Harry Redknapp threatened to "sue the bollocks" off a journalist as he angrily denied taking bungs, a court heard on Tuesday. The Tottenham Hotspur manager is accused of taking secret payments from former Portsmouth chairman Milan Mandaric while he was manager of the club - a charge he denies. In short extracts from a phone conversation read out to a jury at Southwark Crown Court, Redknapp told News of the World reporter Rob Beasley he had "the best accountants in England", claiming the Inland Revenue was fully aware of his dealings in Monaco. When Beasley described how Mandaric had told him the money sent to Redknapp's offshore accounts were investments outside football, the Tottenham Hotspur manager replied: "He don't know what he is f****** talking about. What is he talking about? It is a bonus." Explaining that the payments surrounded profit made on the sale of Peter Crouch from Portsmouth to Aston Villa, Redknapp added: "If it was something dodgy I would have gone over there and brought it back in a briefcase." When Beasley asked him whether he had paid any tax in the UK on it, Redknapp replied: "Haven't been asked to, Rob." Redknapp said "there ain't nothing crooked in it" as the telephone conversation went on, the court heard. "Don't say bung," Redknapp said. "It's nothing to do with a bung. It's paid by the chairman. How can it be a bung when the chairman of the football club paid me?" He added: "What's a bung? It's a f****** sick word." When asked about the bonus clause in his contract, Redknapp said: "My accountant has got my contract ... I'm not going to f****** show you." He added: "The Inland Revenue know all about it. I've got nothing to defend, Rob." (Source: The Huffington Post)
Sounds fair. It's a legal payment from the chairman and clearly not a bung. That's not even the issue.
The Pompey situation is ridiculous. It appears that owner after owner has just lumped on random debt after random debt. Can they actually prove that they're owed any of this money, as it appears to be a work of fiction?
From the sounds of things, it would appear that Harry did not declare it as Revenue (or else why is he moving it to an off-shore account?), but (according to Harry) was under the impression that Pompey was paying the tax on it. If a manager is merely an employee of the club, paying Schedule E tax, this would be a reasonable assumption to make. That's assuming, of course, that Mandaric declared having made the payments. But, if Harry was sure that Pompey was paying the tax on those payments, why did he move the funds off-shore? None of it makes any sense.
Perhaps they're very astute, the way English banks have performed in recent years, we should all put our money offshore.
Sure, that could well be a reason. In which case, he'll be able to show that he moved other funds off-shore around the same time, monies that the Revenue accept were fully and properly accounted for. The explanation, backed up by such corroborative evidence, would add a massive lift to his defence. Of course, if they were the only funds moved off-shore at that time (or, god forbid, at all), it will severely weaken his defence. Time will tell.
