Can be discussed here

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Answers

So much rumour and counter rumour. All of this is allegation I hasten to add for legal reasons.

Seems clear which club it is from all the reporting and the usual suspects are implicated. Latest rumour is that the manager of the club is set to resign.

Think about the players - who is out on loan at another club at the moment - this person is implicated so it seems directly or indirectly they all come from the same club. Could be wrong.

I know it's all speculation but don't you all feel it has tainted the game. I really don't feel like standing cheering the team on Sat. I will but I just wish all this could be resolved - sooner rather than later.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

As this is an American site, does that mean that it is not covered by our laws of libel and contempt? If so could some one please place all the dirt on here.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Bobby resigned yesterday and it was rejected. It's shocking the whole story. I can't go into any more details but the whole soul of the club has been ripped out.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Here's a mathematical solution to your queries:

11, 8, 7, 19, 28, x,

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Can't believe 11 and have heard nothing from my sources to suggest that.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Plus two from another club. Either could be said to be going to newcastle.........

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Don't see the point of any further speculation at this stage - and the fact that Rob's site is being used (however subtly) to lead to this one (however password protected) could still get the NOTBBC network in trouble. I'm sure other sites are being far less responsible in the way they're "discussing" this, but sod's law and all that...

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

One Chelsea player who is currently at Charlton. I\m still hearing it was 7 and 1 but I don't know how many of the 7 were actually involved. I know we are going to have a whole in midfield though.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

If it is true that our players were involved causing SBR to resign then it is a black day for the club. The R word cometh. We are already in the deep dodo in the league, stacks of adverse publicity over the last few years and now this. It has gone beyond the laughing- stock stage.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

...and now the password for this site has been posted on NOTBBC. I'm told by my learned friends that lawyers can, indeed, read...

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Ca't believe 11 would get involved and 7 comes as a shock if true.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

11?! I don't believe that! The sooner the truth starts to come out about what went on, the better. The rampant speculation isn't doing anyone any good.

I don't blame Bobby at all for offering his resignation in light of all this mess. He certainly doesn't need or deserve the hassle. Plus he probably felt he was doing the honorable thing. This could be a much longer season than any of us thought when our only problem was not being able to win games. :-(

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Don't (want to) believe 28 either.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

28 has been mentioned to me.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

I've been told 7 names. 6 play for us. No big surprises amongst them.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

DSS - how does your info line up with my earlier posting (above)?

Could corroborate

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

8, 10, 16, 19, 29, 35.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

BBC website has a quote of 2 to 3 years for assisting a rape.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Seems more likely than 11, 7 and 28 but time will tell. Are we paranoid or are other supporters groups also thinking it could be their lot?

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

I've been told 39 chelski was the one consensual, 8.16.19.35 are ours. This from someone who "knows" someone who works on the sun sports desk.

39 chelski by the way has the same initials as #16

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

7 and 28 are what I have been told from more than one source. As well as 8 (main man) and 19. In fact 7 and 8 are probably our biggest concerns. 11 may have been out in the town but I highly doubt he would have been involved. Being in the hotel doesn't make you a party to it. Bowyer, Bellamy and Woodgate are in the clear by all accounts.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Press Conference today?

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Mysty, where and when for the press conference?

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

I've heard 2pm

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

That would have been an hour ago

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Oh...right. Hadn't looked at my clock. Scratch that rumour, then.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Have also posted this on NOTBBC:

I've had my say about continued comment and speculation on this site and NOTBBC. It seems people aren't prepared to draw a line under this discussion.

Evening Standard:

Concern is growing over controls of the internet as names of alleged football rapists were widely circulated on websites today. Police are still investigating the alleged attack on a 17-year-old girl at the Grosvenor House hotel in Park Lane by up to eight Premiership players, but the identities of the men have been revealed on a series of websites. Experts today said this highlights a loophole in the legal system in which names are put in the public domain with no proof of guilt or even charges being brought. One well known discussion site associated with a Premiership club was closed today after some contributors named individuals accused of the alleged rape. The Internet Service Providers' Association said: "There have been several high-profile cases, most recently involving David Beckham, where sites have printed rumours. It is incredibly hard to control this, as there is no clear legal guidance as to who is responsible. "We are calling for a complete overhaul of the law in this area, because at the moment it is very confusing when it comes to defamation. As internet service providers we are not publishers, yet at the moment we are having to act as judge and jury on what we take down, taking responsibility for the content. That is not right - a judge needs to decide this. We have repeatedly asked the Government to address the problem, and the Law Commission for England and Wales is backing our campaign, yet nothing has been done." The development emerged today as a specialist team of Scotland Yard detectives began examining CCTV footage from the security cameras of the Grosvenor House hotel. Officers from Operation Sapphire, the Met's task force to tackle sex crimes, were also continuing to question the victim, whose complaint has left football dreading the possibility of another high-profile and potentially devastating court case. An England star, understood to be at the centre of the scandal, is reported to have denied even being at the scene and his teammates are also said to be protesting their innocence. As the investigation intensified today, forensic teams moved into sealed-off rooms at the hotel.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Email from a mate. Mind you, rumour mill's going crazy at the moment. Be positive, it might be a press conference to say that we're taking Kluivert on loan. Then again, given his criminal past, that might not be a great idea :-((

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Benton, what do you expect. If any of this is true it will be utterly devastating. I can't remember anything worse in footy, and not NUFC, in the last 20 years. The escapades of those two chumps in Spain pales into insignificance next to this. And it's not voyeurism, we are all deeply deeply concerned about the implications. Christ man, how could we turn out to support the innocent team members, never mind any guilty ba*^ards, if this is true. Me, I'd want to hide away in shame.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

DAVID BECKHAM???? Is he implicated as well??

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Mysty - I expect people to realise the possible consequences to both boards of continued speculation - and effective naming of individuals.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Benton, we're not daft. Subscribers to other boards might be, that's why at least one has been closed down. The discussions here and on NOTBBC have never named anyone, nor I suspect would they. The conversations have been primarily around the consequences to the Club should they be proven. We can all speculate as to the possible guilty parties, but players come and go. Footballers aren't the brightest pebbles on the beach (is that libellous?), and some of them are almost certainly of a criminal tendancy, as in all walks of life. The Club's name, however, is sacrosanct. However, shall we also draw a line under this particular discussion? And before Geordie appears, I'll do it for him ...........................................................................................................................

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Err...can I also just chip in to say that, AFAIK, the libel laws apply to UK operated sites only. Nothing they can do about what goes on in other countries. This site is US-based. It's just not realistic to expect people to not talk about it, only to hope people exercise some restraint in not discussing speculation as being fact until it is proved or dis-proved. It seems folks on here are doing a good job of that.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

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

damn... beaten to it

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

No, let`s not, because I have a question. I posted it on the other board but it looks like Rob S has removed it. Thought it was general enough to discuss but apparently not, which is fair enough.

I keep reading that certain men accused of a particularly serious crime will be interviewed by police "within the next month". What I wanted to know was, is this standard? It seems like an astonishing length of time to wait in the case of a serious allegation. Are the police so shortstaffed? Or is there some other obvious reason that I`m missing? Can anyone shed any light? Not, of course, referring to any case in particular, I`m curious about police practice in serious cases in general.

By the way, I think some of us are being a bit precious about the libel/slander inplications here. There are a million football chat sites out there, most of them far more widely read than Rob`s fine forum, and populated by contributors far less restrained. The chances of anyone attempting to close down a small forum where everyone has consciously shied away from naming names, seems astronomical to me. Of@course we should use some common sense but there`s no need to pretend it`s not happening.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Don't want to pretend it's not happening - but numbers are as good as names...US hosted or not. BBC report the Attorney-General has just put out a severe warning to the media about this investigation. Anyway, that's all I've got to say about that.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Tip for Mag Scum!

DONT BEND OVER FOR THE SOAP!

HA HA HA!

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Wondered how long before that lot raised their ugly heads. I would like to think that no matter what we think of the SMB, the fact that a girl potentially got raped would not be a laughing matter but once again their depths know no bounds.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Hi - I am also interesting if it takes weeks to interview a suspect in a major crime like this - wouldn't the suspects already have been questioned by now (in any occurance - not just this one)

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

FAir warning about the soap mind - there's Mackems about.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

The CPS may have to decide if there is a case to answer before interviewing anyone. Given it is potentially so high profile then they will want to get everything right. They can't charge anyone before they have a case. They COULD interview without charge which may help them decide whether to charge or not - suspects dont' have to cooperate with this.

This will run and run I think.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Thanks Dylan - that makes it much clearer

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

Christ, what the hell is the atmosphere going to be like on Saturday?

I feel so sorry for the other players (assuming it is NUFC of course, as all I've heard so far is off the internet)

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2003

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2003451421,00.html

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

A slight change in the story there then...2 from one club and 6 from another....not that it makes any difference at all...

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Plus Gav, she only recognised one of them. So either she's fibbing, she's not a footy fan, or they're not footballers, just a bunch of scally's who claimed to be footballers to impress a couple of birds at a bar. Allegedly.

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

bit strange selling your story of such a horrific experience to the tabloids...is it not ?

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

The sun claim that players forced themselves on her. At no point does it claim she said no, that she tried to resist or was in tears. I would have thought that most people in the above situation would have done one of the above.

Not saying that she's making it up but what has been omitted from the reports is interesting.

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

DSS - those 6 numbers are rubbish, only 3 lots of £10 on the Lottery over the past 6 months. Mind Rollover tonight :)

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

A different story from the mirror

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/content_objectid=13465901_method =full_siteid=50143_headline=-MY%2DSEX%2DORDEAL-name_page.html

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Surely that makes it easy to identify the player. Who gave an interview in that magazine last week ??

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Careful now Katz, or Benton will be on your tail :-)

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

"Unpublished interview".

Life's a box of chocolates...

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

The Dailt Star says she stayed for breakfast with them, which is one of the reasons they're checking the CCTV stuff

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

This is looking increasingly like a sting, albeit one that will leave a nasty smell.

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

All quiet on here? whats going on? have all the rumours finally run out of steam? or is everyone scared with all of these threats of being sued flying around...

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Not the sting we know is it? Never though he would leave a nasty smell, thought he was a fine chap!

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Haven't seen anything new. I guess everyone is just waiting for the facts to come out

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Is it a Sting, or is it just (leaked) from The Police?

-- Anonymous, October 01, 2003

Today is Sting's birthday

-- Anonymous, October 02, 2003

Which one? Not which birthday, which one Sting or sting

-- Anonymous, October 02, 2003