I will not express my opinion of the findings of this court case suffice to say, if these charges had been brought against you or I, would the verdict have been the same ? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16925280 What a complete waste of taxpayer's money when the verdict was sooo inevitable
Completely agree. To say "sorry but I'm a bit thick and not good with numbers" should not really be a sound legal defence. You have to ask what the CPS are up to if they cannot get a conviction with all the evidence of undeclared income going into offshore accounts. I can't be the only one thinking that if Harry is so stupid how is he a multi-millionaire ably running a stream of top flight clubs over the years. Same old story, one law for those who can afford top barrister's fees, one law for the rest of us.
I'm not for a minute suggesting that 'palms were greased' etc, etc ......... you're right, it ends here
From reading the various informations since the start of the trial it never sounded like they had any serious evidence to pin on them. Just the fact there was money placed in an account in Monaco that belonged to arry. But no substantial evidence to prove his innocent claims wrong. This almost meant it was one persons word against the over which never end in a conviction. Anyway proven not guilty and that's that. Fortunately nothing that will effect us
Akin to a Brian Rix farce. Notwithstanding the verdict, the moneys paid to managers, players and agents for transfers (10% for any sell on) makes a mockery of the game. And the CPS makes a mockery of the justice, not legal, system.
Got to agree the biggest thing to come from this hearing is 'why should managers be allowed to pocket money from player transfers?'. This really leaves the game open for corruption (although still within the laws) where a manager may look to sell players for their own personal profit rather than to benefit the club
Two major factors that may have affected the outcome are that it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, which would have been unlikely as a few of you have said there was a lack of evidence and cases such as this can be very complicated, so much so that there have been suggestions that trials such as this should not include a jury.
Its good to know that we have someone who is talented enough to second guess a jury! It is all about due process and the fact that we have the rule of law in this country is something which makes me very proud.
I am glad that the HMRC brought this case to court as it sends out a clear signal that Tax evasion will not be tolerated especially in these austere times. Anyone who is salting away untaxed income must be rooted out and dealt with by the courts.
To be honest once the details of the case have been read it would have been entirely wrong to convict them. It's not illegal to have a back account in Monaco, but yes it would be possible to use it to dodge tax. Also as Harry said several times he's paid millions in tax why would he risk prison for the sake of a few thousand. Some of you are saying that there is one rule for the high profile and another for the rest of us, I think thus is true, that case would never have got to court if the people involved weren't famous.
