Corruption at highest level with an untold story


As reported in The Herald yesterday, the judiciary, police and Crown Office Prosecution Service (COPS) colluded in an “unlawful” manner against individuals who were simultaneously subject of a campaign by prominent Rangers supporters over control of the club’s assets before and after liquidation.

Sheriff Lindsay Wood granted police 22 warrants in an investigation into the takeover of Rangers at a time when a high-profile campaign was underway against the same people to secure the assets of the club post-administration and liquidation by ‘real Rangers people’.  The Herald also reported that Wood was a prominent Rangers fan who attended games, social events and displayed a photo of Ibrox in his office.

Accusations of collusion by police against groups of individuals are common, but it is rare to find the judiciary and prosecution services involved.  It is rarer still that they go after white-collar professionals.  If this is what they will do for their team against accountants and lawyers, what would they do to you?

No less an authority than sheriff principle for Glasgow and Strathkelvin concluded Wood “submitted a misleading report”.  Senior investigating officer, Chief Inspector Jim Robertson, chanted a Rangers song during interviews.  A judge ruled that Robertson gave evidence that was “patently untrue” and acted in an “intimidatory”, “threatening” and reprehensible” manner.

Sheriff Wood accepted his failings and announced he would retire in May this year. So far, compensation payments to victims have reached £40m.  Remember, this is only what was published in The Herald yesterday.  Fair play to them, if ever you wonder why we need a strong traditional media, this is it.

Let’s be clear, however, there is a lot more that has not come out.  If you think Wood and Robertson were architects of this, you are wildly mistaken.  Only the Scottish Government have the ability to look deeper, but there are some clear lines to follow up.

When this was all happening, individuals working on this put themselves at significant personal risk and have since wisely gone to ground.  While I think that risk has passed, it is not my gamble to take.  But I know for sure if the Scottish Government took a hard look at the COPS, their prosecution decisions and their unprecedented leaking of information to the press – by official email (which I’ve seen), they would find out what we all know but some prefer to ignore.

Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8

  1. Even Scotlands leading judge Lord Carloway overturned the decision of the investigation led by Turnbull to discipline Wood as reported in todays Times.



    What kind of sinister set up is running this country that the countries top Judge does this.



    Tip of the iceberg.

  2. Go tell the Spartim on

    Surely this compromises any legal decision Wood has made especially if you are of a catholic and Celtic persuasion (they’re not the same thing) similarly with jackboot Robertson

  3. Where this to have occurred in any other part of the UK, I’ve no doubt we’d be looking at a public inquiry.

  4. Lessons from history, Lord Denning when denying an appeal for the Birmingham Six in 1980.



    “Just consider the course of events if their action were to proceed to trial … If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. … That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, ‘It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.’ “

  5. Back to Basics - Glass Half Full on

    Absolutely brilliant Paul.






    League tables : Quality of News Gathering and Publishing.



    What it should look like ….



    1. Quality newspapers


    2. BBC


    3. Commercial TV


    4. National tabloids


    5. Local tabloids


    6. Supporters blogs



    In reality ….



    1. Supporters blogs


    2-6. The rest: tied on same points

  6. “Its the Scottish Governments fault”



    Will that include your wee crowd of unelectable masons guising as a party of the working class who were in power when UK company law was broke from 1999 onwards



    Your scum(keev et al) Paul are of the same knuckle,same masonic societies….except no one votes for you.



    The high moral ground of we done zero.


    Own it.



    To even imply this would have been different is cobblers.


    Sure you wiped out a million souls,ignoring a bit of paperwork wont be a problem.




  7. Happy Birthday Favourite Unvle


    And day late


    Happy birthday Cosy corner bhoy who was 83.



    All the best good tims




  8. The Bhoys are back in league action at Celtic Park next week, with St Mirren the visitors in the cinch Premiership on Wednesday (Jan 18) and we’re giving supporters who can’t be at the match in person the chance to catch all the action LIVE on pay-per-view.



    Stream Digital’s pay-per-view service is available to buy now for next Wednesday’s league clash v St Mirre, with all the build-up, live match action, half-time and full-time analysis included for just £12.99.For UK as well

  9. Chairbhoy @ 5.18am




    SFtBs proves my point about negative comments on Brendan Rodgers…







    “… Unlike, Brendan Rodgers he has not made any direct or side-of-the-mouth criticism of his employers”.




    Wow! You do like declaring yourself the winner in a debate. May I remind you that your point about Brendan Rodgers was that any comment criticising BR on CQN was received positively with agreement.




    However, my comment about BR, that you quote above, was responded to with only one reply- and that was from yourself- no one else bothered to agree with it, commend it, repudiate it. or laugh at it. Apart from yourself. If anything, you disproved your own point, in that a criticism of BR (whom I commend as a football coach but disapprove of his manoeuvering to leave us ) was actually greeted with disagreement (by one poster) and by tumbleweed by CQN generally. Unless you can read the minds of all those who chose not to comment, your point remains, at least, unproven. And, on a sample of one, disproven.







    PL did not employ BR, PL was and is again an employee of Celtic, this PL as Mr Celtic narrative is bunkum. When BR criticised PL he was criticising a colleague, not his employer nor Celtic in general.




    Personally, I am unsure how the hierarchy works and whether the football Club Manager is an equal level to the CEO, or subsidiary or superior. Are you sure they are equivalent colleagues? My reading is that managers tend to get fired but CEO’s don’t get fired as regularly- but I don’t have the figures for this.




    Can you provide evidence that BR criticised his “colleague” PL by name or was it, again , a side of the mouth dog whistle message? I searched the records again and, during the period where PL was failing to land the right back that BR wanted so badly that he had to leave for Leicester when it wasn’t delivered, I found this, from another Celtic site (presumably an echo-chamber site, unlike your own preferred site, responding to an interview by BR to the Daily Record:-




    Brendan Rodgers and Peter Lawwell have certainly had their relationship questioned, but the Hoops manager is at ease with the transfer process at Celtic.




    “Rodgers has been outlining what it is his Chief Exec truly does in the process of bringing in a player.




    Celtic have so far failed to bring in a right-back this month. That’s despite the fact a host of different names have been linked to Parkhead over the last month too.




    Their failure to yet bag one has opened the door for criticism to Lawwell once again. But Rodgers has moved to defend his colleague, and instead went out of his way to explain the role he plays in negotiations.



    “I don’t know money. I’ve got a little bit but I don’t know much about it! There are greater experts than me on that.




    “You find the player and, whether fair or not, I’m not saying then it goes to Peter and he doesn’t do it because that’s not really the case. Sometimes it changes from an agent’s perspective or a club’s perspective.




    “You’ve maybe agreed something initially and then it changes. It’s a whole, difficult, complex dynamic. But it’s about trying to find the players you can bring in.”




    Rodgers interestingly backing Lawwell




    Many have perceived the Celtic manager to have had digs at Lawwell in the past. Opening up on frustrations about transfer recruitment in the past have left many pointing in the board’s direction – particularly Lawwell.




    But Rodgers is clearly looking to back his main man here.”




    It’s interesting to hear that Rodgers takes no part in negotiations. Effectively, the Hoops manager just puts suggestions to Lawwell that he hopes can be done. Whether it can be or not is then down to the negotiations between Lawwell, the club, the agent, and the player.




    To be fair to the Celtic supremo, it’s not an easy job. As Rodgers mentioned, agents and clubs can very easily move the goalposts in the middle of negotiations. Deals that look likely to be done can always have a hitch in them.




    But it’s good that Rodgers has provided fans with some proper clarity over both he and Lawwell’s roles in the transfer market.





    So I ask once again, if you care little about the PL legacy, if you are agnostic to his contribution, why get so het up about his legacy and current contribution being challenged, why make spurious arguments against folk that raise the issues, why try to offensively label them and intimidate them and close down the debate?




    I realise you are responding to several posters here but I will reply only on my own behalf. I am neither agnostic nor carefree about “PL’s Legacy”. In this very echo chamber, I disagreed, along with many others, on his “re-appointment” to the club. I dissented from the cover story that he was back to help us with our Child Abuse scandal and stated he has demonstrated no skill set previously for this. I have stayed many times, including in my reply to you, that PL lied and cheated the Celtic support on 3 separate issues- Res 12, the 5 Way agreement and the overall handling of 2012 events. I cannot be any clearer.




    But I did dissent from the fanciful narrative, advanced by another poster and which you were willing to give house-room to, that PL was the likely reason that the S. Korean transfer was taking “so long” or “slowing down”.




    I am perfectly able to pin the crimes on PL that he did commit. But I feel no need to make him responsible for all ills that befall us.




    PL was an employee, Not Mr. Celtic, and certainly not someone to praise or revere, any more than Bob Kelly, Desmond White, Terry Cassidy or any other historical equivalent (and yes I know their job titles were different). PL was employed by our minority shareholder and de facto owner, Dermot Desmond. He carried out DD’s instructions and was deemed by DD to have carried this out satisfactorily. I neither revere nor love them- my affections are reserved for our players and some managers. That is why I loved BR as a coach who improved players and disliked him for “his” transfer market failures and his PR talk (lying?) to our support, as evidenced by the DR interview.




    I doubt there is a single CQN’r who agrees with me on all my views above, nor a single one who goes 100% with you on here or on Sentinel Celts. That is healthy.





    You are welcome to your echo chamber, yet from time to time the false narrative will be questioned, yet don’t get over alarmed, it’s healthy to have your world view… challenged




    I detest the bitchiness between “rival” Celtic blogging sites. I have found good and bad on every blog run by genuine Celtic supporters. I am comfortable with most CQN contributors, even those who point out the many errors of my ways. I visit an admire other sites but life is too short to contribute widely on too many. Any criticism of SC on here will get short shrift from me. The guys who run SC would prefer that they are not seen as an anti-CQN site too but they operate a light touch censorship too/




    Please keep on challenging but remember what you were challenged about yourself. This is not a PL all good or all bad debate- that is for genuine echo chambers.




    This started as an argument over whether PL was an obstructive force in the Cho negotiations- nothing else-




    I find that fanciful. Others think the co-incidence of his return and Cho not being landed quickly enough is sufficient to advance the unconvincing “no smoke without fire” argument ( have they never heard of smoke bombs or dry ice?). If I am not mistaken, we were owed in the press as being after Cho some time near the end or just after the World Cup. There was no leak at that time that we were after Tomoki Iwata. Yet Iwata is here (arriving officially after PL was back officially) and Cho is not.




    If this is a transfer failure, rather than a delay, then surely Mia lies at the door of Michael Nicholson or Ange, on our side. Otherwise, if we ant to blame PL for it- we would have to credit PL for landing Iwata- and we don’t want to do that now do we?




    That way lies echo-chamber madness.

  10. From PREVIOUS Thread..



    BIG JIMMY on 13TH JANUARY 2023 11:55 AM


    ART OF WAR on 13TH JANUARY 2023 11:21 AM





    Big Jimmy –















    What does Viaplay sport cost?











    What does it cost? Subscribe to Viaplay through Xfinity with X1 or Flex. 7-Day Free Trial then only $4.99/ month. Subscribe to Viaplay through Roku. 7-Day Free Trail then only $4.99/ month or $49.99/ year.










    Ive just looked at the VIAPLAY Website.





    I am now aware that VIAPLAY has taken over PREMIER SPORTS.





    On the VIAPLAY Website, the ” SPORT OPTION” is £14..99 per month, and I dont mind paying that…but in order to Subscribe, I MUST provide a ” SKY VIEWING NUMBER” ?





    I ONLY watch SKY SPORTS, via the ” NOW” Channel on my Firestick, so I do NOT think that I have a ” Sky Viewing Number” ? So there would be NO Point in me phoning SKY ?







    I see that I have ” FLEX” via my Firestick, SHOULD I go to ” FLEX” Tomorrow on my SMART TV before the Celtic game obviously, and SUBSCRIBE thru that outlet….WILL ” FLEX” ask for a ” SKY VIEWING NUMBER” ?







    Sorry for being a PEST Mate.



  11. BURNLEY78 on 13TH JANUARY 2023 8:57 AM




    Any CEO could have done what Liewell done.



    The fact is the 5 way agreement lie should have seen him chased from our club.



    A bare faced Liar of a man.



    In fact I could do his job and better.



    D :)

  12. Daughter on her first solo trip,just been charged £40 for a bag,which i take free on Jet2 to Portugal every year,it’s 3-4 mm bigger than whats ‘accepted ‘, it’s a standard cabin sized case,beware……absolute dogs

  13. Bada


    Went to Disneyland Paris a couple of years ago with the grandkids. We all had carry on bags – air France decided to check all the hard shell cases – 2 of ours failed the test initially but with a bit of physical persuasion got through.


    On the return journey no such tests at Paris and there was a French passenger with a case which would have failed the test.


    It seems it’s entirely arbitrary rules by the airlines/ handling agents. No such thing as a standard case or rules

  14. Anyone taking a subscription tomorrow for the match would be advised to take it out through Sky, Virgin or amazon prime. I wouldn’t subscribe dirrctly with viaplay because prem sports use to be an absolute nightmare to cancel.

  15. Gene- the flight is empty ,their dimensions are a lot smaller than Jet2 for cabin bags,just checked

  16. Back to Basics - Glass Half Full on

    Cheers BB.



    Same ask as Coneybhoy if I may



    Which airline and where to in Portugal?



    A few of us heading there soonish.

  17. BhoyjoeBelfast



    Would you know if Clonard Monastery is still an active Parish and would it be open to a tour.a couple of friends are thinking of going and expressed interest in visiting there and bombay st area.hope all good your side.




  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8