JFH in the clear

[knocker]

Hang him.

[Stanley]

But that would be making an assumption not fact

No, I would say it's a fact. If you analyse the video it's clear that it contains edit points.

[James1979]

I just don't understand why Les speaks to sky about this. If later on, JFH is charged then we look like idiots. If alll fine, then why don't we sue?

[Bluehoop]

No, I would say it's a fact. If you analyse the video it's clear that it contains edit points.

The video is clearly edited and the article is written to sensationalise the video. Classic gutter journalism to sell news papers. I have dealt with many claims for the Met Police where they have tried to submit video evidence to defend their actions, often edited and/or fused together with real time analogue to suggest it is a continuous loop. Forensic experts are employed to confirm if surveillance footage has been edited and as soon as it is proven to be so, the law is very clear in that it becomes inadmissible as it is corrupted. The article and video are frankly worthless as evidence of innocence or guilt and until or unless full and unfettered evidence is available no one can really know the truth.

[jmelanie]

The video is clearly edited and the article is written to sensationalise the video. Classic gutter journalism to sell news papers. I have dealt with many claims for the Met Police where they have tried to submit video evidence to defend their actions, often edited and/or fused together with real time analogue to suggest it is a continuous loop. Forensic experts are employed to confirm if surveillance footage has been edited and as soon as it is proven to be so, the law is very clear in that it becomes inadmissible as it is corrupted. The article and video are frankly worthless as evidence of innocence or guilt and until or unless full and unfettered evidence is available no one can really know the truth.

Hopefully this is what is going to happen, because at the moment the situation is unsatisfactory for all concerned.

[dogsrrs]

No, I would say it's a fact. If you analyse the video it's clear that it contains edit points.

I'm prepared to believe that ! So tell then are some posters using the story to attack the sleeze bag JFH or has got to go with the results would he not not be a sleeze bag if we in the play offs

[Olly]

Exactly

[jmelanie]

I'm prepared to believe that ! So tell then are some posters using the story to attack the sleeze bag JFH or has got to go with the results would he not not be a sleeze bag if we in the play offs

IMO he would still be a sleeze bag even if we were top of the championship. We have a lot of young players in our squad and I wonder what their opinion was on listening to the tapes and reading the article (most people seem to be only mentioning the tapes) and how much respect they have for the manager?

[nasser95]

IMO he would still be a sleeze bag even if we were top of the championship. We have a lot of young players in our squad and I wonder what their opinion was on listening to the tapes and reading the article (most people seem to be only mentioning the tapes) and how much respect they have for the manager?

You know he does say in the tape that the will only take players if they're good. I mean, that's why this whole thing is really inconclusive. He didn't actually give any suggestion that he'd take players just because they were offered to him. If a player is available and is good, he'll take them, just as any manager should.

[dogsrrs]

Football is sleeze get over it Banking is sleeze get over it Politics is sleeze get over it Eu is sleeze get over it the only thing that isn't going out to work for zilch then you are lazy ambitionles And someone to know your place

[dogsrrs]

You know he does say in the tape that the will only take players if they're good. I mean, that's why this whole thing is really inconclusive. He didn't actually give any suggestion that he'd take players just because they were offered to him. If a player is available and is good, he'll take them, just as any manager should.

How many on here wouldn't take a bung to sign a good player , me nah I'd only take it to sign a right old steamer if your going to be a sleeze bag do to it style

[nasser95]

"We have a good player on our books and we'll pay you personally 50k to speak and then maybe take him for a low amount"

"I'll have to take a look at him and make sure he's good enough, if he isn't I don't want him, but if he is, I don't see an issue in improving our squad"

And yet to some, this is too immoral to do, especially relative to the other options that people wanted here... Pearson... Warnock... those guys are angels.

[Stanley]

Mud sticks sadly. No matter how inconclusive the sting was his reputation is now tarnished. Saying that, I have far more contempt for the sleazebag 'journalists' and their paymasters for attempting to frame him than JFH himself, who's biggest crime was basic naivety.

[dogsrrs]

Mud sticks sadly. No matter how inconclusive the sting was his reputation is now tarnished. Saying that, I have far more contempt for the sleazebag 'journalists' and their paymasters for attempting to frame him than JFH himself, who's biggest crime was basic naivety.

Stan you could throw in a bit greed but that's the way of privilege

[nasser95]

Stan you could throw in a bit greed but that's the way of privilege

I wouldn't really say greed, to be honest he was just negotiating. Never agree the fee they give you, that's the rule in any negotiation process like this, they offered, he wanted more, they took the deal.