You Know What....

C

CJC

Active member
Joined
6 May 2001
Messages
4,108
Reaction score
4

You Know What....

Sorry if we're not allowed to talk about it, but I think the incident cannot go ignored.

If whoever the persons involved are are tried and sentenced, what will the implications be for English football? Will we lose some talent, or more importantly respect. Will players be kept a much closer eye on now???

I think that the situation with Bowyer and Woodgate will be what happens, where the victim or a relation screws the trial up if there is one.
 

You Know What....

Having deleted another post with it insinuating reference to some "suspects". Anyone who posts anything that could be construed as a reference to the alleged guilty parties will be banned. No second chances, no warnings - except for this one. Why do you thing rivals.net have closed the beesotted message board overnight?
 

You Know What....

Well Done Banana

Well Done Banana. I think that you have dealt well with the situation. It would be a great pity if this message board had to be taken down because a mindless idiot had used it to mention names. Also, the person that mentioned names on the Newcastle site on Monday has now been traced and told by lawyers that he/she may face a claim for libel and a possible criminal case for perverting the course of justice. As he/she made the posts at work, his/her employer has also been informed.

However, by way of a reminder, it was Edmundo that started a thread on this topic earlier this week - not a good idea in my opinion.
 

You Know What....

I can't see anything coming of this as a) the victim was stupid in IMHO to give her story to a tabloid newspaper, and should have left the matter in the hands of the police and CPS b) There is every likelyhood a mistrial could be called or the person acquitted like John Leslie, as the naming that has gone on is prejudicial c) The other tabloid that named the club has also been prejudicial. The law of this country is you are innocent until proven guilty. The internet will now have draconian legislation forced on it.

In terms of football matters if a few of the players play for the same club it will disturb the normal running in the way that happened to Leeds, and a relegation dogfight could ensue.
 

You Know What....

It probably depends on how many people know the names.

I don't know who it is and would probably rather it stayed like that to ensure a fair trial.

If the names get splashed everywhere they will not get a decent trial and will not get convicted, whether they are guilty or not.

If any club lost the players of the standard they are talking about they will be in deep trouble, relegation must be likely.
 

You Know What....

CJC said:

I think that the situation with Bowyer and Woodgate will be what happens, where the victim or a relation screws the trial up if there is one.
Click to expand...

It's so going to happen. The sun are gagging to blow the lid off it and take the kicking. Though the warning after woodgategate may be enough to stop them.

I would be double pissed if that happened again.
 

You Know What....

So what is everyone saying here? If I were to be charged with something I would not get or expect any protection from being named in the media, so why should these players. I know they haven't been charged yet and may well not be.

It's almost becomming a standard defense for the (in)famous these days to clim prejudicial reporting.
 

You Know What....

They now reckon "The 8" won't get charged as she went to the papers before the police. Also, there are more rumours that only half of them were players. However, one name always keeps popping up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

You Know What....

i see the Mirror reckons the "England star" has an alibi.

they would be named if arrested, surely? it would be hard to avoid...

she's very stupid to have gone to the papers tho :nono:
 

You Know What....

If there is any truth in this incident it will not go away, I think it could end up being one of football's biggest ever "scandals".

The Mirror article clearly implies that the main club involved will take drastic action if any of their players are found to be involved. That's a very different position to acting only if any players are found guilty. Very worthy but they may have a lot to lose, we shall see.

The names can fairly easily be found from the Internet and the Sun and the Mirror have been less than subtle in giving hints as to one of the clubs involved, I can't see the names not being in the public arena after the weekend football.

As we saw in the John Leslie case the gutter press will justify anything they deem to be "in the public interest".
 

You Know What....

Having seen a list of names, I'm now really hoping its all bollox.
 

You Know What....

Re: Re: You Know What....

Carri Bee Un said:
It's so going to happen. The sun are gagging to blow the lid off it and take the kicking. Though the warning after woodgategate may be enough to stop them.

I would be double pissed if that happened again.
Click to expand...

why does the british tabloid media always feel the need to name names before anything goes to court. Once the suspects have been "named and shamed" as they call it, it is impossible to guarentee a fair trial, and as stated by WEB, the court will be unable to convict as the defendant will (rightfully) claim that they have not received a fair trial.

To an extent I would like to see a newspaper blow the lid and then to be made an example of to the most serious extent possible. It would act as a good warning to the rest of the media that Libel is taken seriously and will be punished as such.

I hope that the claims made are not being made for malicious reasons, and because a crime has been committed.

If i have said anything that is overstepping the line then please edit, but I feel I have been careful not to say anything that is too specific to any case.
 

You Know What....

Re: Re: Re: You Know What....

davebee said:
why does the british tabloid media always feel the need to name names before anything goes to court. Once the suspects have been "named and shamed" as they call it, it is impossible to guarentee a fair trial, and as stated by WEB, the court will be unable to convict as the defendant will (rightfully) claim that they have not received a fair trial.

To an extent I would like to see a newspaper blow the lid and then to be made an example of to the most serious extent possible. It would act as a good warning to the rest of the media that Libel is taken seriously and will be punished as such.

I hope that the claims made are not being made for malicious reasons, and because a crime has been committed.

If i have said anything that is overstepping the line then please edit, but I feel I have been careful not to say anything that is too specific to any case.
Click to expand...


It's not really the tabloids fault. They have to sell papers, and most of the country wants to know.

Those responsible are the policemen and the hotel staff who leaked the names - they have professional responsibility to keep the information confidential. If the names only came from the girl in question, then the papers have done nothing wrong.

As for libel, it's a tricky one. It would not for example be libellous to name the players at the centre of the allegations if you got all their names right as long as you said no more than that they were the ones the police were speaking to and you didn't mention rape - that would be statement of fact. Saying that, you might have to be careful you didn't leave yourself liable (NOT libel!) on another front to say perversion/obstruction of justice etc.

I shall be very interested to see what comes of all this, and at last proper legal ground rules may be laid down for websites so we know what we can and can't do.
 

You Know What....

Re: Re: Re: Re: You Know What....

PAZ said:
It's not really the tabloids fault. They have to sell papers, and most of the country wants to know.

Those responsible are the policemen and the hotel staff who leaked the names - they have professional responsibility to keep the information confidential.
Click to expand...

rofl
 

You Know What....

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: You Know What....

Jimbee said:
rofl
Click to expand...

The Sun has revealed this morning that the man who the girl consented to having sex with is a Chelsea player... Not on my predictions list!
 

You Know What....

Right, so we all had the same name for the first bloke..........how about the rest?
 

You Know What....

What if the names are released and they are found not guilty or the charges dropped through lack of evidence or a the 'victim looking for a bit of publicity?

There are too many high profile cases where careers can be ruined following an allegation.

If there is truth in the allegation, then the case needs to go to court as quickly as possible with a publicity blackout. If there is no truth in the allegation then the girl needs to go prison for the same length of term as a rapist.

The tabloids are wetting themselves with anticipation to release the info. It is not in teh public interest, it is in teh interest of them selling more papers.

All the time the public buy the crap, they will print it.
 

You Know What....

Aston Villa have sadi that none of their players were involved.

I would have thought they were prime candidates, it is well known they have trouble scoring away from home.
 

You Know What....

Banana said:
Having deleted another post with it insinuating reference to some "suspects". Anyone who posts anything that could be construed as a reference to the alleged guilty parties will be banned. No second chances, no warnings - except for this one. Why do you thing rivals.net have closed the beesotted message board overnight?
Click to expand...

Just banned the first one. Due to the serious nature of the allegations and the potential ramifications for the board the guilty party cannot expect to be allowed back for a long time. In fact, probably not until the case is over.
 

You Know What....

i got an email from Betdaq telling me that because of certain rumours, this team's price vs xxx this w/e had fluctuated so much that you could have backed them at 2.05 and have laid them at 1.74!!!!
 

You Know What....

This is kind of off-topic, but I'm curious about English rape statutes.

For example, in the U.S., if a person over 18 has intercourse, consensual or not, with a minor (u-18), the parents and/or guardians of the minor can press charges of statutory sexual assault. I'm guessing England has no such law, or that the age is different and a 17 year old is exempt, since I have yet to see this aspect discussed much in the reports...
 

You Know What....

It's 16. Or so I, um, understand.
:sneakoff:
 

You Know What....

big article in yesterday's news of the world (that reputable old paper), where the guy interviewed claimed that the girl stayed for breakfast and has got narky cos she might have heard them bragging about four of them doing her (all with consent, says he). one name was mentioned as definitely NOT being involved, although the hotel rooms were booked in his name. so the guy said 2 footballers had sex with her, one a Chelsea player and one at another unnamed Premiership club, as well as 2 mates, and all 4 were with consent.

if any of that's not able to be printed, i'm sorry :( i hope that hasn't implicated anyone!
 

You Know What....

The end of that article in the News of the Screws left a bitter taste in my mouth... it was when Max Cliffords' name was mentioned.

Apparently this girl has approached this man to "represent" her interests. The same man that "represented" that woman who accused the Hamilton's of unlawful acts and who has represented numerous other individuals who have opted to grind their axes in public.

I have to say, that in my mind, this girl has done herself no favours should her claims have anything to them. IMHO the man is a leach, and I despise everything he stands for. He seems to have no regard for innocent parties and it could be said that he exploits dire situations purely for financial gain - (just covering my back there with all the jargon!).

Why, if the girl was so distraught after her ordeal, would she go running to the Sun and to Max Clifford prior to charges being bought?
 

You Know What....

Re: Re: Re: You Know What....

davebee said:
why does the british tabloid media always feel the need to name names before anything goes to court. Once the suspects have been "named and shamed" as they call it, it is impossible to guarentee a fair trial, and as stated by WEB, the court will be unable to convict as the defendant will (rightfully) claim that they have not received a fair trial.
Click to expand...

Not only that but mud sticks and the mere fact they were in the frame will be a black mark against them to some people. If they're found guilty in a court then fine - name and shame. If not, then it's not fair on them. Barrymore, Leslie and Weller are all names that immediately spring to mind.
 

You Know What....

Barrymore, indeed, has this week moved to New Zealand i hear.

And the player i've heard mentioned the most (it was the player the News Of The World said definitely WASN'T involved) is gonna get stick for ages.

It sounds more and more like she's cried rape. Obviously, if anything untoward happened, the victim would have my sympathy, but i'm a cynic, and i hate to hear of things like this.
 

You Know What....

and Carl, agreed 100% re: Max. Sod the illegal immigrants, let's just get rid of him :mad1:
 

You Know What....

Though it hurts, I have to agree with Carl Spewper Hooper, he may support a very strange mediocre pub side, but he speaks a lot of sense in this instance.

If you get raped, you go the police, not to the parasite that is Max Clifford. Why go to a publisist if you are a victim?

The girl has done herself no favours going to the parasite and the Sun first, rather than the police.
 

You Know What....

I had a discussion about the Max Clifford link at the weekend and I can see why she chose to speak to him. As soon as the girl went to the police the chances are somebody was going to leak it to the press, even if was not the alleged victim. Once the allegations leaked out you can bet that the teams involved would set their press officer onto it to try to manage the news to minimise the chances of their investment in the players being jeopardised. In a scenario like that if I was the girl I'd want someone fighting my corner and unfortunately Mr Clifford is the only man whose name comes readily to mind as a readily available PR/news manager so I can understand why the girl got in touch with him.

The "she had breakfast with them" story is either the truth or exactly the type of spin I was talking about, whatever happens I hope the truth comes out and justice is served, which is either 8 innocent men acquitted (or no charges) and 1 girl going to prison for perverting the course of justice or 8 rapists getting sent down for a long time. BTW I can't see any club taking any disciplinary action before a trial in this case as I am sure the lawyers would argue that any suspensions, transfer listings or sackings would be prejudicial to them getting a fair trial.
 

You Know What....

Well one player has given an alibi, I'm not gonna mention his name in case I'm still not allowed to but he booked the hotel room in question but was somewhere else with another woman. His picture was unblanked in the papers today.

The rape laws seem to work differently, you are guilty until you can prove your innocence.

I would think a club would not pick any of their players who were implicated just to avoid the hassle at matches and get them out of the public eye, send them training somewhere rather than suspend them.
 

You Know What....

A key issue is with all the media coverage (although TV and Radio seem to be staying well clear of the matter), will either the victim or accused really get fair trial?

And surely if there was anything to these stories, there would be arrests by now? I'm no law man, but do the old bill usually take this long to bring charges based on circumstancial evidence, with the view to producing further evidence later?
 

You Know What....

I don't think there will be a fair trial.

The fact that she went to the press first before the police, makes her look like a kiss and tell tart who got out of her depth and is trying deperatly to save herself from ridicule, IMHO.

If she had gone to the OB first, I would have a completely different opinion.
 

You Know What....

And surely if there was anything to these stories, there would be arrests by now? I'm no law man, but do the old bill usually take this long to bring charges based on circumstancial evidence, with the view to producing further evidence later? [/B]
Click to expand...


With DNA testing I think they can take their time, as previously forensic evidence was more immediate. Presumably the woman in question has been medically examined and they took away the bed linen so I guess they have what forensic evidence they might need. The mind boggles............

I am not surprised they are taking their time, get this wrong and police careers can go down the pan. Look at the recent Hamilton case when they ending up looking pretty stupid.
 

You Know What....

JBN said:
I don't think there will be a fair trial.

The fact that she went to the press first before the police, makes her look like a kiss and tell tart who got out of her depth and is trying deperatly to save herself from ridicule, IMHO.

If she had gone to the OB first, I would have a completely different opinion.
Click to expand...
Did she go to the press first? I thought the old bill had done their usual trick of selling the story to the NOTW.
 

You Know What....

The great Hamilton case.

Another case where the parasite Max Clifford was contacted before the police.

All the time there are 'parasite publisists' who are willing to leach of other peoples misfortune and try and make a quick buck, there will be cases like this.
 

You Know What....

The fact that Clifford is involved now does not mean that she went to the press first or that he was involved before it all spilt out into public.
 

You Know What....

I have heard that she went to Cliffiord and the Sun prior to the police.

If she didn't then I apologise to her, if she did, then it deserves to be thrown out and she should named and ridiculed for being so bloody stupid.

I hate cheque book journalism, I hate publisists who feed of other peoples misfortune and I hate the so called victims who sell their stories for their 15 minutes of fame and a few quid in their back pocket.

This sort of society stinks.

It is the reason I do not buy a tabloid toilet paper, it just encourages them even more.

Rant over.
 

You Know What....

Why would she go to someone like MAx Clifford anyway, unless the accusations are false, the police should be able to speak on victims behalf.
 

You Know What....

BenMoses said:
Why would she go to someone like MAx Clifford anyway, unless the accusations are false, the police should be able to speak on victims behalf.
Click to expand...

Because if you had the full force of the tabloid rat pack beating a path to the doors of your house, your family, friends, probably your boss as well, you might think "hmm, a professional might help us handle this better" (and I don't mean for financial gain).

It didn't take the "defendants" long to put their side of the story across, via their friend in the NOTW this Sunday - for which he has been paid £10,000. If they wanted to buy his silence they could easily eclipse that. Instead they are throwing doubt on her story.

BTW, agree with Ed further up. I reckon she went to the police first. Given the profile of those involved its not surprising the story then got out. Of course she may have said to much when the Sun knocked on her door, but I don't think she went to it first.
 

You Know What....

The Joker said:
Because if you had the full force of the tabloid rat pack beating a path to the doors of your house, your family, friends, probably your boss as well, you might think "hmm, a professional might help us handle this better" (and I don't mean for financial gain).

It didn't take the "defendants" long to put their side of the story across, via their friend in the NOTW this Sunday - for which he has been paid £10,000. If they wanted to buy his silence they could easily eclipse that. Instead they are throwing doubt on her story.

BTW, agree with Ed further up. I reckon she went to the police first. Given the profile of those involved its not surprising the story then got out. Of course she may have said to much when the Sun knocked on her door, but I don't think she went to it first.
Click to expand...

Surely the girl has annonymity, so won't have media peoples beating a path to her door.
The police are there to protect her, and not people like Max Clifford
 

You Know What....

Edmundo said:
The fact that Clifford is involved now does not mean that she went to the press first or that he was involved before it all spilt out into public.
Click to expand...

I was lead to believe the Press got the story after the police knew about it.

I also though Clifford got involved at a later date when the Press story became so big.
 

You Know What....

There's a lot more rapists that don't get convicted than there are lying "victims". If she's telling the truth, then I say fair play to her for having the courage to come out, instead of being intimidated by the profile of the people involved, and being ripped apart by the press.

And if she just wanted cash, wouldn't she just have said "I shagged all these players, it was great, can I have my £100,000 grand please?". The NOTW would have given her half the paper, never mind the rest of 'em. Why would she put herself through all this, and a police medical, which I hear is not the nicest thing in the world?
 

You Know What....

"There's a lot more rapists that don't get convicted than there are lying "victims". If she's telling the truth, then I say fair play to her for having the courage to come out, instead of being intimidated by the profile of the people involved, and being ripped apart by the press"

This is true.

"And if she just wanted cash, wouldn't she just have said "I shagged all these players, it was great, can I have my £100,000 grand please?".

And get branded a slut by every tabloid? Probably the broadsheets as well.
 

You Know What....

Max Clifford

Carl Super-Hooper said:
IMHO the man is a leach
Click to expand...

what a perfect way to describe possibly the worst Fulham fan in the world -- and that takes some doing ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom