Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
ESI 1 v ESI 2 - Initial Hearing 01-02/09/2020, Court of Appeal 17/09/2020 (p127)
Comments
-
Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.6
-
I believe so but Cawley said he won't be doing tweets as it'll be a lot of legal argument and jargon or words to that effect.Henry Irving said:So any news on the consequential hearing?
When is it, is it live?0 -
A few people have said it. Also saw it on Twitter but can't find it now. Most people's cameras were off, though.PragueAddick said:Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.0 -
If you mean the ‘watch out for VAR comment, I think he is referring to the fact that an Elliot appeal has not yet been ruled outcarly burn said:Airmans take on it.
Not sure what he means at the very end?
http://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2019-20-blogs/1-9-court-ruling-leaves-door-wide-open-for-sandgaard-to-buy-charlton/2 -
"The real winner appeared to be Sandgaard. But do watch out for VAR."0
-
Then best Nimer sells now to TS and has it wrapped up before a hearing.Gary Poole said:
If you mean the ‘watch out for VAR comment, I think he is referring to the fact that an Elliot appeal has not yet been ruled outcarly burn said:Airmans take on it.
Not sure what he means at the very end?
http://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2019-20-blogs/1-9-court-ruling-leaves-door-wide-open-for-sandgaard-to-buy-charlton/3 -
Yes, I imagine all barristers want to take on a case which they passionately believe in, rather than something they just do because the client pays well.Henry Irving said:
We don't know if it was cost saving but she was the best barrister for the job.carly burn said:So was employing Lauren a stroke of genius or a Nimer cost saving measure?
For Christy(sp?) Is was just another paid gig.
For LK it meant a lot more professionally and personally.
She was well on top of all the issues from the start.
So it was a clever move IMHO.
And it was the biggest and best single bit of marketing the Trust is ever going to get. Hope they hoover up plenty of new members as a result.
And Lauren isn't some junior lawyer thrown into the deep end, she's a barrister in chambers, this is what she's been trained for.4 -
Weegie Addick said:Apologies all, esp @RedChaser and @KBslittlesis but it really didn't sound good!! You should be used to my natural doom and gloom on a match thread by now - I like to think of myself as runner-up to @oohaahmortimer in the "prepare for the worst" stakes.
@Weegie Addick
Yours, was the last post I saw before I drove to a FA cup game last night and I felt lower than a Dachshund's testicles when you said we were screwed !
As I wasn't on line, it sounded bleak with not only yours but many other comments about the Judge implying a trial in November was favourite and I assumed with everyone else that how can a club be sold, if it isn't established who owns it ?
Heather, you have been a star, on national radio and for CAST, and your questions prompted the chancer Southall, from admitting that ESI hadn't bought Charlton, lock stock and barrel.
You are still in massive credit, thank you for all your hard work.
Heather, @Fanny Fanackapan (Jean, who has been fantastic over the years in her commitments to POTY and work at SL) and now the sublime talents of Lauren Kreamer have proved that behind this crazy football club are talented Woman.
Included in this is @Tracey Leaburn for her Sterling work not only with the players in her day to day job but her promotion of the Prostate cancer blood test.
Yes, IF, IF, IF Thomas Sandgaard can be in control of Charlton, it will be the dog's bollocks !
Edit: nearly forgot the lady who has worked the hardest on a daily basis, the multi tasking @aliwibble and who deserves a medal for her dillagent abridged version of events.
8 -
Might be another winding up order on the place by then...👌🏻cafcfan1990 said:I think we should all print a copy and send to IPS Law...0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Magnificent and uplifting thread.
Started on 30 August with anticipation, excitement and foreboding in equal measure; a complete story arc described within 48 hours, from the perigee of a club and its extinction, to absolution and redemption delivered with an anxiously-waited coup de grâce, delivered by a hitherto barely-known supporter, now lifted to a permanent place in the club's history.
Every character was involved, like a latter-day Dickensian melodrama, but tinged with dramatic interplay reminiscent of Shakespearean tragedy and speckled with the Tarantino-like crushing blows meted out in the most delicious way at the offending protagonists.
The good guys won.
The bad guys did worse than lose. They lost the only two things they hold dear: their money and the reputation.
And a High Court Judge, placing permanently on the record what we always knew: this is a very special club, deserving of protection.
13 -
carly burn said:Airmans take on it.
Not sure what he means at the very end?
http://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2019-20-blogs/1-9-court-ruling-leaves-door-wide-open-for-sandgaard-to-buy-charlton/
"Multi-tasking lawyer Chris Farnell"
Brilliant Airman. I know it's par for your own standards but also Kevin Nolanesque, if I may say so.
9 -
I'm sure she would fancy me if she did 😊Johnnysummers5 said:Cardinal Sin said:
"How'd d'ya fancy Blackpool next year?"Todds_right_hook said:Anyone else wonder how elliots conversation went with his wife last night
Has she met Blackpool.2 -
A few of us got admitted early, we then got the reporters in AKA Cawley, Airman, BBC, SKY etc, each barrister gave a list of names they needed admitting, so Burke must have been added by Elliotts as it certainly wasn't from Lauren! About 20 minutes after they opened up to the riff raffPragueAddick said:Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.
If it's of interest those admitted early prior to the press were;
Chris Farnell (i believe Elliott was on the same link)
Marian Mihail
Both Barristers & Judge
Some solicitors for both sides (front row legal and Axiom I believe)
John Burke
Court Clerk
So he was DEFINITELY admitted by Elliots team, I even messaged him on twitter to that effect before the public were allowed in, of course no response. Sadly no pictures/videos were on screen other than the two barristers and judge, everyone else joined with Camera's off, although one reporter forgot his mike briefly
3 -
I did wonder if he was the John Burke from Blunts solicitors which recently went into liquidation.......Rob7Lee said:
A few of us got admitted early, we then got the reporters in AKA Cawley, Airman, BBC, SKY etc, each barrister gave a list of names they needed admitting, so Burke must have been added by Elliotts as it certainly wasn't from Lauren! About 20 minutes after they opened up to the riff raffPragueAddick said:Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.
If it's of interest those admitted early prior to the press were;
Chris Farnell (i believe Elliott was on the same link)
Marian Mihail
Both Barristers & Judge
Some solicitors for both sides (front row legal and Axiom I believe)
John Burke
Court Clerk
So he was DEFINITELY admitted by Elliots team, I even messaged him on twitter to that effect before the public were allowed in, of course no response. Sadly no pictures/videos were on screen other than the two barristers and judge, everyone else joined with Camera's off, although one reporter forgot his mike briefly 0 -
Mihal has a brilliant knack of putting out statements that say absolutely nothing whatsoever. ( including the statement he gave the judge yesterday which also said absolutely nothing and nearly stuffed us.)MattF said:4 -
Surely if it's the same 'John Burke' from Twitter, he's given the court a fake name... Illegal?1
-
Yeah. That made me chuckle.PeanutsMolloy said:carly burn said:Airmans take on it.
Not sure what he means at the very end?
http://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2019-20-blogs/1-9-court-ruling-leaves-door-wide-open-for-sandgaard-to-buy-charlton/
"Multi-tasking lawyer Chris Farnell"
Brilliant Airman. I know it's par for your own standards but also Kevin Nolanesque, if I may say so.0 -
He wasn't on trial though, just a spectator.Chunes said:Surely if it's the same 'John Burke' from Twitter, he's given the court a fake name... Illegal?0 -
Would it be illegal if he's simply there as a spectator?Chunes said:Surely if it's the same 'John Burke' from Twitter, he's given the court a fake name... Illegal?0 -
Sponsored links:
-
I don't know. He would've submitted it to the court clerk for condition of entry, like we all did, so he clearly would've misrepresented himself.ForeverAddickted said:
Would it be illegal if he's simply there as a spectator?Chunes said:Surely if it's the same 'John Burke' from Twitter, he's given the court a fake name... Illegal?3 -
Mr Farnell has stopped replying to my e mails.i_b_b_o_r_g said:Sad as it may sound, while I'm sat here having a morning coffee, I just looked back on Elliott's Mrs' Facebook again, and it looks like Farnell and his Mrs have been deleted. They were definitely on there a couple of days ago
I think he's a bit miffed about what I told him was coming and still to come
17 -
I thought Prague had spoken to him and left confident that the person on twitter isn't John Burke from blunts?Rob7Lee said:
I did wonder if he was the John Burke from Blunts solicitors which recently went into liquidation.......Rob7Lee said:
A few of us got admitted early, we then got the reporters in AKA Cawley, Airman, BBC, SKY etc, each barrister gave a list of names they needed admitting, so Burke must have been added by Elliotts as it certainly wasn't from Lauren! About 20 minutes after they opened up to the riff raffPragueAddick said:Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.
If it's of interest those admitted early prior to the press were;
Chris Farnell (i believe Elliott was on the same link)
Marian Mihail
Both Barristers & Judge
Some solicitors for both sides (front row legal and Axiom I believe)
John Burke
Court Clerk
So he was DEFINITELY admitted by Elliots team, I even messaged him on twitter to that effect before the public were allowed in, of course no response. Sadly no pictures/videos were on screen other than the two barristers and judge, everyone else joined with Camera's off, although one reporter forgot his mike briefly 2 -
Interesting and smooth as ever. Saying what the fans want to "hear". But I, personally, do not trust him for 2 reasons: (1) He is closely associated with ESI1 and maybe ESI2 - we don't really know plus the Florica connection. We don't really know what's in all of this for him - it's not exactly love of the club is it!? and (2) in all my years of working in 'business change' most people (and especially senior stakeholders) have hidden agendas behind their, apparently agreeing faces. I mean yesterday his court submission was criticised by the judge...could that have been because he has a hidden agenda for personal gain or the gain of others - I mean who is paying this guy!?MattF said:1 -
A misrepresentation in itself isn't against the law. Would need to go alongside something like fraud or a contract.Chunes said:
I don't know. He would've submitted it to the court clerk for condition of entry, like we all did, so he clearly would've misrepresented himself.ForeverAddickted said:
Would it be illegal if he's simply there as a spectator?Chunes said:Surely if it's the same 'John Burke' from Twitter, he's given the court a fake name... Illegal?1 -
They underestimated us, but despite everything they did get close to getting away with it.rememberbillybonds said:So much to read, many bits missed.
but what I cannot understand is why Elliott and Farnell wanted to put so much effort into a project in plain view of an enquiring audience ( ie Charlton fans). We are all convinced their motives are suspicious, their assets not sufficient. What did they want and expect?
Maybe Nimer and Southall still have.
I'd like to think that TS doesn't pay too much but who knows at this stage?
I'd like us to get them Range Rovers back as well from Farnell & Elliot.3 -
Leeds_Addick said:
I thought Prague had spoken to him and left confident that the person on twitter isn't John Burke from blunts?Rob7Lee said:
I did wonder if he was the John Burke from Blunts solicitors which recently went into liquidation.......Rob7Lee said:
A few of us got admitted early, we then got the reporters in AKA Cawley, Airman, BBC, SKY etc, each barrister gave a list of names they needed admitting, so Burke must have been added by Elliotts as it certainly wasn't from Lauren! About 20 minutes after they opened up to the riff raffPragueAddick said:Just re-posting from the other thread. @Rob7Lee has said that "John Burke" was added, early on to the list of attendees, presumably by Elliott's crew. Did anyone else notice this? If so, did they see the person on screen? We are very anxious to ID him.
If it's of interest those admitted early prior to the press were;
Chris Farnell (i believe Elliott was on the same link)
Marian Mihail
Both Barristers & Judge
Some solicitors for both sides (front row legal and Axiom I believe)
John Burke
Court Clerk
So he was DEFINITELY admitted by Elliots team, I even messaged him on twitter to that effect before the public were allowed in, of course no response. Sadly no pictures/videos were on screen other than the two barristers and judge, everyone else joined with Camera's off, although one reporter forgot his mike briefly
I believe he did, although that's not to say he wasn't lying. Especially as he was in the process of liquidating his solicitor firm, supposedly in practice since 1812 ( yes 1812) and owes a few hundred thousand to creditors.2 -
I think @blackpool72 will tell him to f**k offCardinal Sin said:
"How'd d'ya fancy Blackpool next year?"Todds_right_hook said:Anyone else wonder how elliots conversation went with his wife last night1 -
Agree but I've seen a number on social media proclaiming this to be a victory for Dodger rather than the trust. Even when there's a significant victory that a huge number of us have helped to provide there are still some weirdos out there who want to engage in point scoring rather than congratulating everyone involved.Henry Irving said:
We don't know if it was cost saving but she was the best barrister for the job.carly burn said:So was employing Lauren a stroke of genius or a Nimer cost saving measure?
For Christy(sp?) Is was just another paid gig.
For LK it meant a lot more professionally and personally.
She was well on top of all the issues from the start.
So it was a clever move IMHO.
And it was the biggest and best single bit of marketing the Trust is ever going to get. Hope they hoover up plenty of new members as a result.9 -
He's stopped replying to my e mails and he said he would always reply as long as they were polite. Liar.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Ironic given that when he was replying to fans i don't think i saw a single message that didn't have at least three spelling mistakes.bobmunro said:Scoham said:
They thought they could make a profit quicklyrememberbillybonds said:So much to read, many bits missed.
but what I cannot understand is why Elliott and Farnell wanted to put so much effort into a project in plain view of an enquiring audience ( ie Charlton fans). We are all convinced their motives are suspicious, their assets not sufficient. What did they want and expect?
and easily. They also seriously underestimated Charlton fans.Didn't Farnell also ridicule fans for being unintelligent and illiterate?Hmmm - think on that Chris!
On that note though, has anyone been in touch with him over whatsapp to offer their condolences? I bet he's not so keen to reply to everyone now.6
This discussion has been closed.
