• Sign up free today!

    Join in on the discussion, prediction leagues and competitions today! Sign up takes no longer than 5 minutes.

Sign in to follow this  
football forum

Zdravko Mamic Jailed; Luka Modric Cleared of Perjury Charge

Recommended Posts

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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up to 5 years in prison

Or in other words, a letter mailed to Modric saying you've been a bad boy,  please don't do it again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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,

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

worst of the worst would be Bruno.   But that bastard is free now due to technicalities.   oh well, brazilian law ...

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Share this post


Link to post
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 

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chelsea fans trying to defend that scumbag Alonso says it all about their club really. xD

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
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)? 

Share this post


Link to post
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 ....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it is a lot easier to post 'rattled' then any sort of counter-point with substance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Spike said:

Of course it is a lot easier to post 'rattled' then any sort of counter-point with substance. 

The typical, especially in defeat.  It's a process I like to call  "Cicero's 5 steps of consecutive fallacies" 

1. Make an asinine claim from hasty generalisation

2. Get proven wrong and perform a red herring due to having no rational counter argument. 

3. Get called out on your red herring and resort to ad hominem. 

4. Get backed into a corner and claim you were only 'fishing' or state the other person has been "rattled"

5. Post the Jack Wilshere meme "Ok Mate" as the last final defence. 

 

Good showing by our "member of the month". Now just awaiting the Wilshere meme to complete the process. 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Cicero said:

The typical, especially in defeat.  It's a process I like to call  "Cicero's 5 steps of consecutive fallacies" 

1. Make an asinine claim from hasty generalisation

2. Get proven wrong and perform a red herring due to having no rational counter argument. 

3. Get called out on your red herring and resort to ad hominem. 

4. Get backed into a corner and claim you were only 'fishing' or state the other person has been "rattled"

5. Post the Jack Wilshere meme "Ok Mate" as the last final defence. 

 

Good showing by our "member of the month". Now just awaiting the Wilshere meme to complete the process. 

We've all been there. It happens to all of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spike said:

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)? 

Of course you are - but you were the clear insinuation you were making was that you didn't believe he deserved jail time, at least that's how I and others clearly have read it, and for that I completely disagree. On a wider point I actually don't believe in jail time as the most effective form of punishment. We send far too many people to prisons for crimes that do not warrant it and could be better served with rehabilitation and community service time. However, death by drink driving for me is up there with the worst crimes, it's so selfish and reckless and Alonso has got off so lightly whilst another and their family will serve a lifetime sentence.

I also disagree with the use of the word accident. Putting himself and others in that situation was a choice he made, he knows the consequences of drink driving, you see them every single day, and somehow he's escaped without any serious retribution. To place blame on the girl who was killed by Alonso does not sit comfortably with me, and whilst of course you have to take responsibility for your own actions, it doesn't change the fact that Alonso was the one driving the car, considerably over the drink driving limit, considerably over the speed limit, reckless, out of control and clearly not thinking about consequences for him, or more importantly for other human beings. I think his actions were reprehensible and whilst I believe in rehabilitation, I don't think justice has been done in this case, and I cannot be satisfied that he deserves his current place in society. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Storts said:

Of course you are - but you were the clear insinuation you were making was that you didn't believe he deserved jail time, at least that's how I and others clearly have read it, and for that I completely disagree. On a wider point I actually don't believe in jail time as the most effective form of punishment. We send far too many people to prisons for crimes that do not warrant it and could be better served with rehabilitation and community service time. However, death by drink driving for me is up there with the worst crimes, it's so selfish and reckless and Alonso has got off so lightly whilst another and their family will serve a lifetime sentence.

I also disagree with the use of the word accident. Putting himself and others in that situation was a choice he made, he knows the consequences of drink driving, you see them every single day, and somehow he's escaped without any serious retribution. To place blame on the girl who was killed by Alonso does not sit comfortably with me, and whilst of course you have to take responsibility for your own actions, it doesn't change the fact that Alonso was the one driving the car, considerably over the drink driving limit, considerably over the speed limit, reckless, out of control and clearly not thinking about consequences for him, or more importantly for other human beings. I think his actions were reprehensible and whilst I believe in rehabilitation, I don't think justice has been done in this case, and I cannot be satisfied that he deserves his current place in society. 

this is the thing for me, too.

Yes, a drunk girl may not have been in the wisest frame of mind to get in the car with a driver who is intoxicated as well.

But a sober driver 1) probably doesn't crash the car and 2) has more care for his passengers and is more aware of the dangers that come with driving. 

You'd rather have a sober driver/drunk passenger as opposed to drunk driver/drunk passenger. To me that's common sense and it baffles me how Alonso doesn't get more blame for what happened or the fact that there's any blame for the passenger, drunk or not. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Advertisement