Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

Maybe. Im no lawyer and so not sure of the legal definition of fraud - but afaik there has to be deliberate intent to deceive and hide assets / income. Seems to me 'arry is trying to play the "oh there was tax to pay? silly me, im just a simple football man' to make it look like accidental cockup rather than conspiracy - ie not guilty of 'fraud'. If successful he would still have to pay the tax of course, but get off the criminal charge.

 

I think abdication of responsibility can only happen if there is concern the person does not have the mental capacity of an adult, perhaps this is why Redknapp is going down the I'm a 2 year old route!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does appear that arry is going for a reduced punishment because he did not realise he was defrauding the public purse rather than attempting to get off the charge all together?

 

It also appears that depending on who is asking the questions will depend on which Storrie Arry is willing wil give. Pleed ignorance to the old bill while stitching his mate Milan up with the Press.

 

One thing that does make me wonder though, with the amount of money he has it does seem odd to try and fleece 30k's worth of tax. If thats all its over then why bother? Obviously some effort has gone to do it and I cant see how they can get away with a guilty verdict but is that just scratching the surface of a much bigger scam that hasnt been uncovered?

 

He could end up with a slap on the wrist for the 30k he should of paid, gets a guilty verdict but a fine and no jail trerm based on everyone thinking he is a bit thick and didnt realise. He could walk away thinking he has got away with all the stuff no-one has found and quite happy if thats the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also appears that depending on who is asking the questions will depend on which Storrie Arry is willing wil give. Pleed ignorance to the old bill while stitching his mate Milan up with the Press.

 

One thing that does make me wonder though, with the amount of money he has it does seem odd to try and fleece 30k's worth of tax. If thats all its over then why bother? Obviously some effort has gone to do it and I cant see how they can get away with a guilty verdict but is that just scratching the surface of a much bigger scam that hasnt been uncovered?

 

He could end up with a slap on the wrist for the 30k he should of paid, gets a guilty verdict but a fine and no jail trerm based on everyone thinking he is a bit thick and didnt realise. He could walk away thinking he has got away with all the stuff no-one has found and quite happy if thats the case?

 

Because it's around £160k 'invested' in Monaco isn't it?

 

Therefore someone who earnt £1.5m like 'Arry did at Pompey will be paying the higher rate plus NI on top, so it's closer to £80k than £30k.

 

Greed, pure and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a theory.

 

We don't know about the outcome of Storrie's case. Storrie also, has not been called as a witness for the prosecution. Also, we have heard of almost NO cross examination or questioning of Milan's part in this.

 

The defence starts next week. Now, do you think that realistically there will be a different outcome between the two cases? (Storrie & Mandaric/Arry)?

 

I don't.

 

Finger in the air time but I reckon Storrie got found not guilty, and expect the same for the other two.

 

It just seems very dodgy that Milan's hardly had a mention - unless his evidence and cross examination was in the previous case (which I think he was named on)..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget, the only disclosure in this case is that the rosie47 account existed in the Monaco branch of HSBC. There's been no disclosure - as it's not relevant - of any other off-shore accounts Redknapp owns. Given the relatively low figures involved in this particular case, i.e. the one that HMRC has managed to gather enough evidence with which to prosecute, it would seem reasonable to conclude that this isn't a one-off. As he says himself in his defence, why would he bother going to that trouble just for £30k (or £80k as is more accurate given his status as a high-rate taxpayer)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget, the only disclosure in this case is that the rosie47 account existed in the Monaco branch of HSBC. There's been no disclosure - as it's not relevant - of any other off-shore accounts Redknapp owns. Given the relatively low figures involved in this particular case, i.e. the one that HMRC has managed to gather enough evidence with which to prosecute, it would seem reasonable to conclude that this isn't a one-off. As he says himself in his defence, why would he bother going to that trouble just for £30k (or £80k as is more accurate given his status as a high-rate taxpayer)?

 

.....Apart from the account in Florida which he transferred the monies to from Monaco. And who knows from there he could personally deliver it to the Bahamas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost 50,000 posts and 1,000 pages! It could definitely make a book or maybe even a film or a TV series. I used to think that when Dream Team (remember Harchester United) was on Sky that this was far fetched but this story really takes it to another level. So many villains and comedy characters to cast ...

(by the way - who owns the rights? Fitzhugh Fella for starting the thread, the SWF, all the contributors ...?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because it's around £160k 'invested' in Monaco isn't it?

 

Therefore someone who earnt £1.5m like 'Arry did at Pompey will be paying the higher rate plus NI on top, so it's closer to £80k than £30k.

 

Greed, pure and simple.

 

Ah yeah your right on the figure, I used 30k as that was what he had mentioned in the NOTW bit the other day I think. But even still, 80k is still small fry compared to the kind of money being spoken about, so could this case be just the tip of a yet uncovered iceberg?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's Mandaric's account (or, more specifically, Mandaric's company), not Redknapp's.

 

Didnt Arry fax instructions to send 100K to the american account? If Milan has gone through the trouble of paying nearly double that into the Monaco account for Arry then why would he send 100k back to Milan?

 

Could there be another Arry account in the states that it went to? Would HMRC be able to get details of that account like they did the monaco account or would a states account be protected differently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didnt Arry fax instructions to send 100K to the american account? If Milan has gone through the trouble of paying nearly double that into the Monaco account for Arry then why would he send 100k back to Milan?

 

Could there be another Arry account in the states that it went to? Would HMRC be able to get details of that account like they did the monaco account or would a states account be protected differently?

It was mentioned a day or two ago that "dormant" accounts attract some sort of fee from the bank, so it might have been a token transaction just to ensure the account status remained "active".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was mentioned a day or two ago that "dormant" accounts attract some sort of fee from the bank, so it might have been a token transaction just to ensure the account status remained "active".

 

£100K a token transaction ?!?!?! 'Kin ell !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didnt Arry fax instructions to send 100K to the american account? If Milan has gone through the trouble of paying nearly double that into the Monaco account for Arry then why would he send 100k back to Milan?

 

Could there be another Arry account in the states that it went to? Would HMRC be able to get details of that account like they did the monaco account or would a states account be protected differently?

There were some documents and a request from the CPS to USA left on some cloud computing site. Did they relate to Harry or Milan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're talking about an off-shore account owned by a man who has been paid tens of millions of pounds during his career. For him, £100k probably *is* a token amount.

 

Probably why he's been caught - got careless over the 'small stuff'. Everyone knows that this charge is just the tip of the iceberg, but the only thing HMRC / police have allowable / admissable evidence for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm Costa Rica on business at the moment and have been told by the locals that the Chinese Government built them a 35,000 seat national stadium, as a reward for breaking off diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

 

This could be a good model for a Skate Escape.

 

Declare Portsmuff independant of the UK, break diplomatic relations with Taiwan, get a new stadium, then re-instate relations with Taiwan and break relations with China, get Taiwan to fund a new team.

 

Other than that, I can't see a way through this for our fishy friends.

 

Can we build our own version of the Berlin Wall as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because it's around £160k 'invested' in Monaco isn't it?

 

Therefore someone who earnt £1.5m like 'Arry did at Pompey will be paying the higher rate plus NI on top, so it's closer to £80k than £30k.

 

Greed, pure and simple.

 

Absolutely. The fact that he seems to think that he only missed paying £30k on such a big amount gives us some idea of how little tax he pays on everything else he earns. If I can't have his (or the RBS bank bloke's) job can I at least employ his accountant please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as it's Friday....

 

rosiecopy.jpg

Wanna tell you a story

'Bout some money I owe

When it comes to taxin'

Oh I fail to show

I ain't exactly pretty

Amount Ain't exactly small

£42 £39 £56

You could say I took it all

 

Never had a owner

Never had a owner like you

Doin all the things

Payin all the cash you do

Where is Peter Storrie?

Ain't no doubt we're bent

When you're given all we got

Weighing in at ten percent

 

I gotta whole lotta money

A whole lotta money

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

And that's a whole lotta money!

 

Oh taxman you can screw it

H.M.R.C. got it wrong

Only went to Monaco

Only went to Monaco once

Slept all through the night time

Til the 6 o'clock knock

Ooooh, To my surprise

They threw me in the dock...

 

I gotta whole lotta money

A whole lotta money

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

Put the whole lot in "Rosie"

And that's a whole lotta money!

Edited by Pancake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think HMRC are determined to nail for him something because he's got away with loads more and this is the one they can prove.

He's had more tax investigations than most, got some compo for a procedure gaff by the police and now he's going to be publicly humiliated (hopefully).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

am I the only one that feels that there is only a little evidence and there are no major bombshells to come out? HMRC messed up the Pompey liquidation and if all we have got from this case is HR playing ther thicko but walks away with a small fine and the media still in love with him. He then has had little damage. I cant see him going inside on this little bit. I assume that now HR has not declared anything else and then the Revenue get some evidence he would then really be in the s###.

 

Seems anything to do with Pompey and you get away with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Teflon Harry is really trying to play up the I didn't know what I was doing carp today. I also love the the way he is trying to blame his accountant who completely runs his life (not) for him ROTFPMSL.

Although said accountant has said under "oath" that he only found out about saggys account 6-years after it inception. Oh sorry I meant found out about Rosie's account in 2008. I'd like to know if Rosie & Harry are inextricably linked or are they 2 separate corporate entities.

 

Hows the take over going? Has Joca persuaded the FL into going for the 32-mill debt is really equity that can be offset against future Cough! Cough! profits?

All together now We all live in a yellow submarine a yellow submarine a yellow submarine Etc!

Edited by Under Weststand
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think his accountant worked for HSBC

 

Think that was his Account Relationship Manager

 

Correct me if I'm wrong

 

Nope afraid me and Tony are correct. Below extracts from James Pearces Twitter commentary.

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Hills said his surprise at not knowing about Rosie47 was even greater because he worked for HSBC. Rosie47 was held in HSBC Monaco

26 Jan

 

James Pearce

Pearcesport James Pearce

Hills said at one stage he'd requested details of Redknapp's assets and liabilities, and Redknapp hadn't mentioned Rosie47 at the time

26 Jan

 

James Pearce

Pearcesport James Pearce

Hills said he would have expected to have been told much earlier about Monaco account

26 Jan

 

James Pearce

Pearcesport James Pearce

Hills told the Court that Redknapp didn't tell him about the Monaco account until 2008 - nearly 6 years after it was opened

 

26 Jan

James Pearce

Pearcesport James Pearce

Jury's been hearing from Alan Hills at HSBC private banking in UK. He was Redknapp's banking relationship manager

 

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Pros say that on 11th January 2008 Redknapp wrote to Monaco bank and requested remaining $207,000 transferred to his London HSBC account

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope afraid me and Tony are correct. Below extracts from James Pearces Twitter commentary.

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Hills said his surprise at not knowing about Rosie47 was even greater because he worked for HSBC. Rosie47 was held in HSBC Monaco

26 Jan

 

26 Jan

James Pearce

Pearcesport James Pearce

Jury's been hearing from Alan Hills at HSBC private banking in UK. He was Redknapp's banking relationship manager

 

 

So Hills was is "banker" at HSBC UK, not his accountant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget, the only disclosure in this case is that the rosie47 account existed in the Monaco branch of HSBC. There's been no disclosure - as it's not relevant - of any other off-shore accounts Redknapp owns. Given the relatively low figures involved in this particular case, i.e. the one that HMRC has managed to gather enough evidence with which to prosecute, it would seem reasonable to conclude that this isn't a one-off. As he says himself in his defence, why would he bother going to that trouble just for £30k (or £80k as is more accurate given his status as a high-rate taxpayer)?

 

maybe if they looked hard enough they might find more offshore bank accounts Saggy has - Rosie1 to Rosie46 and who knows, could go up into the hundreds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Spurs fans I know all think he is being picked on because of his Cockney accent, the fact that 'the establishment' can't stand a 'common man' who has done well for himself, so there has been a big conspiracy to destroy his career. Just as deluded as Pompey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Hills was is "banker" at HSBC UK, not his accountant.

 

Yes indeed! but proves our point correct, that he was Banking with HSBC in the UK. Despite his comments that he didn't even want to bank with HSBC he wanted Barclays or Lloyds in reference to the Rosie 47 account in Monaco. Or have i totally missed something hear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the updates from his evidence today! So he didn't even want HSBC in Monaco, despite banking with them in the UK!

 

 

Meanwhile...back in court dear Ol Arry's doing his best to ensure Daniel Levy carts him off in a white straightjacket.....

 

 

Redknapp "That wasn't part of my life that bank account. I thought he'd lost the money"

2 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Redknapp "I can't tell you what year I won the league. I couldn't tell you what year I won championship with Bournemouth"

3 minutes ago

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

The account in Monaco was with HSBC. Redknapp "I didn't want to bank with HSBC. I want to be with Lloyds or Barclays"

4 minutes ago

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Redknapp "I didn't want an account in Monaco. I don't want to go to Monaco"

5 minutes ago

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Redknapp says he never asked Mandaric how much he was putting into Redknapp's Monaco account. "I just hoped he'd make me some money"

6 minutes ago

 

Pearcesport James Pearce

Here goes. Break in police tape recording so my first chance to update you on what we've heard in Redknapp police interview

8 minutes ago

Edited by Alright Dave
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look! A response from the Football League following....

 

'With the news released this morning that Portsmouth FC owes HMRC £1.6M - how can you continue to allow them to trade players? The company is clearly insolvent.

They also should be deducted 10 points, on the same basis as Southampton FC were when they entered administration - you gave SFC a 10 point deduction after 21 days - the Portsmouth case is running to 52 days already.

 

Why has nothing been done? It's a shameful situation for the football authorities - and football.'

 

AND

 

What more evidence do you need to show that they are trading insolvently - 1 minute in. http://audioboo.fm/boos/632962-part-1-with-portsmouth-chief-exec-david-lampitt-following-latest-off-the-pitch-speculation

 

Act now. Portsmouth are making a mockery of football.

 

Kind regards,

 

I received....

 

 

Thank you for your email.

 

 

 

We note your comments and we hope to provide a full response in due course.

 

 

 

Thank you for contacting The Football League.

 

 

 

Kind Regards

 

 

 

Amanda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh look! A response from the Football League following....

 

'With the news released this morning that Portsmouth FC owes HMRC £1.6M - how can you continue to allow them to trade players? The company is clearly insolvent.

They also should be deducted 10 points, on the same basis as Southampton FC were when they entered administration - you gave SFC a 10 point deduction after 21 days - the Portsmouth case is running to 52 days already.

 

Why has nothing been done? It's a shameful situation for the football authorities - and football.'

 

AND

 

What more evidence do you need to show that they are trading insolvently - 1 minute in. http://audioboo.fm/boos/632962-part-1-with-portsmouth-chief-exec-david-lampitt-following-latest-off-the-pitch-speculation

 

Act now. Portsmouth are making a mockery of football.

 

Kind regards,

 

I received....

 

 

Thank you for your email.

 

 

 

We note your comments and we hope to provide a full response in due course.

 

 

 

Thank you for contacting The Football League.

 

 

 

Kind Regards

 

 

 

Amanda

 

Just received the same response to my e-mail asking them to justify there lack of action

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it disturbing that he is trying to fake a mild learning diability in order to get away with it. Pretty low.

 

I thought that ignorance was no defence under the law. But as the amounts involved are considered to be so small by Harry, one wonders whether it is worth it, adopting that "I'm really a bit thick and semi-illiterate" stance, when he makes himself a laughing stock in the process. The fun that we've had on here gives a good indication of the much greater exposure he is likely to endure in the media when the likes of "Have I got News for you" pile into him. And presumably his chances of ever managing England have been dealt a fatal blow too, even if he does somehow manage to wriggle out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...