All of those goods have been stored now for the better part of two years as I recall. Correct?
Yes, it is. Looking forward to having a trawl through it some point soon. There's got to be a 30" waist in the LVCs!
All of those goods have been stored now for the better part of two years as I recall. Correct?
The strong disapproval being displayed for this thread doesnt quite warrant the gross exageration in the description of those interested in this story. "A pack of wild dogs"? "Gleeful"? I dont see it.
There were members putting up emoticons for "popcorn" whilst waiting for the next tidbit of information and others asking whether the next instalment of this case was more looked forward to than the next episode of "Game of Thrones". Bad taste indeed.
I think Sloan's trial thread has been well done, but some of the comments in this comments thread have been beyond the pale in terms of good taste.
Paddy hit the nail on the head.
It might be that the poster meant to post in this thread but his fingers typed a response before his attention focused on the specific page header. :eusa_doh:Well the first comment has now been posted on the trial narrative by someone that somehow just skipped over every 'header' on every daily account that Sloan has posted. Absolutely unbelievable. Hopefully the poster will delete it..or a bartender will.
Well the first comment has now been posted on the trial narrative by someone that somehow just skipped over every 'header' on every daily account that Sloan has posted. Absolutely unbelievable. Hopefully the poster will delete it..or a bartender will.
This has been massively discussed. Plus Paddy's comment removed from the thread, and then it was unlocked
That's the management asking us to move on, and forward.
Sloan: you said the Lounge got mentioned in court. Aside from the Skip Horween statement, was TFL mentioned by anyone else - Ken, Will, the police? Or is that our lot as far as scottish court fame goes
HD I am sure it was inadvertently done on his part. We all want to see Sloan's trial narrative restricted only to him.
Yeah, the guy followed a link to the thread from somewhere else. Likely doesn't know there is a discussion thread.
I'll bet he has about 50 PM's now asking him to move his post to here. lol
Poor Vespizzare.
I've got to ask, on Monday's chapter, didn't anyone think the disparity between WL's and JM's estimate when they started mislabelling odd? To me it was one of the stand-out aspects of that section.
withGiving evidence for the defence, JM had told the court that the deception had gone on between 2009 and 20012, during WL’s tenure.
andWL insisted, that the move was a stop-gap and had lasted just eight months.
During his testimony KC pointed to a mislabelled jacket that was part of evidence and said that it dated back to 2007.
Compare
with
and
From his expression, I think even Ken was surprised at the 2007 tag! The question is, of course, what do Horween make of this?