Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Richard Rufus - jailed for 7.5 years for fraud (p6)
Comments
-
He always semmed a sandwich short of a picnic to me whenever i heard him interviewed - which wasn't often. Surprised people trusted him - he'd have been the last player i would have said would go on to be a financial whizz kid.1
-
IdleHans said:It's not all bad news for Rufus. He was living in a gated community at the height of his fraud, and he is again now.3
-
eaststandmike said:Rufus_Ambition said:I feel a bit bad about my username now.
charltontvat32acaciagardensmike0 -
/DOUCHER said:He always semmed a sandwich short of a picnic to me whenever i heard him interviewed - which wasn't often. Surprised people trusted him - he'd have been the last player i would have said would go on to be a financial whizz kid.0
-
0
-
I can see where this is going...
7.5 year sentence
In 3 years and 9 months time he will be out on good behaviour.
4 years time he makes an offer to buy Charlton Athletic FC that is accepted and he passes Fit and Proper Owners Test.
22 -
Pelling1993 said:I'm still gobsmacked a Church had £5m kicking about0
-
Dave2l said:1
-
sholland said:I can see where this is going...
7.5 year sentence
In 3 years and 9 months time he will be out on good behaviour.
4 years time he makes an offer to buy Charlton Athletic FC that is accepted and he passes Fit and Proper Owners Test.
0 -
SheffieldRed said:sholland said:I can see where this is going...
7.5 year sentence
In 3 years and 9 months time he will be out on good behaviour.
4 years time he makes an offer to buy Charlton Athletic FC that is accepted and he passes Fit and Proper Owners Test.1 - Sponsored links:
-
The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.6
-
ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.
13 -
ElfsborgAddick said:Dave2l said:
Can't believe that was actually 25 years ago.
To check the league table...you'd use teletext!
Helens alright. Certainly wouldn't kick her out of bed!0 -
He seems so simple in that video and interview. Almost makes you cringe watching him having to talk!2
-
ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.3
-
cafcfan said:ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.1
-
Dave2l said:0
-
cafcfan said:ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.0
-
ShootersHillGuru said:cafcfan said:ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.
But if nefarious actions of a long-term fraudster are not punished accordingly, where is the deterrent to stop anybody else thinking, "wow, let's rip someone off for a couple of million and spend a few weeks banged up". That's better than actually working for a living isn't it?"
My experience in these matters puts me in a situation where I could probably design and commit the almost perfect fraud with very little risk of actually getting caught and even less risk of being prosecuted. In addition there would be very little chance of a successful POCA order. So with the odds heavily stacked in my favour, if there was only a very small chance of being banged up for a few months it would seem like a damned good bet: over three years in gaol, less so.2 -
ShootersHillGuru said:cafcfan said:ShootersHillGuru said:The toughest sentencing should always be for crimes against the person. What Rufus did was stupid and unforgivable and should be punished but 7.5 years where he represents no danger to the public is I think harsh. Monetary crimes are proportionally treated more harshly than violent scumbags.
As @cafcfan points out it's already far too easy to commit and get away with fraud. So failure to offer a strong enough penalty as a deterrent on top would only add to the number of frauds (already the most common form of crime in the UK btw).
5 - Sponsored links:
-
willieduff said:Pelling1993 said:I'm still gobsmacked a Church had £5m kicking about0
-
Soon as Netflix run out of real life Doc ideas, then they can look into the prospect of this story.
It would rely heavily on the editing, interviewing the right people and timing the atmospheric music of it, to generate what viewers will want to see.
The doc about the Hitchhiker kind of proves they'll be up for anything!
It sounds like a nasty thing to do but docu-soaps have minimal boundaries....and respected privacy no longer exists.
Might encourage Rufus to apologise and victims can get some generated money back.
If this gets nothing but a lol, sew me0 -
Dave2l said:0
-
Not kept up with this case, and appreciate he has been proven guilty, but all I can think of when I hear the name Richard Rufus is the 85th minute Wembley May 25th 1998...👍0
-
SHAMED footballer Richard Rufus has been told to pay back just £372,740 of the £9million he scammed from family and friends in a pyramid scheme.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/32277503/richard-rufus-scammed-ordered-pay-back/
0 -
clive said:SHAMED footballer Richard Rufus has been told to pay back just £372,740 of the £9million he scammed from family and friends in a pyramid scheme.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/32277503/richard-rufus-scammed-ordered-pay-back/6 -
Disgraceful. He already got 7 and a half years & now will have to serve another 3 years if he cant cough up the money by March next year. Ludicrous sentencing.
More than people get for rape & manslaughter. Plenty of Irish got released under the GFA when serving life for murder.
Justice........pah !!4 -
golfaddick said:Disgraceful. He already got 7 and a half years & now will have to serve another 3 years if he cant cough up the money by March next year. Ludicrous sentencing.
More than people get for rape & manslaughter. Plenty of Irish got released under the GFA when serving life for murder.
Justice........pah !!20 -
golfaddick said:Disgraceful. He already got 7 and a half years & now will have to serve another 3 years if he cant cough up the money by March next year. Ludicrous sentencing.
More than people get for rape & manslaughter. Plenty of Irish got released under the GFA when serving life for murder.
Justice........pah !!4 -
golfaddick said:Disgraceful. He already got 7 and a half years & now will have to serve another 3 years if he cant cough up the money by March next year. Ludicrous sentencing.
More than people get for rape & manslaughter. Plenty of Irish got released under the GFA when serving life for murder.
Justice........pah !!
He stole £9.3M and it reads like you think he should be allowed to keep the £370K he has left.
You're a great advertisement for financial advisers.20