Jump to content

W6er

Saints
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,535

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

 Content Type 

Posts posted by W6er

  1. Club taking control of 1877 Supporters Bar 25/26

    in General St. Mirren Discussion

    Posted

    On 7/12/2025 at 5:29 PM, Tom Blacks Left Boot said:

    I was reading all about the new club on St. Mirren's Facebook page and noticed someone called Faraway a "fud"! 😄

     

    On 7/12/2025 at 6:23 PM, faraway saint said:

    Upping the trolling, must be nearing another of your breakdowns. 🤣🤣🤣

     

    Things haven't changed on here, I see! 🤣

     

    £180 per season's okay if you like a few pints before the game. However, £10 to sign someone in...! 🤯

  6. Jim Gillespie/Mark MacMillan/Alan Wardrobe Defimation Case

    in General St. Mirren Discussion

    Posted

    The judgement vindicates Wardrop, IMHO.

    The last paragraph summarises the Judge's position:

    Quote

    [136] I shall therefore repel the pursuers’ pleas-in-law, sustain the defender’s third, fifth and eighth pleas-in-law, along with the sixth plea-in-law (in part), and grant decree of absolvitor. In the meantime, all questions of expenses are reserved.

    Definition of absolvitor:

    'A judgment in favour of the person against whom a court action is raised. A decree of absolvitor absolves the party who is defending a court action.'

    Source: https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/absolvitor

     

    It's not hard to see why: 

     

    [30] On 5 October 2022, the defender emailed the second pursuer (copying in the first pursuer and other SMFC board members) repeating his request for a copy of the Stage 1 application. The first pursuer responded, mentioning among other things that the second pursuer was on holiday and that the first pursuer was of the impression that the second pursuer would share more details at the SMFC board meeting on the coming Friday.

    [36] At the date of submission of the Stage 2 application, neither pursuer had provided the SMFC board with a copy of the Stage 1 application. On 1 November 2022, the defender emailed the Scottish Government for a second time (following his first request on 3 October 2022) asking for a copy of the Stage 1 application and additionally requesting a copy of the Stage 2 application. On 10 November 2022, the Scottish Government responded, saying Renfrewshire Council should deal with it. On 1 December 2022, Gayle Brannigan emailed Jacqueline Cameron of Renfrewshire Council requesting a copy of the Stage 1 application. On 13 January 2023, Jacqueline Cameron sent a copy of the Stage 1 application to Gayle Brannigan.

    [41] ...Mr Gillespie accepted that the Stage 2 application was wrong in a number of respects, including by stating that the sale of land had been agreed and that an application for planning permission would be submitted by December 2022 (within 2 months of the Stage 2 application being 14 submitted) despite the fact that planning permission would require land to be identified and despite the evidence of the pursuers that no such land had been identified.

    [42] ...Mr Gillespie accepted that he was involved in preparing the Business Plan. He did not accept that Kibble’s purchase of SMFC shares was predicated on the acquisition of SMFC land and instead suggested that the wording of the Business Plan was “misplaced”.

    [43] The second pursuer also gave evidence as to why the two statements made by Mr Wardrop were untrue and defamatory. In relation to the Stage 2 RCGF application, and the words “Sale of land has been agreed”, Mr MacMillan repeatedly asserted that the bid was speculative in nature. He denied lying. Mr MacMillan recognised that no formal acquisition of land had taken place. At the time however, he did not know that Renfrewshire Council had submitted a map identifying the SMFC-owned land.

    [44] Mr MacMillan was asked several times in cross-examination to explain how Kibble’s access to land for the Wellbeing Centre was “predicated on our purchase of SMFC shares” and was not able to explain that usage in any detail...

    Credibility and reliability of the pursuers and the defender First pursuer

    [64] In contrast to the defender, the pursuers were not credible witnesses. In general terms, both pursuers repeatedly sought to obfuscate and to avoid answering the questions that were put to them. The first pursuer’s attempts to absolve himself from responsibility for the RCGF bid process in relation to the Wellbeing Centre were not credible. When it was put to him that, if Ferguslie was not by 2022 considered to be a potential location for the Wellbeing Centre then Kibble’s RCGF applications contained lies, the first pursuer sought to pivot his position by suggesting that J29 could have been a potential location had Kibble obtained geotechnical information. The first pursuer nonetheless accepted that the Stage 2 application was false in a number of respects.

     

    Second pursuer

    [65] On various occasions, the second pursuer had to have questions put to him several times and to be prompted by the court to provide a direct response. The second pursuer was asked nine times to explain how Kibble’s access to land for the Wellbeing Centre was predicated on the purchase of SMFC shares but did not provide a coherent response. His evidence that, as of 7 October 2022, he still had not opened the location plan attached to Alasdair Morrison’s email was wholly incredible: there were only two attachments to the email, one titled “application Form” and the other titled “Kibble Wellbeing Centre”. The notion that the second pursuer ignored the second attachment to that email at least twice defied belief. He was equally driven to accept that the Stage 2 application was false in a number of respects.

    The defender

    [66] The defender was a credible and reliable witness who did his best to assist the court. He answered, in a straightforward and fulsome manner, the questions put to him in cross-examination. The defender made appropriate concessions where his recollection of matters was contradicted by contemporaneous documentary material. In relation to a Lord Ordinary in a previous case criticising the defender, that judge explained that he did not accept the credibility and reliability of certain aspects of the evidence given by five witnesses, including the defender, before concluding that he otherwise found the witnesses to be generally credible and reliable. The judge’s assessment had no relevance to the defender’s credibility and reliability in this case.

    Acquisition of land

    [67] The reference in the Wellbeing Centre Business Plan to access to the development opportunities afforded by the land being predicated on Kibble’s purchase of the SMFC shares illustrated that the opportunity to develop a Wellbeing Centre on SMFC land was a critical factor in Kibble’s decision to invest in SMFC. There was nothing within the extensive productions before the court that suggested any remotely serious consideration by Kibble of the land to the west of the stadium (on which, at all material times, there was housing owned by Renfrewshire Council). Kibble’s Chief Executive Board Report dated November 2019 would not have been put in the terms stated if the land in question was not that owned by SMFC

     

    Defence of truth

    [74] If the campaign statement and/or the Herald statement are determined to bear a defamatory meaning and to meet the test of serious harm, then the defence of truth ought to prevail in respect of each statement. The defender had succeeded in proving the facts giving rise to reasonable grounds to investigate or suspect that the pursuers failed to disclose a plan to build on SMFC owned land and therefore acted in conflict of interest.

     

    I just hope Wardrop's legal expenses are covered. As fans we should be asking ourselves why we have, at the very least, such evasive and incompetent people on the board...this deserves reiteration:

    'The second pursuer was asked nine times to explain how Kibble’s access to land for the Wellbeing Centre was predicated on the purchase of SMFC shares but did not provide a coherent response.' 

  13. St Mirren v Rangers, Sunday 28th April, 12:30 ko.

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Albanian Buddy said:

    Unless I’m mistaken there are still 5 games to play with the potential for us to secure 15 points.

    Kilmarnock may “Hibs” it and get zero points.

    What a defeatist/negative attitude you seem to have. 

     

     

    Possible, but highly improbable. If in the unlikely scenario we were to close the gap to say four or five points, then I would start to take an interest in their results. As it is, they're almost meaningless. We could 'do a Leicester' and win the league next year, but it's highly improbable so I wouldn't even entertain the prospect unless we were sitting top around February/March. :) 

    11 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

    Look at this hilarious post above, Aberdeen were 8 points behind with THREE games to play yet YOU thought they were still in with a shout of making top 6. :lol:

    I never indicated that we could catch Kilmarnock. While it's not mathematically impossible I'm a realist and I'd like to see us narrow the gap. :byebye

     

    I stated that Aberdeen were in contention, 'mathematically at least'. I simply included Aberdeen for completeness. 

    Re: the emboldened text - you don't have to justify yourself to me! :) I fear some folk are delusional enough to believe we can still realistically finish fourth; I wish to spare such people the disappointment they will inevitably feel, pal. 

  14. St Mirren v Rangers, Sunday 28th April, 12:30 ko.

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

    Only one fixture of any interest in tomorrows games...............

    Hearts win please.

    For comedy value Motherwell to piss on Aberdeen as their support are getting carried away already after a 3-3 draw with Celtic. 

    Ross county to send Livingston towards the Championship, despite them being hard nuts to crack.

    St Johnston to win as they are closer to me and I want as many teams in that bracket to stay in the league. 

    image.png.ffa6990f613dda9a9e965b1db4ee818c.png

    Do you actually believe we can make up an 8 point gap? They're all meaningless fixtures for us, tomorrow.

  17. St. Mirren v Hearts, 6th April 2024 - possible sell out?

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    4 hours ago, portmahomack saint said:

    House Insurance :rolleyes: total waste of hard earned cash just like your saints bet.. very rarely every happens, I've saved a fortune on insurance cover over the last 40 years until this happened 

    house on fire animation GIF by Jon Vermilyea

     

    Now me and the wife are living rent free saving even more cash 

     

    200.gif

     

     

     

    🤣 I needed a good laugh today!

     

    1 hour ago, eastlandssaint said:

    Appeal to St Mirren fans to host applause for loving grandad who died | The Gazette (the-gazette.co.uk)

     

    I saw that. Aye, a nice thing to do. 

  19. St. Mirren v Hearts, 6th April 2024 - possible sell out?

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    51 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

    That's the spirit.

    With the utmost respect I expect you to lose. :byebye 

    I want to lose this bet.

    I will be absolutely devastated if we finish 7th. We would have nothing to play for and our season would be over.

    I have an insurance policy in case my house burns down, but it doesn't mean I want it to burn down.

    If I 'win' the bet, the money will be put towards my next season ticket.

  21. St. Mirren v Hearts, 6th April 2024 - possible sell out?

    in Matchday & Travel Club

    Posted

    16 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

    Maybe 700-ish home tickets are still available for Saturday and to avoid a match day rush I think the club should consider a cut-price offer for registered ticket site users for e-tickets only that are bought before Saturday.  It will be bad enough with people who already  purchased tickets rocking up to the kiosk at 2' o' clock

    That incentivises leaving it late to buy tickets in the future, as folk might expect a similar discount. It's also unfair on those who've already paid full price for their tickets.

    The club should just advise folk to get there early. If people miss the game because they turn up late, then that's their own doing.

     

    I agree with others who said that we need a point against Hearts. We cannot rely on other results. A point should be enough, though goal difference is tight with Hibs. We might have to park the bus at Parkhead. 

  22. Scotland Football Club

    in Other Football

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Wilbur said:

    National anthems are a load of shite. Why is it that we have to endure them before football or rugby internationals ? Most anthems are pathetic dirges harking back to historical battles or wars that we don't need to be reminded of - exactly the same shite that we hate (but have to listen to) when Rangers come to Paisley. 

    Completely unnecessary, a waste of time, and an opportunity for cretins in the crowd to shame their own nation.

    Get them to feck !!

    Just my opinion, of course.  :)

    I love them! Also there's something magical about a rousing rendition of Flower of Scotland before the game. I also like to hear other nations' anthems. :)  

×
×
  • Create New...