|All you need to know about West Ham United FC's potential move to Stratford.
'Sunday Times exclusive'
(front page - I've typed out an excerpt)
'A shadow was cast over the Olypmic Games last night after it emerged that the £500m stadium is at the centre of a corruption scandal.
One of London's biggests football clubs has been exposed for making secret payments to an executive on the body that awarded the stadium to the club after the Games are completed.
WHUFC made payments totalling £20,000 into the executive's bank account before and after it was selected as the owner of the stadium.
The money was paid to Dionne Knight..director of corporate services at the OPLC...
The arrangement was put in place by Ian Tompkins, director at West Ham...
Both executives were suspended on Friday after the Sunday Times confronted them with evidence...'
As I say, this is an excerpt.
Thought the forum should see it, though...
It's already being done on the front page of kumb.com and the Olympic tab .
Mods - this is such a hot topic is it worth keeping it in the GD for a few days on a sticky ?
That way the Tottenham guests can also see it........
Interestingly according to the beeb she came clean about her work with us on Thursday:
Whether she did so out of guilty conscious or was "prompted" to by a third party is open to debate.
Sorry everyone, I've had a GD break and hadn't realised it was previously reported here or on the homepage.
The article reads like an exclusive. Brady's all over it too.
Just lock this down.
Spurs really are experts in - " how to win friends and influence people"
I'd imagine so.
never a dull moment at WHU...sneaky by the filth, but great response by West Ham.
Either the paper or the club have got all this very wrong indeed. What's worrying is that the Sunday Times reports a story generated by someone - this shadowy investigator - who has no direct links with them. They'll obviously have had their own lawyers all over it. Something tells me that they'd have gone to a decent firm for that kind of advice.
The legality of the initial obtaining of phone and bank records may be at issue - but that would be an action to be taken by those to whom they privately belonged. Its not for the club to sue the invesigator for getting the woman's records, even if there was a consultancy arrangement between them.
The use of that in a libel claim (or defence) is surely related to the libel argument of 'justification'. Just because the source of the information is moody, doesn't mean that the substance of the article is libellous (so far as I know, from a non-expert position).
Wish the club could go a season or two without being embroiled in some daft front page argument...
A well timed and excellent response from the club .
Let the Sunday Times run their story , then hit back with a strongly worded statement as the paper hit's the news stands .
I hope the club really does follow up with a legal pursuit of all concerned .
Scandalous behaviour by Tottenham and their agents , and a disappointing piece by the ST, part of the same Murdoch stable that our CEO writes a column for .
Perhaps in the light of their willingness to attack a club employee, in such a viscious and personal way , she may wish to reconsider her views being published in the ST sister paper, the Sun .
I don't doubt that these things have happened.
The question is whether they constitute wrongdoing.
She declared her relationship with Tompkins from the outset. She has had no involvement in the bidding process.
Yet they are calling it "corruption". That's one hell of a stretch.
The whole illegal hacking thing links to all the cases against Coulson/NotW......
The fact that Spurs have supposedly commissioned someone who targeted every member of the executive
I think our statement is desperate. Quoting the data protection act is not a good sign. The Sunday Times is not like any other paper- their lawyers would have been 100% before going with this. We are seriously in the ****. I'm not sure what the secret letter between Cameron and Pickles is about yet- However....that might be the mistake Spurs have made. Levy against the establishment? Only one winner....but we could end up with a hollow victory.
Thios is NOT about Spurs getting to Stratford...its about STOPPING us fulfilling our potential. Chelsea and Arsenal will be hoping the Spurs hidden agenda is successful as well.
Let's all laugh at Tottenham...
....and what the filth have done isn't desperate ? Sometimes in life you have to fight fire with fire. Although not certain, I would like to think that after the Tevez scenario that we will now have top class lawyers working on our behalf.
Tottenham have actually employed someone to sleeze there way through people's private information and documentation. They have approached all 14 members of the voting panel - and I wouldn't imagine it was over cream scones & tea. They have proved beyond doubt that they are chaired by a man who is probably more corrupt than any of our lot have ever been. To commission someone to carry out a criminal act on their behalf is pathetic. So what if they hadnt uncovered anything ? They would have left it alone and walked away innocently ? That doesn't cut it with me. They have gone through someone's personal, private and secured information without a care. As far as I'm concerned sp*rs should be in the dock for this. To say that it is in the state's best interests ? What a load of tosh. I suppose approaching the 14 OPLC members in an individual basis is in the state's best interests too ?
I hate that scummy club even more today than before. I desperstely want the Govt to tell them to do one in their request for cash. I also desperately want Harringey to tell them that their planning permission is now revoked but unfortunately neither will happen...
I think if the bidding ever got reopened, Tottenham Hotspur would hope it's done before 14 completely new members of the OPLC.
I didn't mean to express an opinion one way or another, but note the following:
1. The paper has recorded the following in its final paragraphs (which would amount to libel if inaccurate, I would assume)
(a) Within hours of the paper confronting the pair, they were each suspended.
(b) This weekend, Knight has apologised for keeping secret the payments [from the OPLC]
(c) West Ham said that Brady said that Tompkins said that Knight had OPLC permission to carry out the work
2. Knight is labelled by the paper as a director of the OPLC who had voted on the bid - not sure that your suggestion of 'no involvement' would accord with that.
3. Hacking into voicemail is a direct offence contrary to a law governing the telecommunications systems. Its different (and considerably more serious) from obtaining bank details or even call records. They are paper documents, proof of calls maybe, but not the calls themselves. There is no 'defence' of justification in attempts to listen to voicemails, or to listen to calls as they are made.
4. A lot of the information seems to have originated from an ex-councillor on Newham Council, who has also been named in the piece. It was this bloke who blew the whistle on the relationship between Knight and Tompkins.
I hope your optimism is correct, Bubbles. I can't share it until more is revealed.
Hammer110 summed it up about right a couple of pages ago:
It appears she wasn't involved in the bidding process, simply in procurement. Tottenham seem to have used illegal means to obtain information that really isn't much direct use to them, so they have released it timed to create as much collateral damage as possible ahead of their latest desperate appeal. Which will fail.
Standard approach when an allegation has been made I would have thought.
As the club say - that's between Knight and the OPLC.
Again, that's for Knight to answer - rather than Tompkins.
Seems to have been absolutely refuted.
Breaches of the DPA. Even paper records are covered.
This is just a re-run of the FIFA World Cup bidding process. Unsuccessful bidder runs around slinging mud. The bid winners however, ultimately better fitted with the desires of the bidding committee for hosts. Losing bidders sulk because their bid never really met the desired criteria and they believe they should have been told because it has cost them time and money. Everything else is a bit of a sideshow.
Last edited by bubbles1966 on Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
I think the image in many people's comes from the word 'Times', conjuring up an editorial linkage with 'The Times'. In fact, the two newspapers only came under a single ownership in 1966, over 140 years after the Sunday's creation. Nowadays they are of course part of the Murdoch empire. Perhaps the most famous event for the Sunday Times was when they rashly published as genuine the infamous and forged 'Hitler Diaries'.
IMHO, one cannot equate 'The Times' of today with the Thunderer in its heyday. I'm old enough to remember the uproar when the newspaper started putting news on its front page. Now it's in tabloid form and, IMHO, not much different from other dailies.
Thus, I believe, The Sunday Times is in fact just like any other paper.
Well, our views on the relevance of the points made appear to differ, but its not so clever for Knight to have decided against telling her employers about the payment for this consultancy, until she's confronted with it by a newspaper, but there you have it.
As TPP says, lets hope the club sues for libel, and that Tompkins and Knight sue for breaches of the DPA.
Our club is like a magnet for bad publicity. Its getting boring.
Users browsing this forum: pbenjy and 6 guests