Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

 

A guy who works for my wife used to work in the local tax office and he has said on several occasions that they were watching Mr Redknapp's activities very closely over the years.

 

Looks like the chickens have finally come home to roost :)

Posted

Couldn't have 'appened to a nicer bloke !! him & story sharing a cell, "you wanna be the wife or the husband arry"...."I'll be the Husband Pete"...."ok, well be a good husband, come over ere and suck your wife's co**"

Posted

"In November 2007 when he was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and false accounting. The High Court ruled that officers who raided Redknapp's home in connection with that inquiry had acted unlawfully.

 

From what I have been told, at the time (2007) am I correct to assume that any evidence collected would have be deemed inadmissable, hence the police had to start from scratch to catch him out?

 

If for example they had found loads of incriminating info on the conputer that they may or may not have taken it would have had to be returned to the accused and disregarded?

Posted

If they didn't think that they had a case against him they would have dropped it by now. But it is one thing to have a case and another to have enough evidence of a realistic conviction.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...