Jump to content

www.stmirrenshirts.com


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, W6er said:

Well spotted. Twitter is a virtual signaller's paradise - folk looking to appear righteous, champion the underdog, etc. Unless @Stmirrenshirts.com is being accused of stealing them, it is presumably the case that he has paid handsomely for something. Do you know the means by which an ebay seller has acquired his wares? I recently bought a couple of St Mirren programmes, and I don't know anything about the seller.

The fact that the family are vague about the details is slightly bizarre, and I think folk have no business hounding @Stmirrenshirts.com without proof that he's done something wrong. On the contrary, at best they sound like sanctimonious busy-bodies looking for acclamation, at worst a virtual lynch mob. 

The story is documented in the latest Black and White magazine copyright protected 

Edited by alanb
Link to comment
Share on other sites


20 minutes ago, W6er said:

Well spotted. Twitter is a virtual signaller's paradise - folk looking to appear righteous, champion the underdog, etc. Unless @Stmirrenshirts.com is being accused of stealing them, it is presumably the case that he has paid handsomely for something. Do you know the means by which an ebay seller has acquired his wares? I recently bought a couple of St Mirren programmes, and I don't know anything about the seller.

The fact that the family are vague about the details is slightly bizarre, and I think folk have no business hounding @Stmirrenshirts.com without proof that he's done something wrong. On the contrary, at best they sound like sanctimonious busy-bodies looking for acclamation, at worst a virtual lynch mob. 

The only thing the person owning the shirt now could be criticised for is perhaps trying to buy the shirt on the cheap . But maybe he hasn't,  maybe he,s Paul good money for it , and the money has been put to good use . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, alanb said:

The story is documented in the latest Black and White magazine copyright protected 

Well I hope it's fair, because otherwise @Stmirrenshirts.com would be well advised to take legal advice and sue for defamation:

What is defamation?

39. Reputation has been described as an integral and important part of the dignity of the individual, and as forming the basis of many decisions in a democratic society which are fundamental to its well-being, for example, whom to employ.[17] This forms the basis of the law of defamation: a person’s character, honour and reputation should be protected.

40. Where a statement is made about a person which is false, derogatory in nature and is made maliciously, then the person concerned may be entitled to damages for solatium and patrimonial loss. Defamatory comments will most commonly be made about an individual. However, it is possible for companies, partnerships and voluntary organisations to be defamed.

41. The defamatory statement must be communicated for it to be actionable. Unlike English law, the communication does not have to be to a third party.[18]

42. The test of whether a statement is defamatory is objective – that is, would the statement lower the estimation of the person among right-thinking members of society generally.[19] The objective test involves considering the context in ascribing the meaning to be given to the statement and whether it exposes the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule. The context is important as, for example, a statement that may have been considered defamatory 50 years ago may no longer be considered so.

Can I buy single copies of the magazine, or do I need to subscribe? 

 

9 minutes ago, MenstrieSaint said:

The only thing the person owning the shirt now could be criticised for is perhaps trying to buy the shirt on the cheap . But maybe he hasn't,  maybe he,s Paul good money for it , and the money has been put to good use . 

Regardless of how he spent the money, if he has paid money for it then he has been deceived. We're talking about a fellow Buddie who has amassed a collection of St Mirren memorabilia which he delighted in sharing with the rest of us via his website, which is now unavailable. Unless there's any proof that he's been underhand in his dealings, then that is defamation.

If I was him I'd be taking screenshots of defamatory accusations made against him on Twitter, and perhaps seeing if he can establish the account holders' identities. Perhaps he can contact Twitter. He might have grounds to sue. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MenstrieSaint said:

Are St Mirren shirts and W6er one of the same . BTW I too used to enjoy seeing the shirts .

Haha! If I was @Stmirrenshirts.com I'd have taken screenprints and reported the defamatory posts to Twitter from the start, and would be contacting solicitors. If it's true he's received threatening messages, these would also be reported and Police Scotland notified. I'd probably be looking to amicably settle the issue with the family, but I'd want proof that they were stolen, in which case I would be informing the police of the seller's details in order that the criminal can be apprehended.

I don't know the full story, though. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently it definitely was stolen:

 

1274420540_Screenshot2022-01-1714_14_23.png.dbef506890291c2681d92b6a5061cb98.png

 

According to West Bank's post, above. I hope he's got evidence, because he's publicly accused @Stmirrenshirts.com of handling stolen goods, which is a criminal offence. If he cannot prove that, I'd imagine that's defamatory. Definitely worth contacted a solicitor about this sort of thing. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, W6er said:

Haha! If I was @Stmirrenshirts.com I'd have taken screenprints and reported the defamatory posts to Twitter from the start, and would be contacting solicitors. If it's true he's received threatening messages, these would also be reported and Police Scotland notified. I'd probably be looking to amicably settle the issue with the family, but I'd want proof that they were stolen, in which case I would be informing the police of the seller's details in order that the criminal can be apprehended.

I don't know the full story, though. :)

 

Nothing defamatory in the magazine, only relating the story so far and hoping for an amicable ending 

Do wonder why Mr Shirts deleted his Twitter and shut down his website 

Edited by alanb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, alanb said:

Nothing defamatory in the magazine, only relating the story so far and hoping for an amicable ending 

Do wonder why Mr Shirts deleted his Twitter and shut down his website 

I suppose it could be perceived as an admission of guilt, by a cynical person. However, I'd suggest it could also be a result of receiving abuse, threats and having allegations of criminality directed towards him. Why retain a Twitter account if, for example, he's getting abusive DMs? As for his website, perhaps he feels that sharing his collection is no longer worth the hassle?

Genuine question @alanb - if people were phoning you up and saying abusive or threatening things, would you not consider changing your telephone number or unplugging your phone? How is that any different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, W6er said:

I suppose it could be perceived as an admission of guilt, by a cynical person. However, I'd suggest it could also be a result of receiving abuse, threats and having allegations of criminality directed towards him. Why retain a Twitter account if, for example, he's getting abusive DMs? As for his website, perhaps he feels that sharing his collection is no longer worth the hassle?

Genuine question @alanb - if people were phoning you up and saying abusive or threatening things, would you not consider changing your telephone number or unplugging your phone? How is that any different?

On your question 

I would certainly block the numbers calling and/or report to relevant authorities 

On Twitter, block and report also. Personally I would seek to continue the conversation with the family member who engaged with him on Twitter, looking for a mutually acceptable outcome and ignore the self appointed detectives on the case

Don’t have a website 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently it definitely was stolen:
 
1274420540_Screenshot2022-01-1714_14_23.png.dbef506890291c2681d92b6a5061cb98.png
 
According to West Bank's post, above. I hope he's got evidence, because he's publicly accused [mention=15839]Stmirrenshirts.com[/mention] of handling stolen goods, which is a criminal offence. If he cannot prove that, I'd imagine that's defamatory. Definitely worth contacted a solicitor about this sort of thing.  
West Bank hasn't accused stmirrenshirts of stealing or having prior knowledge of the theft when they purchased.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

West Bank hasn't accused stmirrenshirts of stealing or having prior knowledge of the theft when they purchased. emoji6.png

Another WB tweet seems to suggest otherwise 

Family have sought Police advice and other tweets suggested the shirts are in Singapore 🤷‍♂️ So police unable to act 

Maybe Black and White Magazine will serialise this story in future editions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

West Bank hasn't accused stmirrenshirts of stealing or having prior knowledge of the theft when they purchased. emoji6.png

I'm not sure one needs to have prior knowledge of the theft. I am not a solicitor and will not that I'm well acquainted with the law, but it's my understanding that one just needs to have a reasonable cause to be suspicious that the item you're buying has been stolen. So if someone who looks intoxicated tries to sell you a bag of meat in a pub, you might suspect that the person has not acquired this by legal means.

So what you're saying, @Cookie Monster, is that it's widely accepted that @Stmirrenshirts.com purchased his shirts legitimately, with no reason to suspect they were stolen. In that case, the guy has been ripped off and is then being asked to part with a prized item - which he clearly values highly, having displayed it on his website for fellow Buddies to admire - and is then being hounded online, and told he's immoral scum? How is any of that justifiable? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...