Prince v KM in Court | Page 13 | Vital Football

Prince v KM in Court

1977 £12 a week for 40 hours (30p an hour), mind you beer was 30 p a pint too.


Anyway, back to the matter in hand...where the bloody Star reporter gone..? Covered Kevs case then pissed off..? What about the McCabe boys and then HRH, shouldn't we be allowed to know what they have been up to..?

#pisspoorcoverage
 
Off to Barcelona today Rod.

Might have a look at a ground we'll be playing at in 5 years:cool:
I went t'Camp Nou in 1998 for a look round,it was brilliant then and i must admit they had more trophies to look at then we have at BDBL.:giggle: Let's hope we get to meet em before MESSI backs up playin,cos i'd luv to see our Magic Hat/Egan/Bash playin against him.:giggle: UTPB
 
1977 £12 a week for 40 hours (30p an hour), mind you beer was 30 p a pint too.


Anyway, back to the matter in hand...where the bloody Star reporter gone..? Covered Kevs case then pissed off..? What about the McCabe boys and then HRH, shouldn't we be allowed to know what they have been up to..?

#pisspoorcoverage
They’d be all over it if it was reporting on pigs and spinning the propaganda anall
 
1977 £12 a week for 40 hours (30p an hour), mind you beer was 30 p a pint too.


Anyway, back to the matter in hand...where the bloody Star reporter gone..? Covered Kevs case then pissed off..? What about the McCabe boys and then HRH, shouldn't we be allowed to know what they have been up to..?

#pisspoorcoverage

Stir are applying the Pareto Principle to their coverage. We've already used up our 20% for this week:LOL:
 
Stir are applying the Pareto Principle to their coverage. We've already used up our 20% for this week:LOL:


The only thing I've been able to find from today is that Santander asked questions about the £3m from Bin Ladens, presumably to make sure it wasn't tainted money. Nothing of the too and fro with The McCabe boys, and HRH's man. It really is poor...
 
The only thing I've been able to find from today is that Santander asked questions about the £3m from Bin Ladens, presumably to make sure it wasn't tainted money. Nothing of the too and fro with The McCabe boys, and HRH's man. It really is poor...

Stir back in Court tomorrow but they've missed a key witness giving evidence today. They are clueless.
 
As regards this 2 days missed reporting,sheer incompetence or something more sinister?
 
A key figure in this is Renato Rigatoni (sorry can't remember his name... HRH's fixer ) who was supposed to have upset the McCabes royally. I think we may have missed all his evidence.
 
A key figure in this is Renato Rigatoni (sorry can't remember his name... HRH's fixer ) who was supposed to have upset the McCabes royally. I think we may have missed all his evidence.

I don't think the Prince and his side are expected to be called until next week. I think we have missed McCabe's lads.
 
"Court now being shown the lease agreement between Sheffield United PLC and Sheffield United Football Club for Bramall Lane"

Feck me we're finally going to find out who owns the freehold...!! Beighton Blade, where are you..???????
 
Well, Yusuf Giansiracusa (not Renato Rigatoni...apologies) is on the stand now. Forgery allegations thrown out... now going through the £3m loan.

Sam Cooper reporting again (https://twitter.com/samcoopernews )

Reading the tweets for this morning, I can't say that Giansiracusa is coming across very well. He denies that he knew where the £3M "Charwell" money was coming from, despite sending emails to McCabe saying where it was from ("Sela Sports".) Also, the emails he sent don't mention the Bin Ladens at all. He says he doesn't remember why, but this is contrary to the line of questioning last week when it was claimed that McCabe and co all knew where the money was actually coming from.

I've also noticed that most of the questioning from McCabe's lawyer is based around actual evidence, mostly emails sent. The prince's lawyer seemed like he was just stating his opinions all the time ("I put it to you that you are lying" etc.)
 
Its Kev vs. HRH, isn't it? Its Kevs lawyer who has to prove the case, while HRH's only has to defend.

True, but I doubt you can get anywhere if your only defence to documentary evidence against you is to offer a differing opinion. It's hard to judge based on a handful of tweets per hour of the case though. It might just have been a difference in the writing style of the first Star reporter, rather than of the lawyers techniques.
 
True, but I doubt you can get anywhere if your only defence to documentary evidence against you is to offer a differing opinion. It's hard to judge based on a handful of tweets per hour of the case though. It might just have been a difference in the writing style of the first Star reporter, rather than of the lawyers techniques.


My over-riding impression of the first week was that HRH's barrister was scoring quite freely with his jab, over a large number of inconsistancies in the plaintiffs case. No surprisingly, Kevs lawyer is now picking a few out in HRH's case too, but HRH is coming across as being more 'business-like and reasonable' perhaps arms length, in his approach to the club, whereas Kev is a bit more 'this is how its always been done, you have to be a Blade', gung-ho freestyle and short term-thinker.

Only my interpretation of the part of the evidence we are party to...
 
Well, its Friday morning, and they are still at it with Mr Giansiracusa.

Bit of to and fro really. Insinuations of lies and misleading statements, rebuttals and nowt much. Although he's just revealed that the HRH side have a potential buyer in the wings as well. No details as subject to Non-disclosure.

To be honest, the longer this goes on, the less sure I am of what each side was trying to prove. Lots of what I'd call slightly sharp, but pretty normal business activity on both sides, and little for the Kev side to do other than portray HRH and his man as a pair of dreadful cads. I'm not sure that the contract would be null and void if that were the case anyway.