[born in 1866]

Johnnyspireite7, on 12 January 2019 - 03:20 PM, said:

Wouldn't an overheard conversation be slander rather than libel?

Apologies yes, I meant that private conversation/correspondence would be covered by the defamation laws.

[Nivo]

Andrews, on 12 January 2019 - 03:45 PM, said:

I think more solicitors letters may be sent out next week after just reading a comment to Les Ashmores message....very informative of certain people and their "goings on"....

I gave taken a screen shot as I think it will be removed....

Bravo Suzi Kowalski. You waste of a human being.

[Rudeboy spireite]

Why would you take a screenshot?

[Andrews]

It didn't show Les in a good light if it was removed by the writer he may have needed to see it

[valemadness]

Andrews, on 12 January 2019 - 04:12 PM, said:

It didn't show Les in a good light if it was removed by the writer he may have needed to see it

Nikki may need it too

[Andrews]

Yes that did cross my mind...

[Johnnyspireite7]

Nivo, on 12 January 2019 - 03:51 PM, said:

Bravo Suzi Kowalski. You waste of a human being.

What did that banshee write then? I'm not in Lilleyland!

[Wooden Spoon]

Les Ashmore said:

1547289133[/url]' post='1446855']
It wasnt on Facebook mate is was via messenger

Interesting, I would guess that this private message then, being disclosed without your permission, would come under the same circumstances and legalities as any emails sent by Ashley Carson.

If this can be used by David without redress, I guess any emails sent by Ashley to bobs board members could also be shared quite legally as well?

[Andrews]

The comments weren't from her

[calvin plummers socks]

DEATH, on 12 January 2019 - 04:21 PM, said:

Interesting, I would guess that this private message then, being disclosed without your permission, would come under the same circumstances and legalities as any emails sent by Ashley Carson.

If this can be used by David without redress, I guess any emails sent by Ashley to bobs board members could also be shared quite legally as well?

That would be particularly fun

[Benno Spire]

Benno Spire, on 12 January 2019 - 12:36 PM, said:

FWIW, if i see GB in the lounge today I will express my concerns over DA's latest outburst and also tell him the potential legal action against Mr Ashmore will further alienate him from the fan base

I can confirm I spoke with GB today and told him my thoughts on DA's outburst and the potential legal challenge against a fan and it being not the best if he intends to try and build bridges.
The message I asked him to pass to DA was for him to get off his high horse and be a bit more humble towards the fan base.
In fairness to GB he always allows me the opportunity to speak with him and ask him questions. I can assure everyone that I am not afraid to ask him any questions, Smiffy often sits with me in the lounge and I am sure he can vouch for me asking challenging questions.
If anyone has a question they would like me to ask just send me a PM

This post has been edited by Benno Spire: 12 January 2019 - 08:22 PM

[Bonnyman]

All this is completely going over my head, but for what it’s worth I did say a few years back that Dave Allen imo was wearing a wig, if chesterfields downfall has come from his bitterness at my opinionated but unsubstantiated comment it was nothing but a follicular misinterpretation , on the other hand if I was correct I think a grade 4 looks smart.

This post has been edited by Bonnyman: 12 January 2019 - 09:53 PM

[Nivo]

Benno Spire, on 12 January 2019 - 08:05 PM, said:

I can confirm I spoke with GB today and told him my thoughts on DA's outburst and the potential legal challenge against a fan and it being not the best if he intends to try and build bridges.
The message I asked him to pass to DA was for him to get off his high horse and be a bit more humble towards the fan base.
In fairness to GB he always allows me the opportunity to speak with him and ask him questions. I can assure everyone that I am not afraid to ask him any questions, Smiffy often sits with me in the lounge and I am sure he can vouch for me asking challenging questions.
If anyone has a question they would like me to ask just send me a PM

I'm not sure what this is all about. What challenging questions have you asked and what answers have been given?

[plannerj]

Bonnyman, on 12 January 2019 - 09:52 PM, said:

All this is completely going over my head, but for what it’s worth I did say a few years back that Dave Allen imo was wearing a wig, if chesterfields downfall has come from his bitterness at my opinionated but unsubstantiated comment it was nothing but a follicular misinterpretation , on the other hand if I was correct I think a grade 4 looks smart.

This is, by far, the most serious libel of which I am aware and I’m not sure this very late retraction will be accepted. Look out for Postman Pat.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

SpireiteFitzy, on 12 January 2019 - 12:11 PM, said:

Interesting difference in his response to legal stuff. The club he owns commits fraud with the raffle and no-one is brought to justice over it, indeed the rumored mastermind got a payoff and not so much as a slap on the wrist. A certain club employee makes threats to fans over twitter, in this day and age that is now a crime and again not so much as a slap on the wrist and we get some made up fantasy about hackers and it's allowed to slide. I'd go on but I'd be here all day.

However a fan makes private comments expressing his opinions about club issues which are not out in the open and remain known to but a few people and the lawyers are out sniffing around like bloodhounds.

I find his hypocrisy unbelievable. He's upset about things people say that aren't true or may cause distress but just a couple of weeks ago his number two was disclosing to fans that staff might not get paid at christmas, a situation that apparently the staff had no idea was on the table, no doubt causing plenty of anxiety and stress amongst them. It's not libelous but the principle remains the same, saying things that are not necessarily true but cause distress to those concerned in it.

Good post.

I'd echo the comments made by many others - Sheridan's return offered a tinge of anticipation but, as sure as night follows day, it was soon snuffed-out by yet more scandalous behaviour.

Instead of any kind of contrition or humility the pigeon fancier doubled-down on his belligerence.

And you can almost picture certain characters hiding behind him like cowardly cronies of a playground bully.

Who does he think he's attracting with such stuff? Does he genuinely believe folk will be cowed and belittled into attending?

Or perhaps the good people of North Derbyshire have a superior set of standards to those occupying the Club...

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 13 January 2019 - 09:56 AM

[Tha Knows...]

I thought yesterdays crowd was decent for the competition. I didn't expect swathes of fans to watch us play Bedford just cos Sheridan was back. It certainly didn't attract me.

[Security66]

Spire-Power, on 13 January 2019 - 09:43 AM, said:

I thought yesterdays crowd was decent for the competition. I didn't expect swathes of fans to watch us play Bedford just cos Sheridan was back. It certainly didn't attract me.

Our attendance yesterday was the highest in the competition,not bad to say Wrexham played Orient at home.

[Oldtimer]

MDCCCLXVI, on 13 January 2019 - 09:37 AM, said:

Good post.

I'd echo the comments made by many others - Sheridan's return offered a tinge of anticipation but, as sure as night follows day, it was soon snuffed-out by yet more scandalous behaviour.
I
Instead of any kind of contrition or humility the pigeon fancier doubled-down on his belligerence.

And you can almost picture certain characters hiding behind him like cowardly cronies of a playground bully.

Who does he think he's attracting with such stuff? Does he genuinely believe Town folk will be cowed and belittled into attending?

Yesterday's crowd suggests otherwise...

Like others on here I am no fan of Dave Allen's tenure of CFC, however do you not think it prudent to wait and see what was actually written about him. If it was a few innocuous statement / allegations then he is going to look a little silly and a little poorer for escalating the situation. However, If the comments are of a more serious nature then he has every right to seek redress

[bigdbh2]

Whatever was sent in these messages (no one has seen btw) must be incorrect or couldn’t be challenged as libellous.

If it was an untrue and damaging accusation but delivered as fact by someone who’s opinion would be respected is it unreasonable that the victim of the untruths retaliates? Or are we saying that fans can say anything about anyone connected to the club even if it is completely untrue without any reprocussions?

I’m not on any side I just think we should try not to turn every DA situation into a good vs. Evil story.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Oldtimer, on 13 January 2019 - 09:55 AM, said:

Like others on here I am no fan of Dave Allen's tenure of CFC, however do you not think it prudent to wait and see what was actually written about him. If it was a few innocuous statement / allegations then he is going to look a little silly and a little poorer for escalating the situation. However, If the comments are of a more serious nature then he has every right to seek redress

But why publicise the whole issue? Why even mention it at a press conference announcing the new manager? Wasn't this an opportunity to turn a page and build bridges?

Yet just as at Hillsborough Allen chose controversy and confrontation.

I understand the CEO made attempts to bring fans and owner together last week. However those attempts were dashed by the majority shareholder's continuing attitude.