How did the law firm get their evidence??????

A forum for all things Cardiff City

How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Igovernor » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:26 pm

Only police can get search warrants so how did a legal firm get hold of all the texts and paperwork in Moody's house. A police officer has to show justification to a judge/magistrate before a warrant is issued, so unless the legal firm already had evidence of a criminal act to show the police how? also if the police had the warrant, there is no way that the results of said warrant would be shown to the legal firm, very strange ???????
User avatar
Igovernor
Moderator
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:17 am

How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Advertisement

Advertisement
Login or Register to remove this ad.

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby EL JEFE » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:34 pm

:ole: :ole: :ole:
Listening to a guy on the radio today, the police were not involved, this kind of order is very rarely given, in fact only about half a dozen are granted per year out of thousands of applications, so the thinking is that this Malkygate saga is very serious, and more revelations will be forth coming from an FA investigation.
EL JEFE
 
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 7:31 am

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Igovernor » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:42 pm

I did not know that anyone apart from the police can be issued with a search warrant!
User avatar
Igovernor
Moderator
 
Posts: 8047
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:17 am

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby 64JACK » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:49 pm

Igovernor wrote:I did not know that anyone apart from the police can be issued with a search warrant!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_warrant

More to come from this where Moody is concerned.
64JACK
 
Posts: 1768
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Welsh Exile » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:01 pm

64JACK wrote:
Igovernor wrote:I did not know that anyone apart from the police can be issued with a search warrant!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_warrant

More to come from this where Moody is concerned.


If there is something on Moody regarding money missing, bungs or whatever will Malky then be seen to be guilty by association ? Or a guilty of a lack of management control over one of his senior members of staff ?

My opinion is even though it's a bit late already Malky needs to distance himself from Moody, and the further away the better.
Welsh Exile
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:37 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby KWest » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:02 pm

Something tells me moody will see jail time over this. Malky will just be left ruined.
KWest
 
Posts: 1510
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 6:04 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Forever Blue » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:06 pm

Igovernor wrote:Only police can get search warrants so how did a legal firm get hold of all the texts and paperwork in Moody's house. A police officer has to show justification to a judge/magistrate before a warrant is issued, so unless the legal firm already had evidence of a criminal act to show the police how? also if the police had the warrant, there is no way that the results of said warrant would be shown to the legal firm, very strange ???????


Tan paid private investigators,who built up a case on Ian Moody for Fraud,which was then presented to the High Court for a search warrant,Moody's home was raided,laptops and phones etc etc taken in and that was how all this came about on Malky.

Tan spent £1 million on this :shock:
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 163300
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby jackmadandbad » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:07 pm

KWest wrote:Something tells me moody will see jail time over this. Malky will just be left ruined.


hardly ruined he had a long playing career, been a manager 4 and a half years..........got plenty, just wanted more and more........there is evidence of fraud despite malky lovers claims that there is not..is it enough to prosecute is another matter.......
jackmadandbad
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:15 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby xajax » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:24 pm

Igovernor wrote:I did not know that anyone apart from the police can be issued with a search warrant!


There are a number of other agencies which may obtain search warrants, like the TV Licence Records Office, but only if they are able to convince a magistrate that a criminal act may be taking place. In this case what has taken place must be so criminal that it justifies the issuing of a search warrant. If that was so, any information gathered would be subject to sub judice rules and could not be released into the public domain. In this case the information has been published, so no criminal proceedings appear to be anticipated.

I'm sure that all that has happened is above board, but what we've seen so far does not seem to add up, and the we have heard must be the result of a police fishing expedition.
xajax
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Welsh Exile » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:33 pm

xajax wrote:
Igovernor wrote:I did not know that anyone apart from the police can be issued with a search warrant!


There are a number of other agencies which may obtain search warrants, like the TV Licence Records Office, but only if they are able to convince a magistrate that a criminal act may be taking place. In this case what has taken place must be so criminal that it justifies the issuing of a search warrant. If that was so, any information gathered would be subject to sub judice rules and could not be released into the public domain. In this case the information has been published, so no criminal proceedings appear to be anticipated.

I'm sure that all that has happened is above board, but what we've seen so far does not seem to add up, and the we have heard must be the result of a police fishing expedition.


What do you mean by a police fishing expedition ?? Just asking as not sure by that last comment if you think there will or won't be criminal charges brought against either of them ?
Welsh Exile
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:37 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby xajax » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:44 pm

Welsh Exile wrote:

What do you mean by a police fishing expedition ?? Just asking as not sure by that last comment if you think there will or won't be criminal charges brought against either of them ?


Well I've seen from another thread that the warrant was issued to investigate allegations of fraud. If that is the case why has the evidence gathered by the police found its way into the public domain? It would surely prejudice any further court case. I'm not a lawyer but there seem to be some blatant contradictions.
xajax
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby jackmadandbad » Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:56 pm

Forever Blue wrote:
Igovernor wrote:Only police can get search warrants so how did a legal firm get hold of all the texts and paperwork in Moody's house. A police officer has to show justification to a judge/magistrate before a warrant is issued, so unless the legal firm already had evidence of a criminal act to show the police how? also if the police had the warrant, there is no way that the results of said warrant would be shown to the legal firm, very strange ???????


Tan paid private investigators,who built up a case on Ian Moody for Fraud,which was then presented to the High Court for a search warrant,Moody's home was raided,laptops and phones etc etc taken in and that was how all this came about on Malky.

Tan spent £1 million on this :shock:


so there is no fraud :thumbright: :thumbright:
lets try there is obvious fraud or no warrant would be issued, whether thats enough to get a successful conviction is another thing alltogether......
why shock at Tans endevour....id be furious too.....am furious, every REAL Cardiff fan should be..
if player deals were made for any financial gain it was at the expense of our premiership status..
jackmadandbad
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:15 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby jon1959 » Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:00 pm

It was a Search Order not a Search Warrant. Issued by the High Court who accepted the application met the criteria.

http://www.out-law.com/topics/dispute-r ... nd-litigat ion/injuctions/search-orders/

In order to obtain a Search Order:

Strong evidence must be shown to the court that:

- the damage caused, or likely to be caused, if a search order is not made is very serious for the party applying for the order;

- the other party has incriminating documents or goods in its possession;

- there is a real possibility that that party will destroy or corrupt the documents or goods if given notice of the application.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Piller_order

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/search-orders.htm
User avatar
jon1959
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Sheffield - Hallamshire - out of Roath

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby xajax » Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:39 pm

jon1959 wrote:It was a Search Order not a Search Warrant. Issued by the High Court who accepted the application met the criteria.

http://www.out-law.com/topics/dispute-r ... nd-litigat ion/injuctions/search-orders/

In order to obtain a Search Order:

Strong evidence must be shown to the court that:

- the damage caused, or likely to be caused, if a search order is not made is very serious for the party applying for the order;

- the other party has incriminating documents or goods in its possession;

- there is a real possibility that that party will destroy or corrupt the documents or goods if given notice of the application.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Piller_order

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/search-orders.htm


Mmmm, thanks for that. I'd never heard of a "Civil Court Search Order".

I've had a look at it and there is a section which says
An undertaking not to use items seized for collateral purposes will also be implied against the claimant


It seems to imply no "fishing expeditions" allowed. So if, for example, someone granted a search order to look for evidence of, lets say fraud, and they found counterfeit goods or an illegal satellite receiver, or even dodgy text messages and emails, the way I read it, they would not be able to use that information to discredit the accused.

Its a fascinating situation which no doubt will run and run.
xajax
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:34 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Cardiffcitymad » Sat Aug 23, 2014 12:17 am

Forever Blue wrote:
Igovernor wrote:Only police can get search warrants so how did a legal firm get hold of all the texts and paperwork in Moody's house. A police officer has to show justification to a judge/magistrate before a warrant is issued, so unless the legal firm already had evidence of a criminal act to show the police how? also if the police had the warrant, there is no way that the results of said warrant would be shown to the legal firm, very strange ???????


Tan paid private investigators,who built up a case on Ian Moody for Fraud,which was then presented to the High Court for a search warrant,Moody's home was raided,laptops and phones etc etc taken in and that was how all this came about on Malky.

Tan spent £1 million on this :shock:

I know this to be true also. :thumbup:
User avatar
Cardiffcitymad
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 9:13 am
Location: Pontypridd

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby piledriver64 » Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:29 am

This type of search order is not granted lightly.

Believe me, I doubt we've even scratched the surface of the evidence if the courts have felt it appropriate to make such an order.

Moody and Malky are in deep, deep trouble.
piledriver64
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Wayne S » Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:53 am

xajax wrote:I've had a look at it and there is a section which says
An undertaking not to use items seized for collateral purposes will also be implied against the claimant


It seems to imply no "fishing expeditions" allowed. So if, for example, someone granted a search order to look for evidence of, lets say fraud, and they found counterfeit goods or an illegal satellite receiver, or even dodgy text messages and emails, the way I read it, they would not be able to use that information to discredit the accused.


Collateral purposes usually means that you cannot collect private or personal information on persons OUTSIDE of the investigation.

So if they uncovered the private emails of one of Moody's family members as a result of the house search and those emails had no bearing on the case, they would remain private and unused in the investigation.

You are never going to have a situation where one criminal act is ignored because you are looking at an unrelated act perpetrated by the individual investigated.
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby Wayne S » Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:58 am

xajax wrote:I've had a look at it and there is a section which says
An undertaking not to use items seized for collateral purposes will also be implied against the claimant


It seems to imply no "fishing expeditions" allowed. So if, for example, someone granted a search order to look for evidence of, lets say fraud, and they found counterfeit goods or an illegal satellite receiver, or even dodgy text messages and emails, the way I read it, they would not be able to use that information to discredit the accused.


Collateral purposes usually means that you cannot collect private or personal information on persons OUTSIDE of the investigation.

So if they uncovered the private emails of one of Moody's family members as a result of the house search and those emails had no bearing on the case, they would remain private and unused in the investigation.

You are never going to have a situation where one criminal act is ignored because you are looking at an unrelated act perpetrated by the individual investigated.

They will not be able to make sweeping statements like, "He must have committed fraud because, look, he's a racist". The texts are collateral information that do not prove a fraud case. However they will stand up as part of a separate investigation into the same suspect.
User avatar
Wayne S
 
Posts: 9473
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:51 am

Re: How did the law firm get their evidence??????

Postby abergblue » Sat Aug 23, 2014 11:47 am

Maybe the investigators used a good fall back for getting people nicked/investigated/search warrants, the one called tax evasion or VAT fraud?
They have wide ranging powers to search anywhere and a judge would rarely deny them.
If any dodgy deals were suspected then obviously tax and VAT evasion would also be involved.

However unlike many people on here I have no evidence of this or seen any documentation of allegations against Moody or Malky so I could not say for definite.
But, as guesswork, Moody would at least get done by HMRC - possibly leading to a prison sentence IF proven and convicted.
This would be a justification of his actions whether the deals were dodgy, or not, he could still get convicted on tax issues.
abergblue
 
Posts: 952
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:56 am



Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bytespider [Bot], cardiffboy1995, Clickagy [Bot], Facebook [Bot], Google [Bot], Grapeshot [Bot], Igovernor, Jock, MillenniumNova, pembroke allan, Proximic [Bot], worcester_ccfc and 180 guests

Disclaimer :
The views and comments entered in these forums are personal and are not necessarily those of the management of this board.
The management of this board is not responsible for the content of any external internet sites.