From: mairidalglish [email@example.com]
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 5:19 PM
Cc: ‘Paul Gill’; ‘ernienewall’
Subject: F.A.O. ALL TRUST COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Attachments: financial details for committee meeting.doc; 6-21-2010 2;07;43 PM.JPG; 6-21-2010 2;08;04 PM.JPG
Dear Mr Gill,
Further to my previous correspondence with you, and as I requested, I assume that Trust committee members will be supplied with all of the financial details and evidence concerning the ‘Stars of ‘79’ event at the forthcoming meeting this Thursday.
I also assume that they will be shown all legal correspondence including the recent letter sent to Jim Gallacher’s solicitor by Messrs. Blair & Bryden which contained a spreadsheet purportedly demonstrating a debt due by him to the Trust of £2,890. It will be evident that that figure exceeds their earlier demand of £1825 by more than one thousand pounds, and is now the third ‘official’ figure claimed to be owing to the Trust by Mr. Gallacher since the Police found no fault with his figures.
The spreadsheet appears to be riddled with inaccuracies, some of which can hardly have occurred by mistake, and in any event is substantially based on estimates.
I believe that it is essential that all Committee members understand that original accounts for the evening were submitted to the Police BY THE TRUST. That was after they had been prepared by Jim Gallacher to the best of his ability, and belief, and while under huge psychological pressure, because of a threat of losing his job should the Police become involved.
Not only was criminality dismissed (which is relevant to the currently separate matter of pending defamation actions), but ‘lack of a proper paper trail’ and ‘bad business practice’ were cited by the C.I.D,
I attach information and explanatory comments from Jim Gallacher, who has repeatedly offered to meet with members of the Trust Committee to explain his involvement in the evening – offers which have been consistently rejected. I also attach a sample from among several dozen emails I hold on file.
Furthermore, many items of expenditure by Mr Gallacher have been disallowed or in some instances wrongly attributed to others.
I strongly advise all committee members to carefully study the long and convoluted series of evidential emails, which I assume will be made available for inspection as they represent crucial ‘evidence’ concerning the ‘Stars’ event. In that respect, it is worth commenting to the committee as a whole that Mr. Gallacher’s lawyer has described the content of certain emails as ‘attempted extortion and tantamount to blackmail’.
I recommend that the content and context of those emails is studied very carefully before any final decision is made on how best to move the Trust forward.
By way of final comment, it is common knowledge that the purported contents of certain emails (along with a set of ‘accounts’) were deliberately leaked and discussed by committee members (old and new) on public message boards. When the relevant emails are read in context, a totally different picture emerges from that widely and deliberately publicized to further certain individuals’ ends.
May I request that you forward copies of this email to all of your committee colleagues as soon as you can?
With kind regards,
Dr. Ernie Newall.
ABOVE IS THE OFFICIAL EMAIL PRESENTED TO THE TRUST COMMITTEE LAST JUNE AFTER MORTONJAG HAD BEEN ENCOURAGED BY MESSRS. DUNCAN AND GILL TO ENTER NEGOTIATIONS. IF THEY HAD BOTHERED TO PROPERLY EXAMINE THE FINANCIAL DETAILS, THE ~£1500 DEFICIT IN DONNELLY’S TICKET INCOME SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED BELOW WOULD HAVE ‘JUMPED OUT’ AT THEM. THEIR LAWYER HAD BY THEN BEEN ASKED FOR AN EXPLANATION.
From: mairidalglish [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 7:00 AM
Cc: ‘NRobin9415@aol.com’; ‘Paul Gill’; ‘C Dunsmore’; ‘email@example.com’; ‘McCorkindale, Chris’; ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’; ‘email@example.com’; ‘ernienewall’
Subject: Trust Committee Meeting – Thursday 24th June 2010.
24TH JUNE 2010: F.A.O. Nick, Paul, Craig, Scott, Chris, Ewan, and Ross.
This is sent to you all as the new Trust committee members. I’ve excluded Gordon as he was personally involved in the aftermath of the ‘Stars’ event.
We are fellow Trust members with equal democratic rights. I object strongly to ‘cloak and dagger’ instructions to my elected representatives. THE TRUST HAS NO BOSS, yet unthinking respect for authority has been the enemy of truth from the outset.
Within the last forty eight hours, Stuart Duncan has openly discussed details of the ‘Stars’ evening with a non –Trust member. Please use that as your guide. It has been documented. I’m happy to meet with any of you should you wish to question me on anything, and any comments you make through any medium will be treated confidentially.
I suspect that at tonight’s meeting your attention will be focused on the actual evening of the ‘Stars’ celebration, and on the latest spreadsheet which was recently ‘cobbled together’. There is MUCH, MUCH MORE to be considered. The latest attempt to ‘nail the culprit’ is something of a red herring.
The figures from both ‘sides’ are largely based on estimates and on circumstantial evidence. For example, much ‘mileage’ has been gained from an estimated ‘phone bill of £250, when on the other hand, the Trust’s Bar Income figure appears to have been plucked out of the air!
Going to Court could prove to be a very costly error for the Trust, and certainly requires a mandate from the Membership. The published rules are very clear on that. WE ARE A DEMOCRACY AND MUST BEHAVE DEMOCRATICALLY. In constitutional terms, independent audit can be sought at a future date if that is believed not to have been done.
A crucial piece of ‘evidence’ which may be put to you tonight concerns the sum of £600 (in used £5 notes withdrawn from the tombola) which Stuart claims was paid to one of the speakers. The story does not hold water, and will not stand scrutiny in Court. That is a fact and I’m willing to explain the reasons to any of you in confidence.
In the original accounts submitted to the Police BY THE COMMITTEE, the same item of expenditure (which was actually £650) was assigned to J.G. and was not disputed.
Stuart now insists that he ‘REMEMBERS’ the details correctly, while conceding that they are ‘hard to prove’, whereas Jim Gallacher’s version has remained consistent throughout. Stuart has also produced at least six figures for his ‘deficit’, three of which have been in formal statements implicating J.G.
Strathclyde Police C.I.D. spent several weeks investigating the alleged theft. They had been informed that J.G. had ‘had had to come by a large sum of money to pay for water damage to his flat’, when in fact the damage was covered by his insurers! Background checks were run on him, and his employers were interviewed. Eventually they discounted criminality citing ‘bad business practice’ on the part of the Trust. At that point they indicated that the likely deficit was of the order of £1400 to £1500 – less than a third of the sum originally demanded of J.G. All of that has too readily been dismissed, in what I make no apology for describing as a subsequent and sustained ‘internet witchhunt’.
With regard to J.G.’s integrity, you are probably all aware of the recent allegation on greenockmorton.org implicating him in a previous irregularity. I have since seen a statement from an independent third party which completely exonerates him. Again I’m happy to discuss details with any of you confidentially. J.G. works as a buyer for a large oil tanker company, and in the course of his employment he is involved in substantial monetary transactions.
Something which should concern all of us as Trust members, and which I believe should be questioned this evening is Messrs. Blair and Bryden’s professional situation. They claim to represent ‘The Trust Board’, when in fact they have taken instructions from at best three individuals in a committee of fourteen. MOST EMPHATICALLY, THEY CANNOT CLAIM TO REPRESENT THE MEMBERSHIP. That will be put to them by J.G.’s solicitor within the next few days if it has not already been done. When he contacted Blair and Bryden to discuss recent correspondence and figures, he was told that the lawyer concerned was on annual leave. I believe he returned to the office yesterday.
My concern as one of your fellow Trust members has always been that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. The Trust is currently in a perilous state. If it is to survive, I believe that Stuart, Danny, and Sean must start to put the interests of the Membership before personal matters.
There is an easy way and a hard way to bring the ‘Stars’ debacle to a conclusion. The latter will probably kill the Trust. With that in mind I sincerely ask you one and all, irrespective of any differences or misunderstandings we may previously have had, to insist that before any decision is reached on further action you are made privy to every item of email correspondence between the ‘Trust’ and Jim Gallacher, and to ALL of the pertinent legal documentation.
I’ll willingly provide copies of those documents to you individually. They portray a very different picture from that which has been deliberately publicized, and I’ve already explained more formally that the terms ‘extortion’ and ‘blackmail’ have been used by J.G.’s solicitor.
I’ve suggested that tonight your attention may be deliberately focused on the events of the evening itself and on the ‘Trust’s latest version of the figures. As a fellow Trust member I advise you to think VERY CAREFULLY about the following information. I believed from the outset that something was being hidden, and Stuart has always claimed that a ‘deficit’ exists for the night. He may well be correct, as available figures appear to indicate that £1400 to £1500 of ticket income was not banked. J.G.’s ‘ticket money’ has been accounted for. Sean was responsible for the rest.
Finally, and VERY IMPORTANTLY, there’s the ongoing matter of defamatory statements. Danny’s original statement which was ratified within hours by Stuart was the reason I became involved in the first place. Sean’s serial accusations are well know to you all!
Provisional writs have now been sent to Danny and Sean, and it is still possible that action may be taken against Stuart.
I ask you all very sincerely to believe that this matter will, if necessary, be pursued to a conclusion.
Funding (from an independent source) is not an issue, as a satisfactory outcome will outweigh everything else. The Trust must surely survive at any cost.
Court actions will attract publicity and the Trust will undoubtedly be seen in a very dim light as the parties concerned were initially asked only to provide proposals for apology. Provisional writs were issued after they failed to respond, and to date neither Danny nor Sean has formally acknowledged their existence!
In the interests of all of us as Trust members, they have a responsibility either to prove their allegations or to make reparation to J.G. Their statements were made in their capacity as our elected representatives. They cannot hide from that. Further procrastination compounds the damage.
I recommend that Stuart, Danny, and Sean ‘step aside’, and that appropriate reparation is made to J.G. Nothing more and nothing less is required. I believe that it is now imperative that that is done as soon as possible.
It’s for all of you as a committee representing all of the members to ensure that things are now done in a manner which involves as little further damage as possible to everyone involved, but more importantly TO THE TRUST. You are responsible for your actions on behalf of a Membership which expects you to safeguard its interests. I ask you to take that responsibility very seriously tonight.
THAT SECOND EMAIL WAS SENT TO THE NEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN THE SINCERE BELIEF THAT AS PROMISED MORE THAN ONCE IN WRITING BY MR.GILL, THEY GENUINELY INTENDED TO RECTIFY THE ‘STARS OF ’79’ ISSUE FROM WITHIN.
ONLY HOURS AFTER THEIR MEETING MORTONJAG RECEIVED AN EMAIL (BELOW) FOLLOWED BY A VOICEMAIL MESSAGE FROM MR. ROBINSON IN WHICH HE CLAIMED THAT MORTONJAG HAD ‘BACKED THE WRONG HORSE’ AND SUGGESTED THAT HE CEASE INVOLVEMENT!
From: Nick Robinson [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of email@example.com
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 3:19 PM
Cc: ‘Scott Gillan’; ‘Allan Feeney’; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; ‘Sean Donnelly’
Subject: Greenock Morton Supporters Trust – J Gallagher
The Stars of 79 night
I refer to the numerous e-mails that have passed from you variously to individual members of the trust board and to groups of members. All members of the board have now had full access to the papers and computations the “previous” board have prepared in support of their case against Jim Gallagher. We have also considered this in the light of informal “defences” received from Mr Gallagher, sometimes via yourself. I think it is fair to say that the new members of the board as a whole now believe that, at the very least, Mr Gallagher has a case to answer. As a result the board is unanimous in broadly supporting the actions taken to date.
Given that legal action may result from this position and, indeed, writs are threatened against certain individuals on the board, it is inappropriate for any of the board members to discuss the detail of this matter outside of the board and therefore none of us will be able to correspond with you in anything other than the broadest terms concerning this matter and, if we do, such correspondence will require to be copied to all board members.
If you believe that you have firm evidence to refute the board’s position it would be in everyone’s interest if that could be made available for our further consideration.
Nick Robinson CA
Business Recovery and Insolvency Services www.practiser.co.uk
This email may contain confidential information and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the addressee, please notify the sender by reply email and delete it from your computer.
Practiser accepts no liability for changes made to this email after it was sent or for viruses carried by it. Any views, opinions, conclusions or other information in this message which do not relate to the business of this firm are not authorised by us.
Practiser’s principal place of business is 4 Burns Drive Wemyss Bay, Renfrewshire PA18 6BY
A full list of the partners of the firm’s open to inspection at this address. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the firm’s email system is subject to random monitoring and recording by the firm.
THAT MUST BE THE MOST POLITE ‘FUCK OFF’ MESSAGE MORTONJAG HAS EVER RECEIVED!