I hear what you say.
I still can't for the life of me work out how someone like me (who is an arsehole, lacking credibility just cause I once took a particular view on an exDirector a couple of years ago and as joshro says every time I open my mouth I just confirm how little I understand) can not have some fundamental questions of mine answered by CJ on here.
After all his success against barristers and leading law firms over the past 20 years then answering a few simple questions from a pisshead like me surely shouldn't be a problem, should it ????
Arpy
Let me try again. The allegations were made months ago on the Company website and SG was aware of them in any event without the aid of the website. If they were false allegations then surely SG would have grounds at least to publically deny them or to take legal action. As I understand it - neither has happened. And don't forget it is now over a year ago since he was dismissed from his post.
Regarding the CCJs discussion - my tone may or may not have changed but the point I was making certainly didn't. That being we are talking here about KPMG (not a small Company) and a person being 'offered' an appointment as effectively running a plc until such times as a vote was cast. In those circumstances any CCJs imho should have been declared and should have been vetted to establish if they were relevant or not.
That was my only point (and I think was b14's too) from the start and still is my point.
Just stock quotes
Just stock charts
Follow this thread
