Jump to content
talkfootball365
  • Welcome to talkfootball365!

    The better place to talk football.

Zdravko Mamic Jailed; Luka Modric Cleared of Perjury Charge


football forums

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43260942

Quote

 

Croatian authorities have charged the captain of the national football team, Luka Modric, with perjury.

The Real Madrid midfielder is suspected of making false statements at the tax fraud trial of Zdravko Mamic, a former executive director at Dinamo Zagreb.

Prosecutors say Mr Modric, 32, made a false statement in June 2017 over details of his transfer from Dinamo to English club Tottenham Hotspur in 2008.

If found guilty of perjury, Mr Modric could face up to five years in prison.

Mr Mamic, a powerful figure in Croatian football, was a senior official at Dinamo Zagreb when Mr Modric played for the club, which is the most successful in the Croatian league.

Cash is said to have been embezzled via deals where Mr Mamic, his brother Zoran and two others took a cut from the sales of players.

They are accused of corruption that reportedly cost Dinamo Zagreb more than €15m (£13.1m; $16.7m), and the state €1.5m.

Prosecutors did not name Mr Modric as the defendant but identified him as a "Croatian citizen born in 1985", in line with Croatian law.

Croatian media identified the defendant as Mr Modric.

Mr Modric testified in June 2017 about his £16.5m transfer from Dinamo to Tottenham in 2008.

The perjury charge hinges on exactly when he signed an annex to his contract with Dinamo, setting out the terms for future transfer fees.

According to prosecutors at a tribunal on 13 June, Mr Modric falsely said he had signed it in July 2004.

Prosecutors say the annex - which allowed Mr Modric to receive half the transfer fee - was actually signed in 2008 when he had already left the club.

Prosecutors also say Mr Modric told investigators in 2015 that the annex had been signed when he had already been sold to Tottenham.

The state attorney's office believes the player changed his testimony in favour of Mr Mamic.

The June 2017 trial, at which Mr Modric gave evidence, attracted huge media interest in Croatia.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply
10 minutes ago, Cannabis said:

As with Messi, Ronaldo and everyone else that's been a footballer and ''broken the law'' he will get away with it because of who he is regardless of what he has said or done. 

The only person to really take the piss out of the above rule was Adam Johnson.

that's because he touched little girls....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marc said:

Marcos Alonso is the worst example of a footballer being above the law.

Murdering bastard. I don't think I've ever seen the English media mention it either,

Being stupid enough to get into a car with a drunk driver isn't murder xD It's fucking suicide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Marc said:

Marcos Alonso is the worst example of a footballer being above the law.

Murdering bastard. I don't think I've ever seen the English media mention it either,

Except it wasn't murder, was it? 

And she was daft enough to get in a  car with a drunk driver just as he was daft enough to drive the car drunk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Spike said:

Being stupid enough to get into a car with a drunk driver isn't murder xD It's fucking suicide

 

9 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Except it wasn't murder, was it? 

And she was daft enough to get in a  car with a drunk driver just as he was daft enough to drive the car drunk. 

I exaggerated, it obviously wasn't murder, no. Defending Alonso to any extent is just absurd. 

I believe he was also driving at twice the speed limit. I don't know much about the case, but do we know for a fact that she knew he was pissed?

Blame the girl that died, that's right. 

The point is really. Why didn't he do jail time and don't blame the victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Marc said:

 

I exaggerated, it obviously wasn't murder, no. Defending Alonso to any extent is just absurd. 

I believe he was also driving at twice the speed limit. I don't know much about the case, but do we know for a fact that she knew he was pissed?

Blame the girl that died, that's right. 

Then why are you harping on about it? You've already formed an opinion, passed judgement on someone, and then in almost the same breath admitted you don't know anything. If the person can't tell if someone is twice over the legal driving limit then they are either, ignorant, or plain stupid. I don't pretend to care in the slightest about Alonso or the girl, but someone doesn't get to waive their responsibility to their own safety because they are dead. I don't stick my bloody hand into a boiling pot of water and then get to blame the person that boiled it, or claim that I didn't know it was boiling. 

Nobody ever wants to take responsibility for their own actions. It is always someone else's fault. It is Alonso's fault he was drunk, it was his fault that he got into a car, it was fault, that he was speeding, but it isn't his fault that someone made the conscious decision to accompany him; a person that couldn't even guarantee his own safety. The blame is 50/50, I have no sympathy or empathy for either party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Marc said:

 

I exaggerated, it obviously wasn't murder, no. Defending Alonso to any extent is just absurd. 

I believe he was also driving at twice the speed limit. I don't know much about the case, but do we know for a fact that she knew he was pissed?

Blame the girl that died, that's right. 

The point is really. Why didn't he do jail time and don't blame the victim.

Fairly certain it's that reason alone why he never served any time. Whether by other witnesses or whatever, there was proof that she knew Alonso was drunk yet chose to get in with him anyway. 

Calling him a murderer is down right laughable, and to state we are blaming the victim and defending Alonso is even moreso. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Fairly certain it's that reason alone why he never served any time. Whether by other witnesses or whatever, there was proof that she knew Alonso was drunk yet chose to get in with him anyway. 

Calling him a murderer is down right laughable, and to state we are blaming the victim and defending Alonso is even moreso. 

I don't know about jail time but I am of the opinion he should never be allowed to drive again. He has already given up that right, showing he is incapable of driving safely. There are more effective manners of punishing someone than just jail time. Maybe he should have to support the deceased's family for the remainder of his life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking bizarre posts. Absolute fucking weirdo. 

 

Always amazes me how people can't accept any kind of criticism towards their club or players and are unable to enter any kind of debate with a level headed approach.

To say that he didn't deserve any jail time is just outright absurd and I won't debate any further 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marc said:

Fucking bizarre posts. Absolute fucking weirdo. 

 

Always amazes me how people can't accept any kind of criticism towards their club or players and are unable to enter any kind of debate with a level headed approach.

To say that he didn't deserve any jail time is just outright absurd and I won't debate any further 

Nobody said that he doesn't deserve jail time you fucking moron. How you won member of the month is a fucking mystery to me. 

I even admitted that I don't give two shits about Alonso. Absolute state of your reading comprehension. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

I don't know about jail time but I am of the opinion he should never be allowed to drive again. He has already given up that right, showing he is incapable of driving safely. There are more effective manners of punishing someone than just jail time. Maybe he should have to support the deceased's family for the remainder of his life?

Always thought manslaughter came with some sort of prison sentence. 

I'd be more lenient for a permanent Intoxalock breathaliser system in his vehicle for the remainder of his life vs licence forever revoked. 

I'm sure he's got something lined up financially with the victim's family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
8 minutes ago, Spike said:

I don't know about jail time but I am of the opinion he should never be allowed to drive again. He has already given up that right, showing he is incapable of driving safely. There are more effective manners of punishing someone than just jail time. Maybe he should have to support the deceased's family for the remainder of his life?

 

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

Nobody said that he doesn't deserve jail time you fucking moron. How you won member of the month is a fucking mystery to me. 

I even admitted that I don't give two shits about Alonso. Absolute state of your reading comprehension. 

 

This is a very strong insinuation that you don't believe he should have done jail time. Which is completely laughable.

He's a scumbag with no consideration for human life, that should be locked up and certainly shouldn't be enjoying a life of luxury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cicero said:

Always thought manslaughter came with some sort of prison sentence. 

I'd be more lenient for a permanent Intoxalock breathaliser system in his vehicle for the remainder of his life vs licence forever revoked. 

I'm sure he's got something lined up financially with the victim's family. 

Nah, the intoxalock breathliser is too lenient. That is good for people that just have minor incidents, ya know. A little over the limit, slight speeding, etc. But someone died due to negligence here. Never allowed to drive again, if it were up to me. Definitely white collar imprisonment, as it isn't really a 'hard criminal' offence. Couldn't tell you how long, a year maybe? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spike said:

Nah, the intoxalock breathliser is too lenient. That is good for people that just have minor incidents, ya know. A little over the limit, slight speeding, etc. But someone died due to negligence here. Never allowed to drive again, if it were up to me. Definitely white collar imprisonment, as it isn't really a 'hard criminal' offence. Couldn't tell you how long, a year maybe? 

Was only leaniing towards the former given his age when it happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Storts said:

 

 

This is a very strong insinuation that you don't believe he should have done jail time. Which is completely laughable.

He's a scumbag with no consideration for human life, that should be locked up and certainly shouldn't be enjoying a life of luxury. 

Insinuation being the key word. Giving a hypothetical example of one method of punishment doesn't mean it is going to happen, because that is all it was; a hypothetical example. I'm actually allowed to mention, debate, and say things that I don't necessarily believe in, just like you.

It's a touchy subject because someone died due to gross negligence, but it of course was an accident. Given a few inches, a few extra moments, the incident wouldn't have happened and people would still be alive. A very different scenario to premeditated murder. How does one properly punish that? It is moral to lock someone up with hardened criminals? Is it acceptable to simply remove the means of the accident? Is it better to punish or rehabilitation? These are all morally loaded questions that I cannot answer but that doesn't mean we can't discuss alternatives, and simply regress into 'lol ur a joke, I the mighty moral arbiter passes judgement'.

If we were to consider ourselves an enlightened society why would we automatically jump to the third most rudimentary measure of punishment (after death and torture)? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

Nah, the intoxalock breathliser is too lenient. That is good for people that just have minor incidents, ya know. A little over the limit, slight speeding, etc. But someone died due to negligence here. Never allowed to drive again, if it were up to me. Definitely white collar imprisonment, as it isn't really a 'hard criminal' offence. Couldn't tell you how long, a year maybe? 

i don't want to compare justice systems  but here in saudi, i have a friend who was imprisoned for two years because they traveled in some steep road and they were going downhill and the facking tires blew up and he lost control ( he's driving a van ) and they smashed into a tree, two passengers died.    In that case my friend wasn't drunk nor was in drugs, just a mechanical failure and yet he got jail time.        

But with Alonso's case ... he was damn drunk and yet he still drove his car, c'mon guys, no matter how stoned we are with alcohol we can still make the right judgement NOT to drive.   Spanish authorities are just too lax with his case.

he should have been imprisoned with 2nd degree manslaughter due to drunk driving ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Storts said:

Backtracking now. Well done @Marc - Earned that member of the month badge 

What backtracking? Saying 'I don't know about jail time, my opinion is that he should be punished with jail time' are two different statements that are independent of eachother.. I'm self-aware enough to know that I don't know that jail time is the right answer but I also believe that in the case a mild sentence would probably be best in the eyes of the law. Someone died, multiple people were at fault, and one of the was unpunished. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, bozziovai said:

i don't want to compare justice systems  but here in saudi, i have a friend who was imprisoned for two years because they traveled in some steep road and they were going downhill and the facking tires blew up and he lost control ( he's driving a van ) and they smashed into a tree, two passengers died.    In that case my friend wasn't drunk nor was in drugs, just a mechanical failure and yet he got jail time.        

But with Alonso's case ... he was damn drunk and yet he still drove his car, c'mon guys, no matter how stoned we are with alcohol we can still make the right judgement NOT to drive.   Spanish authorities are just too lax with his case.

he should have been imprisoned with 2nd degree manslaughter due to drunk driving ....

That's not the entire issue though? The point we are making, and it is a pivotal point despite how some claiming we are 'defending Alonso', when in fact it's this piece of evidence that kept him away from serving time in the first place. She knew he was drunk yet chose to get in with him. Her hand wasn't forced to do anything. She ultimately was just as negligent to get in with a drunk driver and a driver choosing to drive drunk. 

Whether this was a massive ploy by his defence team, there was still enough evidence to suggest this was the case. So to state he should of served jail time or not play football ever again, is a bit pointless. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Storts said:

Backtracking now. Well done @Marc - Earned that member of the month badge 

Rattled. Hilarious that my famous member of the month win after only being here for a month was brought up. 

I can't believe this spike lad had the cheek to call the forums best member a moron. No wonder he's never won member of the month

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Sign up or subscribe to remove this ad.


×
×
  • Create New...