Jump to content

Heed The Crown Office Warning On Contempt Of Court.


OlegKuznetsov

Recommended Posts

Be careful what you say, people. You don't want a charge or to let certain individuals off.

THE CROWN Office has warned social media users about making any prejudicial comments relating to the court case over the acquisition of Rangers assets in 2012.
In a tweet, the Crown Office said: "Please note that the Rangers case remains live under Contempt of Court Act and nothing should be published that might prejudice the case.
A key part of the contempt law is preventing the publication of material which could influence a jury and jeopardise the chances of an accused receiving a fair trial. Those found guilty of contempt of court may be sent to prison.

The Crown Office comments come as a fourth man appeared in court on charges related to the purchase of the assets of Rangers in 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sorry. I'm not authorised to discuss that either.

I'm still not clear on what you aren't allowed to say. Can you give examples?

Can I say that Craig Whyte sooks men's willies? Or could this in itself create prejudice based on homophobia?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still not clear on what you aren't allowed to say. Can you give examples?

No.

I cannot give you examples of what I'm not allowed to say.

Can I say that Craig Whyte sooks men's willies? Or could this in itself create prejudice based on homophobia?

Craig Whyte's alleged sooking of men's willies, or otherwise, is not part of the case against him, as far as I understand, so the restriction would not apply in that example, which you were allowed to give for those very reasons.

As a guide, I'd suggest we avoid asserting guilt or innocence in relation to any of the accused, or indeed speculating about the likely evidence or reasoning for the case(s) against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that unless you're materially involved in the case, as a witness, court official or involved with the club, police or prosecutors, nobody is going to give a monkeys about your opinions. If you're leaking documents, you'll probably be fucked though.

I think the warning is for those involved and mainstream media.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck enforcing that on the board :D

It's not really for us to enforce.

It's more for each of us to be aware of our legal responsibilities, else the law may enforce it.

I think it's appropriate to highlight to users that which has been pointed out by the Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anybody frequents twitter or has even seen the likes of imgur pictures of peoples tweets, this type of law enforcement is gonna cause a shit storm.

Biggest thing twitters taught me is people are fucking morons, typing out things they would never say out loud in a million years.

Can see a few social media related jail terms due to this type of thing shortly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the jury is made up from Bears, I doubt anything we say on here would make a difference.

The jury will be screened, they'll ask what school was attended, if your a member of a lodge (Masonic or Orange) if your a member of any Republican Party or organisation and told not to wear your colours in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet the big tax case was different? We had blogs the lot, every unemployed tarrier was now a tax expert, the media believed them the guilty verdict was a full gone conclusion..

What did Police Scotland do about it? Was that not breaking the law? Or does the law only apply at police Scotland and the PF they way it does at the Snp? Only when it bloody suits them..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet the big tax case was different? We had blogs the lot, every unemployed tarrier was now a tax expert, the media believed them the guilty verdict was a full gone conclusion..

What did Police Scotland do about it? Was that not breaking the law? Or does the law only apply at police Scotland and the PF they way it does at the Snp? Only when it bloody suits them..

This

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet the big tax case was different? We had blogs the lot, every unemployed tarrier was now a tax expert, the media believed them the guilty verdict was a full gone conclusion..

What did Police Scotland do about it? Was that not breaking the law? Or does the law only apply at police Scotland and the PF they way it does at the Snp? Only when it bloody suits them..

Was that in front of a jury?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was that in front of a jury?

It has nothing to do with who it is in front off.

The BBC used stolen evidence then used it to suggest we were guilty while the judges were looking at evidence.

Is that not a clear break of the law? And again what did police Scotland do?

The law is the same for all not just when police Scotland enforce it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has nothing to do with who it is in front off.

The BBC used stolen evidence then used it to suggest we were guilty while the judges were looking at evidence.

Is that not a clear break of the law? And again what did police Scotland do?

The law is the same for all not just when police Scotland enforce it.

It's worth remembering that the tax cases were not criminal.

Criminal proceedings have different stricter guidelines.

Nonetheless, I share your anger at the leaking of our info.

However, it then highlights the contrast in the rush to judgement in the media regarding our non-criminal case with the almost fleeting scrutiny that the accused in these criminal cases received from that same media.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As pointed out the tax case and this case are totally different,criminal and civil matters have different processes .the public chat about the tax case was wrong but not illegal,we can't risk these bastards getting off on technicalities so box clever is the name of the game

Link to post
Share on other sites

timeline.png

That's not contempt of court.

Don't discuss the case, don't discuss what evidence might be spoken about in court, don't assume guilt (or innocence, this goes both ways) don't discuss what sentence should be handed out if a guilty verdict is reached. Don't speak about potential witnesses.

I think that covers it. Report anything that you see with people talking about any of the above. We already know Imran Ahmed used this site to spill shit, I'm sure others used it too.

Keep your eyes peeled. We need this trial to be as fair as possible.

Admin should employ another few members to keep up with any potential sneaky shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...