 1 Nov 2017, 11:12 PM (581,199 Views)
|
|
TheOncomingStorm
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:18 PM
Post #261
|
- Posts:
- 855
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #33,281
- Joined:
- 5 February 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Got to be Henrik
|
- Torquemada
- 8 Nov 2017, 01:58 PM
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 01:28 PM
I had thought Mark Daly as a journalist of some integrity, in the Spiersy mould somewhat, but he has allowed himself to be used in some tawdry smear campaign against Dermot Desmond and Celtic.<br />That Daly allowed himself to be used in that fashion has changed my view of him completely. Dermot's letter to him gave a very clear warning re. the consequences for him and indeed the BBC if they continue to peddle this muck. There has not been a peep out of him or the BBC since other than to publish the content of Dermot's letter and my guess is that they'll continue to zip it.<br />Daly himself must feel a bit of a carrot. There is no follow up to his story. He confronted Dermot in public as though he was exposing something like the Watergate scandal only to be told to keep his trap shut, or face the legal consequences. What a fud. Could never take him seriously as an investigative journalist again.
I agree totally. There is some amount of misty-eyed pish about Daly since his absurdly titled documentary, The Men Who Sold The Jerseys, which has been used by every precious snowflake on KDS to pretend that the BBC did not have an agenda in going after Desmond. Even its title was a deflection. "Selling the jerseys" means letting your club down, your teammates. Who let Rangers down, pray tell? It was the club which did it to itself by cheating and criminality. Was that referred to -- in your dreams.<br /><br />If Daly's carefully sanitised "attack" on the EBT culture at Ibrox was to mean anything worthwhile, it should have been entitled "The Men Who Cheated Scottish Football" or, even more accurate and succinct, "The Men Who Stole The Titles". Of course, that would never have allowed the huns to indulge in their "we wur victims uva crime, so we wiz" bullscheidt.<br /><br />The BBC has been a disgrace in all of this from the outset. A programme on The Paradise Papers would have been perfectly entitled to mention Desmond's inclusion in the leaks along with mention of other bigwigs with Scottish business interests whose tax affairs are questionable, even if legal. But to doorstep him at Celtic Park, set it up carefully with a picture of Daly clearly showing the club's name highlighted in the background, and to continually mention Celtic in an issue which has absolutely nothing to do with the club, is gutter journalism, red-top sensationalism pure and simple. The fact that so many fools with impeccable Celtic-supporting credentials have fallen for it is as astonishing as it is depressing. spot effing on.
|
|
|
| |
|
TheOncomingStorm
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:19 PM
Post #262
|
- Posts:
- 855
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #33,281
- Joined:
- 5 February 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Got to be Henrik
|
Oops! Double post
|
|
|
| |
|
Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:24 PM
Post #263
|
- Posts:
- 1,042
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,592
- Joined:
- 3 May 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
- Bhoyball
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:16 PM
There's not a self employed person that doesn't indulge in some form of tax avoidance . Smaller scale , just as legal . Are they immoral in doing so? An important distinction is that almost all of that cash will return to circulation in the economy, and in the process be taxed elsewhere. The billions of pounds hidden away in some Crown Dependency somewhere will not, and responsibility for making up for that shortfall has fallen to those least able to bare the burden - a great motivator, it has to be said, for smaller-scale tax avoidance.
|
|
|
| |
|
adammce
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:27 PM
Post #264
|
- Posts:
- 1,103
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #33,561
- Joined:
- 6 June 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Du Wei
|
- Bhoyball
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:16 PM
There's not a self employed person that doesn't indulge in some form of tax avoidance . Smaller scale , just as legal . Are they immoral in doing so? Bit of a difference between a self-employed person who might find it hard to get by on the money they earn being a bit creative to survive (mainly thanks to billionaires and the '1%' playing a major role in building the financial system to make sure we all have to pay a bit more to make sure they can get away with paying less) and some billionaire playing the game to keep more money he couldn't spend in his lifetime. Plus the majority of these people don't hide away the money they magicked around with their accountant; they put it back into the economy via feeding their families, building materials and all the rest. Don't imagine anyone in the Paradise Papers is hiding that money to then put it back into the economy through spending - if they were, then fine. We all know that isn't the case whatsoever.
edit - canny be arsed actually.
Edited by adammce, 8 Nov 2017, 05:42 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
adammce
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:29 PM
Post #265
|
- Posts:
- 1,103
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #33,561
- Joined:
- 6 June 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Du Wei
|
- Smiley
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:35 PM
- T_Bhoy
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:20 PM
- Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick
- 7 Nov 2017, 05:10 PM
It is not wrong to question what Desmond is or is not doing with his money, given the scale of the heist that is being conducted by social and economic elites like him. Journalists, in an ideal world, are there to ask those questions on our behalf. What we are seeing, however, is how BBC Scotland's coverage inevitably gravitates towards the parochial. There is a well-documented lack of resources and accomplished journalistic talent at BBC Scotland, and because of that they are unable to provide the kind of in-depth coverage offered by other newspapers and broadcasters. Because of this, BBC Scotland latches onto angles that are both easy (and cheap) to develop into stories, and which contain hooks that will catch as much people as possible - and football is the biggest hook of them all, especially if it's a negative story regarding Celtic. This is Kailyard parochialism, wherein a serious, global issue is dumbed-down to a level where it can be conveyed in the pre-existing package of Scottish football. I find it troubling when an issue of this severity is relegated to tabloid-level pantomime, both because it is far more important than that and because I think people are capable of more complicated thought than our esteemed national broadcaster believes we are.
This is not, of course, a defence of what Desmond has seemingly been doing. We can and should level criticism at both Desmond and BBC Scotland. Cries of "aye but it was legal" or "aye but if it was cash-in-hand" are disingenuous and hypocritical. Global economic elites funnel billions into offshore havens every year, leaving nothing for everyone else. Cash-in-hand payments on which tax isn't paid is recycled almost immediately back into the economy, and back into the tax pool - money stashed in the Cayman Islands is not, ever. The reign of austerity in this country is a direct consequence of this: we have to "tighten our belts" not because there isn't enough, but because people like this stole all the money (and decided they were going to make their robbery legal). I don't care if it was "just a wee bit", it's as wrong when Dermot Desmond does it as it is wrong when the Queen, Bono or Apple do it. "Are you a Rangers supporter?" is just childish, and makes Desmond look like an idiot.
I bet most people in here think that there are too many loop holes for the rich, but that isnt what people are arguing for. Its the fact that they use a non british citizen who doesnt owe money to the uk tax system that is being used as an example. There are far better examples, but for some reason they were all ignored.
It's as if they applied some context to the situation. Rightly or wrongly, and it's rightly, DD is seen as the man calling the shots at Celtic. I'm personally glad it's been pointed out again that DD is, just like a lot of billionaires, actually pretty shady. Aside from drawing attention to these matters, which is always welcome, we can watch those who freaked out at the old huns' tax shenanigans and how the media pure ignored it now tie themselves in knots to excuse other definitely-ok forms of financial chicanery, while also simultaneously scraping and tugging their forelocks to defend a guy who wouldnae give them the ash from his cigar.
|
|
|
| |
|
Martoto
|
8 Nov 2017, 05:50 PM
Post #266
|
- Posts:
- 1,208
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,457
- Joined:
- 16 February 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- King Henrik
|
- Bhoyball
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:16 PM
There's not a self employed person that doesn't indulge in some form of tax avoidance . Smaller scale , just as legal . Are they immoral in doing so? If that is true and they pay less into the public purse than someone who earns the same but cannot avoid, then yes.
If your account also asks if you'd like to opt out of public services that those taxes pay for and you agree, then that might be a different matter.
|
|
|
| |
|
Asgardstreasure
|
8 Nov 2017, 06:40 PM
Post #267
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,534
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,238
- Joined:
- 13 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Billy McNeil
|
I would expect that an accountant advising a client on tax matters would be under a professional obligation to ensure that his/her client enjoys all tax breaks legitimately available and a failure to do so could expose the accountant to disciplinary action. I think it all comes down to the legislature to create a system that makes tax avoidance more difficult/fair. But whatever rules the legislature comes up with imo we cannot expect accountants or their clients to opt not to take advantage of whatever breaks are available, whether that's the MOT bill for a taxi or the VAT on a private jet. I think the problem is similar to global warming in that there has to be a joined up approach at an international level. We might feel disgust at what they get away with, but it is the rules themselves which need to be tightened up and kept under review. Trouble is that we've got the tories in power and all their mates in the city who fill the tory coffers with gold want to keep these shady practices legit.
|
|
|
| |
|
Willie Wonka
|
8 Nov 2017, 06:51 PM
Post #268
|
Slavery fled, oh glorious dead
- Posts:
- 27,523
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #615
- Joined:
- 9 February 2005
|
- Smiley
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:35 PM
- T_Bhoy
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:20 PM
- Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick
- 7 Nov 2017, 05:10 PM
It is not wrong to question what Desmond is or is not doing with his money, given the scale of the heist that is being conducted by social and economic elites like him. Journalists, in an ideal world, are there to ask those questions on our behalf. What we are seeing, however, is how BBC Scotland's coverage inevitably gravitates towards the parochial. There is a well-documented lack of resources and accomplished journalistic talent at BBC Scotland, and because of that they are unable to provide the kind of in-depth coverage offered by other newspapers and broadcasters. Because of this, BBC Scotland latches onto angles that are both easy (and cheap) to develop into stories, and which contain hooks that will catch as much people as possible - and football is the biggest hook of them all, especially if it's a negative story regarding Celtic. This is Kailyard parochialism, wherein a serious, global issue is dumbed-down to a level where it can be conveyed in the pre-existing package of Scottish football. I find it troubling when an issue of this severity is relegated to tabloid-level pantomime, both because it is far more important than that and because I think people are capable of more complicated thought than our esteemed national broadcaster believes we are.
This is not, of course, a defence of what Desmond has seemingly been doing. We can and should level criticism at both Desmond and BBC Scotland. Cries of "aye but it was legal" or "aye but if it was cash-in-hand" are disingenuous and hypocritical. Global economic elites funnel billions into offshore havens every year, leaving nothing for everyone else. Cash-in-hand payments on which tax isn't paid is recycled almost immediately back into the economy, and back into the tax pool - money stashed in the Cayman Islands is not, ever. The reign of austerity in this country is a direct consequence of this: we have to "tighten our belts" not because there isn't enough, but because people like this stole all the money (and decided they were going to make their robbery legal). I don't care if it was "just a wee bit", it's as wrong when Dermot Desmond does it as it is wrong when the Queen, Bono or Apple do it. "Are you a Rangers supporter?" is just childish, and makes Desmond look like an idiot.
I bet most people in here think that there are too many loop holes for the rich, but that isnt what people are arguing for. Its the fact that they use a non british citizen who doesnt owe money to the uk tax system that is being used as an example. There are far better examples, but for some reason they were all ignored.
It's as if they applied some context to the situation. Rightly or wrongly, and it's rightly, DD is seen as the man calling the shots at Celtic. I'm personally glad it's been pointed out again that DD is, just like a lot of billionaires, actually pretty shady. Aside from drawing attention to these matters, which is always welcome, we can watch those who freaked out at the old huns' tax shenanigans and how the media pure ignored it now tie themselves in knots to excuse other definitely-ok forms of financial chicanery, while also simultaneously scraping and tugging their forelocks to defend a guy who wouldnae give them the ash from his cigar. That's some leap for a comparison. Are we getting a sporting advantage from this like oldhuns did? are we not paying paye and vat like the old hun did? are we hiding evidence on tax from the sfa like the oldhun did?
the fact is he's not broken any law, he's not going bust over it, they did.
|
|
|
| |
|
Corky Buczek
|
8 Nov 2017, 06:59 PM
Post #269
|
- Posts:
- 8,240
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,021
- Joined:
- 26 May 2005
|
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 01:28 PM
I had thought Mark Daly as a journalist of some integrity, in the Spiersy mould somewhat, but he has allowed himself to be used in some tawdry smear campaign against Dermot Desmond and Celtic. That Daly allowed himself to be used in that fashion has changed my view of him completely. Dermot's letter to him gave a very clear warning re. the consequences for him and indeed the BBC if they continue to peddle this muck. There has not been a peep out of him or the BBC since other than to publish the content of Dermot's letter and my guess is that they'll continue to zip it. Daly himself must feel a bit of a carrot. There is no follow up to his story. He confronted Dermot in public as though he was exposing something like the Watergate scandal only to be told to keep his trap shut, or face the legal consequences. What a fud. Could never take him seriously as an investigative journalist again. I disagree with just about every word of that post.
He pointed out that Dermot had been avoiding tax - quite legally as have various others who Daly made mention in a full documentary yesterday. What Dermot didn't do when confronted was just admit it.
There is no add on. I assume Daly got DD's letter before the programme went out. But they still went ahead and broadcast it. there is no add on to the others who tax details were revealed - no one was accused of behaving illegally.
RTC, the guy who did actually break the EBT story, was fulsome in his praise of Mark Daly at the time of his second Rangers documentary (the first one exposed Craig Whyte's previous ban as a director), describing him - if my memory serves me correctly - as the best investigative journalist in the country.
What I do find strange however is Sportsound doing a piece on it. As the likes of Ned Rise posted this story is nowt to do with the actual game and Celtic do not benefit in any way by DD's tax arrangements.
|
|
|
| |
|
Wee Ed KTF
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:14 PM
Post #270
|
- Posts:
- 6,194
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,493
- Joined:
- 10 July 2005
|
BBC Radio Scotland's lead sports story (and online) -
"Dick Advocaat thinks Aberdeen boss Derek McInnes is ready for Ibrox"
No agenda. No siree.
|
|
|
| |
|
sid1888
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:34 PM
Post #271
|
- Posts:
- 955
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29,721
- Joined:
- 21 October 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- jinky
|
- Willie Wonka
- 8 Nov 2017, 06:51 PM
- Smiley
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:35 PM
- T_Bhoy
- 8 Nov 2017, 04:20 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It's as if they applied some context to the situation. Rightly or wrongly, and it's rightly, DD is seen as the man calling the shots at Celtic. I'm personally glad it's been pointed out again that DD is, just like a lot of billionaires, actually pretty shady. Aside from drawing attention to these matters, which is always welcome, we can watch those who freaked out at the old huns' tax shenanigans and how the media pure ignored it now tie themselves in knots to excuse other definitely-ok forms of financial chicanery, while also simultaneously scraping and tugging their forelocks to defend a guy who wouldnae give them the ash from his cigar.
That's some leap for a comparison. Are we getting a sporting advantage from this like oldhuns did? are we not paying paye and vat like the old hun did? are we hiding evidence on tax from the sfa like the oldhun did? the fact is he's not broken any law, he's not going bust over it, they did. It is indeed a poor comparison but hey ho the search for moral equivalence goes on for those desperately seeking it
|
|
|
| |
|
Asgardstreasure
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:37 PM
Post #272
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,534
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,238
- Joined:
- 13 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Billy McNeil
|
- Corky Buczek
- 8 Nov 2017, 06:59 PM
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 01:28 PM
I had thought Mark Daly as a journalist of some integrity, in the Spiersy mould somewhat, but he has allowed himself to be used in some tawdry smear campaign against Dermot Desmond and Celtic. That Daly allowed himself to be used in that fashion has changed my view of him completely. Dermot's letter to him gave a very clear warning re. the consequences for him and indeed the BBC if they continue to peddle this muck. There has not been a peep out of him or the BBC since other than to publish the content of Dermot's letter and my guess is that they'll continue to zip it. Daly himself must feel a bit of a carrot. There is no follow up to his story. He confronted Dermot in public as though he was exposing something like the Watergate scandal only to be told to keep his trap shut, or face the legal consequences. What a fud. Could never take him seriously as an investigative journalist again.
I disagree with just about every word of that post. He pointed out that Dermot had been avoiding tax - quite legally as have various others who Daly made mention in a full documentary yesterday. What Dermot didn't do when confronted was just admit it. There is no add on. I assume Daly got DD's letter before the programme went out. But they still went ahead and broadcast it. there is no add on to the others who tax details were revealed - no one was accused of behaving illegally. RTC, the guy who did actually break the EBT story, was fulsome in his praise of Mark Daly at the time of his second Rangers documentary (the first one exposed Craig Whyte's previous ban as a director), describing him - if my memory serves me correctly - as the best investigative journalist in the country. What I do find strange however is Sportsound doing a piece on it. As the likes of Ned Rise posted this story is nowt to do with the actual game and Celtic do not benefit in any way by DD's tax arrangements. If Daly is going to start confronting people in public and challenge them about their lawful business practices I think he would very quickly find himself in a police station with en suite facilities. The manner of the approach on DD was aggressive and it was an ambush. I think people confronted in that way in public may have a complaint which would interest the Procurator Fiscal. I think journalists who take that approach should have irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing. That way, the subject of their interest is unlikely to bring the police into the equation . But when the "journalist" has no evidence of wrongdoing, none whatever, the same reluctance to involve the police does not obtain. DD probably knows that any trial would be turned into a media circus and most likely resisted the urge to see Daly dragged off in cuffs for that reason. Journalists are not above the law, and they subject members of the public (who are going about their lawful business) to harassment at their peril.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ned Rise
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:48 PM
Post #273
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
- Posts:
- 9,160
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,170
- Joined:
- 12 January 2012
|
- Bhoyball
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:16 PM
There's not a self employed person that doesn't indulge in some form of tax avoidance . Smaller scale , just as legal . Are they immoral in doing so? A lot of self employed people have no choice but to set up that way as real full time PAYE jobs are getting more and more scarce.
If they have to buy equipment to do their job or are entitled to claim certain expenses, is that any different from a salaried employee getting a wedge from the government for their pension pot, or tax free vouchers to buy a bike and accessories, or probably any other number of company benefits that their employer will probably write off tax against?
I'm sure most of them would prefer the certainty of a steady wage, sickness and holiday pay but then they're in clover because they can claim a few pence on the mile.
|
|
|
| |
|
Corky Buczek
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:59 PM
Post #274
|
- Posts:
- 8,240
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,021
- Joined:
- 26 May 2005
|
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 07:37 PM
- Corky Buczek
- 8 Nov 2017, 06:59 PM
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 01:28 PM
I had thought Mark Daly as a journalist of some integrity, in the Spiersy mould somewhat, but he has allowed himself to be used in some tawdry smear campaign against Dermot Desmond and Celtic. That Daly allowed himself to be used in that fashion has changed my view of him completely. Dermot's letter to him gave a very clear warning re. the consequences for him and indeed the BBC if they continue to peddle this muck. There has not been a peep out of him or the BBC since other than to publish the content of Dermot's letter and my guess is that they'll continue to zip it. Daly himself must feel a bit of a carrot. There is no follow up to his story. He confronted Dermot in public as though he was exposing something like the Watergate scandal only to be told to keep his trap shut, or face the legal consequences. What a fud. Could never take him seriously as an investigative journalist again.
I disagree with just about every word of that post. He pointed out that Dermot had been avoiding tax - quite legally as have various others who Daly made mention in a full documentary yesterday. What Dermot didn't do when confronted was just admit it. There is no add on. I assume Daly got DD's letter before the programme went out. But they still went ahead and broadcast it. there is no add on to the others who tax details were revealed - no one was accused of behaving illegally. RTC, the guy who did actually break the EBT story, was fulsome in his praise of Mark Daly at the time of his second Rangers documentary (the first one exposed Craig Whyte's previous ban as a director), describing him - if my memory serves me correctly - as the best investigative journalist in the country. What I do find strange however is Sportsound doing a piece on it. As the likes of Ned Rise posted this story is nowt to do with the actual game and Celtic do not benefit in any way by DD's tax arrangements.
If Daly is going to start confronting people in public and challenge them about their lawful business practices I think he would very quickly find himself in a police station with en suite facilities. The manner of the approach on DD was aggressive and it was an ambush. I think people confronted in that way in public may have a complaint which would interest the Procurator Fiscal. I think journalists who take that approach should have irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing. That way, the subject of their interest is unlikely to bring the police into the equation  . But when the "journalist" has no evidence of wrongdoing, none whatever, the same reluctance to involve the police does not obtain. DD probably knows that any trial would be turned into a media circus and most likely resisted the urge to see Daly dragged off in cuffs for that reason. Journalists are not above the law, and they subject members of the public (who are going about their lawful business) to harassment at their peril. I'm not a lawyer but I think a procurator fiscal would laugh at your suggestion. It happens all the time. It happened to Lord Ashcroft at the Tory conference on the same subject, the Everton investor and various others named in the investigation. Mark Daly did the exact same to the owner of Banstead FC in the EBT programme, I don't remember any Celtic supporter demanding the CPS in England get involved.
No one is being accused of breaking the law. They are being accused of avoiding tax. It really is that simple.
|
|
|
| |
|
Henry Trumpington
|
8 Nov 2017, 07:59 PM
Post #275
|
- Posts:
- 556
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32,815
- Joined:
- 22 August 2013
|
- Bhoyball
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:16 PM
There's not a self employed person that doesn't indulge in some form of tax avoidance . Smaller scale , just as legal . Are they immoral in doing so? Evening.
|
|
|
| |
|
Peco
|
8 Nov 2017, 08:23 PM
Post #276
|
- Posts:
- 3,756
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #733
- Joined:
- 6 March 2005
|
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:14 PM
- Peco
- 7 Nov 2017, 09:54 AM
- tomtheleedstim
- 7 Nov 2017, 06:31 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It also highlights the lack of HR governance at the BBC that employees and contractors have no recourse to bullying threats from senior management. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-23587678Do you mean this story?? Corsica 1968’s post
This is what I was responding to; specifically the claim that the threats of a senior BBC manager had made these journalists think twice about making a documentary about the funds going missing. I assume the charity event in question is the same one but I’m sure Corsica1968 can confirm.
|
|
|
| |
|
Asgardstreasure
|
8 Nov 2017, 08:35 PM
Post #277
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,534
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,238
- Joined:
- 13 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Billy McNeil
|
- Corky Buczek
- 8 Nov 2017, 07:59 PM
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 07:37 PM
- Corky Buczek
- 8 Nov 2017, 06:59 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
If Daly is going to start confronting people in public and challenge them about their lawful business practices I think he would very quickly find himself in a police station with en suite facilities. The manner of the approach on DD was aggressive and it was an ambush. I think people confronted in that way in public may have a complaint which would interest the Procurator Fiscal. I think journalists who take that approach should have irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing. That way, the subject of their interest is unlikely to bring the police into the equation  . But when the "journalist" has no evidence of wrongdoing, none whatever, the same reluctance to involve the police does not obtain. DD probably knows that any trial would be turned into a media circus and most likely resisted the urge to see Daly dragged off in cuffs for that reason. Journalists are not above the law, and they subject members of the public (who are going about their lawful business) to harassment at their peril.
I'm not a lawyer but I think a procurator fiscal would laugh at your suggestion. It happens all the time. It happened to Lord Ashcroft at the Tory conference on the same subject, the Everton investor and various others named in the investigation. Mark Daly did the exact same to the owner of Banstead FC in the EBT programme, I don't remember any Celtic supporter demanding the CPS in England get involved. No one is being accused of breaking the law. They are being accused of avoiding tax. It really is that simple. Even were the Fiscal to conclude that this kind of intrusion should be tolerated in terms of the public interest, were he to do this again DD could obtain a Non-Harassment Order. Below is the legislation which is very simple and straightforward. Clearly DD could establish a "course of conduct" were Daly to repeat his little outburst. As you can see, a breach of a Non-Harassment Order is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment.
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
Scotland
S.8 Harassment.
(1) Every individual has a right to be free from harassment and, accordingly, a person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of
another and —
(a) is intended to amount to harassment of that person; or . (b) occurs in circumstances where it would appear to a reasonable person that it would amount to harassment of that person.
S.8(3)
For the purposes of this section—
“conduct” includes speech;
“harassment” of a person includes causing the person alarm or distress; and
[b]a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions.
S.9 Breach of non-harassment order.
(1) Any person who is in breach of a non-harassment order made under section 8 is guilty of an offence and liable —
(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both such imprisonment and such fine; and
(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both such imprisonment and
such fine.
|
|
|
| |
|
hocuspocus
|
8 Nov 2017, 08:42 PM
Post #278
|
- Posts:
- 3,165
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,285
- Joined:
- 28 June 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- tinsoldier
- 6 Nov 2017, 08:11 PM
NEW GERS BOSS SCOT THE LOT? Blues must think big MICHAEL GANNON We've all been there. 2am, club closing, mind on a kebab. Then you see it. The last munter in the place, staggering her way out of the toilet like Mikael Lustig on a run up the wing. She catches your eye. You're in, job done, morals of an alley cat. And that's exactly what Rangers will be doing if they go for a cheap option as their next boss. With Del McInnes staring at his mobile every five minutes waiting on his Sash ringtone going off, they have to act quickly and do the RIGHT thing. If they don't, they are in danger of not even getting the dregs at the bottom of the kebab spit that the bloke scrapes up for you if you've £1.54 in shrapnel in your sky rocket. And make no mistake, the Aberdeen boss would march all the way to Ibrox if the call to arms came. It's a no brainer. But Gers bosses have dithered before. They've been the bloke who was too scared to approach the gorgeous bird with the high heels and wavy hair, and are now in danger of getting the Hattie Jaques double in the ski-pants and Robbie t-shirt. With a kebab. Reports last night also linked the Ibrox giants with Steve McClaren, and that would see the light blues dining at a 5 star restaurant with silver service included. The Englishman has managed at the very top but could he handle the Glasgow rabbit hutch? McInnes has played for Rangers and therefore has the advantage of knowing what to expect. And sure we've all heard how Celtic made history at the weekend but records are there to be broken. It's hardly a big deal. In fact it's the barmaid that looks great until the lights go on at the end of the night and she's about as attractive as finding a curly hair in your kebab. It's all there for Rangers to get should they get their collective digits out their posteriors and make that call to Del Boy. And spare me the tosh about Aberdeen being Celtic's main rivals. If Dave King sends out the RFC badge signal then McInnes will be walking up the marble staircase quicker than you can slice some kebab meat from a revolving spit in a fast food take-away outlet that I've been in loads of times. It's up to Gers. It's either a 2am crying into your beer consolation prize or a champagne reception with her from Friends. And that would be Del-icious.
|
|
|
| |
|
Johnnyd60
|
8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
Post #279
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 80
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,259
- Joined:
- 26 January 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
- Peco
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:23 PM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 05:14 PM
Corsica 1968’s postThis is what I was responding to; specifically the claim that the threats of a senior BBC manager had made these journalists think twice about making a documentary about the funds going missing. I assume the charity event in question is the same one but I’m sure Corsica1968 can confirm. I'm waiting on Corsica1968 to respond, cause I'd like to ask him why the bbc would go to such lengths to prevent a documentary being made on the subject yet run the story as a news item? I smell a shampooe smear job.
|
|
|
| |
|
Corky Buczek
|
8 Nov 2017, 09:04 PM
Post #280
|
- Posts:
- 8,240
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,021
- Joined:
- 26 May 2005
|
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:35 PM
- Corky Buczek
- 8 Nov 2017, 07:59 PM
- Asgardstreasure
- 8 Nov 2017, 07:37 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I'm not a lawyer but I think a procurator fiscal would laugh at your suggestion. It happens all the time. It happened to Lord Ashcroft at the Tory conference on the same subject, the Everton investor and various others named in the investigation. Mark Daly did the exact same to the owner of Banstead FC in the EBT programme, I don't remember any Celtic supporter demanding the CPS in England get involved. No one is being accused of breaking the law. They are being accused of avoiding tax. It really is that simple.
Even were the Fiscal to conclude that this kind of intrusion should be tolerated in terms of the public interest, were he to do this again DD could obtain a Non-Harassment Order. Below is the legislation which is very simple and straightforward. Clearly DD could establish a "course of conduct" were Daly to repeat his little outburst. As you can see, a breach of a Non-Harassment Order is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment. Protection from Harassment Act 1997 Scotland S.8 Harassment. (1) Every individual has a right to be free from harassment and, accordingly, a person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of another and — (a) is intended to amount to harassment of that person; or . (b) occurs in circumstances where it would appear to a reasonable person that it would amount to harassment of that person. S.8(3) For the purposes of this section— “conduct” includes speech; “harassment” of a person includes causing the person alarm or distress; and [b ]a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions.
S.9 Breach of non-harassment order. (1) Any person who is in breach of a non-harassment order made under section 8 is guilty of an offence and liable — (a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to a fine, or to both such imprisonment and such fine; and (b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both such imprisonment and such fine. 1) Nothing that Mark Daly did broke the Law. 2) If Mark Daly was to keep "door-stepping" DD then yes that could be considered harassment but why would he try and speak to him again ? He did what he set out to do. There is nothing else to say.
|
|
|
| |
| 3 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
|