Ridsdale cleared

What a waste of taxpayers money!!

Not a Ridsdale lover by any stretch of the imagination but I am willing to accept the conclusion made by the judge after hearing all the evidence and so I believe should others if they can put their often blinkered views of the man(me included) aside.

STILL using the official site of Plymouth Argyle football club to issue his own PERSONAL press releases. Plymouth Argyle had nothing to do with these charges and will soon have nothing to do with Peter Ridsdale so why taint our world with his grubby antics?.

This news will keep the fearless partnership in chest puffing out pride for some time to come but as statements on the OS go that's just about the most irrelevent thing i've ever seen produced. I feel so sorry for the poor hard pressed and unpaid staff member who had to type that out with £20k Pete standing behind them doing a little dance............especially that last f**king sentence :twisted:.

Plonker :evil:.

--------------------------

Posted edited by Admin.

X Isle":19793nh0 said:

STILL using the official site of Plymouth Argyle football club to issue his own PERSONAL press releases. Plymouth Argyle had nothing to do with these charges and will soon have nothing to do with Peter Ridsdale so why taint our world with his grubby antics?.

Click to expand...

:iagree:

Guilfoyle has also used the Baggo at least twice to directly advertise P and A.

What a self centered piece of dog poop.

dont know what happend there? my mesage got mixed up with yours mr x?

Tugboat":3j8ujh5h said:

What a self centered piece of dog poop.

Click to expand...

:iagree:
In many workplaces, such a blatant personal use of company time and resources would be a sackable offence :wave: :wave:

If no evidence could be offered then the man is innocent and should be treated as such regardless of anything else. We may well not want him anywhere near our club but innocent OF THIS he is.

Ridsdale is innocent. There are no shades of grey in English law & to suggest otherwise; in particular to state that he has not been vindicated due to the fact that charges were brought in the first instance, is libellous. No ifs, no buts.

That no evidence was was presented by the prosecuting body reflects exceptionally poorly on their preparation & is utterly inexcusable - it is the polar opposite of a 'minor technicality'.

jerryatricjanner":3dcizv6u said:

Not a Ridsdale lover by any stretch of the imagination but I am willing to accept the conclusion made by the judge after hearing all the evidence and so I believe should others if they can put their often blinkered views of the man(me included) aside.

Click to expand...

1) If, as I understand, it was at a magistrates Court, there is not likely to have been any Judge involved! ( only possible exception would be if it was in front of a "Stipe", a Stipendiary Magistrate, who is a legally qualified magistrate sitting alone, who can often be a Judge:- though he is not called such at a Magistrates Court).

2) Doesn't sound as though anyone heard any evidence! If the Trading Standards prosecuters "offered no evidence", it means they withdrew their prosecution at the start of proceedings, and their case effectively collapsed before it started.

3) Without wishing to comment on this specific case, in general terms "Offering no evidence" doesn't mean that they've got none, it means they've re-assessed their case and decided they're not likely to win, and so decided to throw in the towel.

4) However a case concludes, if a man is not found guilty, he is innocent and must be regarded as so by all. This is an absolute right, and applies to Peter Ridsdale like anyone else. I totally agree that everyone should accept this conclusion to the affair and desist from any snide comments or insinuations. The man has been cleared as the charges have been withdrawn;- end of....

5) In such a high-profile case, this is a considerable embarrassment for the proscutors, and there will almost certainly be recriminations and an inquest behind the scenes! Not least, as already has been said, about the waste of tax-payers money in mounting this case! :doh:

Thread tidied and some posts removed, please be careful what you post. Thanks.

He shouldn't have used Argyle's Official Site for this statement but I do sympathise with Ridsdale.

People are continually complaining about him and implying that he is corrupt and greedy.

In actual fact, he has probably saved Argyle from oblivian. Yes- for a salary, and yes he likes everyone to know how marvellous he is. But so what ? Without Ridsdale there might have been no football club.

Remember that James Brent thought that Argyle's chances of survival were 10% earlier this year. A number of people "in the know" are saying that Ridsdale has done a good job here. Without Ridsdale's efforts, I doubt that the Brent takeover would be happening right now.

I think he has done little wrong at Argyle to deserve such criticism.