cp40 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 did anyone hear the audio continue after adjournment 8 mins later people discussing the case not realising still streaming Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marki Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 she was paid 30 million ffs what more does she want for a few days work Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Yeah I heard it. Totally bang out of order. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 she was paid 30 million ffs what more does she want for a few days work It clearly shows it was more than a few days worth and very expensive for her to conduct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marki Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 she,ll not be happy until she,s in the billionaire club Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Carrick18 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 what a pointless smug and twattish thing to say What am I missing here? He's saying that being cross-examined in a billion-pound legal case is showing her up? A quick scan of his timeline shows a fair few RT's of stories poo-pooing the takeover. Wonder why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixelphish Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 she,ll not be happy until she,s in the billionaire club Same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 its drawing to a conclusion i feel,the WHO report due on the 16th"the official version that is" will allow this to be signed off at long last , exciting times just around the corner It (WTO report) might have the opposite effect and the deal is rejected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordiesteve710 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I didn't see the courtroom proceedings but bear in mind that a big part of the cross examining counsel's job is to elicit mistakes, exaggerate them, trip her up with semantics, anything to essentially undermine her credibility in the eyes of the court so that they give less weight to her evidence. And this cross-examining counsel who has been appointed for a case like this no doubt gets paid a s*** ton of money for being very very very good at his job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Carrick18 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I also think it's a bit of a c***'s trick to comment on someone's demeanour when they are a known sufferer of Huntington's disease. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I also think it's a bit of a c***'s trick to comment on someone's demeanour when they are a known sufferer of Huntington's disease. I hadn't even heard of the disease up until this post never mind being aware she had it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 what a pointless smug and twattish thing to say What am I missing here? He's saying that being cross-examined in a billion-pound legal case is showing her up? A quick scan of his timeline shows a fair few RT's of stories poo-pooing the takeover. Wonder why. The same Martin Hardy who wrote Rafa’s way, penned this article claiming his job was on the line. At a time when most people thought Ashley was the problem, I always found it a bit strange. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/newcastle-rafa-benitez-fighting-a-losing-battle-arsenal-a8113141.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjohnson Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 what a pointless smug and twattish thing to say What am I missing here? He's saying that being cross-examined in a billion-pound legal case is showing her up? A quick scan of his timeline shows a fair few RT's of stories poo-pooing the takeover. Wonder why. Fail to see the relevance really. Not directly related (unless you believe rumours of her using the 'winnings' to fund her stake). This will be worth a hell of a lot more to all involved than NUFC. If anything it will show the calibre of lawyers involved on both sides Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Carrick18 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I also think it's a bit of a c***'s trick to comment on someone's demeanour when they are a known sufferer of Huntington's disease. I hadn't even heard of the disease up until this post never mind being aware she had it. Been mentioned in a few Chron pieces, and articles going back as far 2014. https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/amanda-staveley-the-100m-woman-advising-the-most-influential-sheikhs-across-the-gulf-9121171.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I also think it's a bit of a c***'s trick to comment on someone's demeanour when they are a known sufferer of Huntington's disease. I hadn't even heard of the disease up until this post never mind being aware she had it. Been mentioned in a few Chron pieces, and articles going back as far 2014. https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/amanda-staveley-the-100m-woman-advising-the-most-influential-sheikhs-across-the-gulf-9121171.html Barely if ever read the Chronicle or ever read up on Staveley herself. Only clicked the link/video today out of interest. In the couple of minutes I watched I thought she was flapping, Huntington's disease or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Carrick18 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Do you have a link to it? I'd seen previous interviews where she comes across in a similar way. It just seems a bit of a cheap shot, along with the lack of consideration for the fact this is a massive trial, and sitting in the witness stand is tough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Do you have a link to it? I'd seen previous interviews where she comes across in a similar way. It just seems a bit of a cheap shot, along with the lack of consideration for the fact this is a massive trial, and sitting in the witness stand is tough. The links in the thread. Its not a cheap shot, its on opinion based on an observation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitley mag Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Looks like a few people heard the video rolling afterwards. https://twitter.com/agbnufc/status/1271097034544726018/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Lots of planes today Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejeck Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Looks like a few people heard the video rolling afterwards. https://twitter.com/agbnufc/status/1271097034544726018/ If you click on the link for the video feed and drag it to 6:07.00 you can hear what was said. https://cl-2016-000049.sparq.me.uk/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto2005 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Yep calls her a liar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Why on earth is a court case being live streamed ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Yep calls her a liar. What if Staveley is lying? and if she's lying in court, then she's possibly lying to Caulkin about being confident the deal will go through. In which case, she isn't confident and the deal won't go through. The deal is off. Fuck, we've got 10 more years of Ashley. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Yep calls her a liar. What if Staveley is lying? and if she's lying in court, then she's possibly lying to Caulkin about being confident the deal will go through. In which case, she isn't confident and the deal won't go through. The deal is off. Fuck, we've got 10 more years of Ashley. Go to bed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Yep calls her a liar. What if Staveley is lying? and if she's lying in court, then she's possibly lying to Caulkin about being confident the deal will go through. In which case, she isn't confident and the deal won't go through. The deal is off. Fuck, we've got 10 more years of Ashley. Go to bed Are you coming with? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts