Blues star Ranger admits £2,000 online banking fraud

[rigsby]

He obviously knew he was going to plead guilty when he was (half ) playing on Saturday. He wasn't so keen to join in on the goal celebration so perhaps was already feeling the shame.

Nile has almost certainly taken advice and pleaded guilty, his solicitor would have been doing a deal. As they do if you plead guilty and that's probably why the other charge has been dropped

If the other two defendants change their mind and plead guilty we may never know the full details of the case. As it stands we will hear a lot more in April, providing it isn't adjourned.

We don't know yet but there is a possibility that Ranger could be giving evidence for the defence or the prosecution. The other guy involved had over 500 different peoples bank details. So although it states Ranger obtained the details of the vulnerable person, does that mean via the other defendants list or by deliberately targeting old or vulnerable people.

I guess we will find out at the time of sentencing but Nile hardly strikes me as a 'Professor Moriarty' of criminals.

 

[Napster]

daily mail says 2015

Court news says 2016, and have more details in their story than anyone else, so my tendancey is to believe them . However I guess it could be a mistake and they didn't change the 'last year' when upating the story
BBC says 2016. http://courtnewsuk.co.uk/former-premier-league-star-admits-bank-scam/

London Met who made the press statement, said 2015, see my previous post.

 

[Firestorm]

You can't , but you can when you phone them up trying to obtain their back details which is what is being reported in the below link .

http://www.barnet-today.co.uk/artic... and fraud charges§ionIs=news&searchyear=2016

but NR isn't being accused of phoning them up, he is being accused of transferring the money.
No defending the act of fraud, which is a crime and as such should be punished , but the use of emotive terms to embellish a crime, which in the great scheme of things is not major, is not necessary

 

[Floval Flyer]

On a serious note; I find it hard to comprehend how SUFC did not do their DD prior to signing Ranger long term; specially after the farcical situation with Ryan Innis - when he also received a custodial sentence, which was latterly reprieved?

Surely the clubs lawyers must have done some pretty stringent background checks before signing him up for 3 and a half years, on what I would assume was a decent salary and signing on fee in league 1 standards. How can they have not known about this pending court case?

That said, (and I am in no way condoning his involvement in this despicable crime); we (SUFC) have a duty of care to support him as part of what I would call his 'rehabilitation'? If Ranger receives a custodial sentence and is sacked by SUFC then I would fear for his future; he's the type of character you'd read about in 2 /3 years being involved in a much more serious 'gang' related crime or even ending up on a slab..

On one hand he deserves what's coming, but on the other hand just simply sending him down and effectively chucking him on the scrap heap would be totally detrimental, and there would be zero chance of him being rehabilitated.

Providing he shows remorse for his crimes, then I believe he should be granted a 'second' or in this case 'last' chance - and SUFC should support and stick by Ranger as an employee of the club. I don't know if the courts will take this into consideration and he may be give community service and will be allowed to continue to train and play, but there are already signs of strain on Ranger, given Saturday's performance?

If he commits any crime whilst he is a SUFC player then he should be sacked, not questions. This is in his past along with all the others, so I say for now we should support him, warts and all...

 

[MK Shrimper]

If he commits any crime whilst he is a SUFC player then he should be sacked, not questions. This is in his past along with all the others, so I say for now we should support him, warts and all...

We've stood by others who've done worse. Hello Ryan Hall.

 

[Mr Browns Ghost]

for the sake of accuracy , this happened less than 11 months ago, Feb 18 2016

thanks for keeping my post totally accurate, you'll have a busy job on your hands scrolling through posts now, if that's your intention...

 

[Napster]

We've stood by others who've done worse.

and weve sacked lesser talented players for doing less.

 

[MK Shrimper]

and weve sacked lesser talented players for doing less.

Have we ever sacked anyone? Not let go as such, but contract cancelled due to a criminal offence.

 

[manor15]

Have we ever sacked anyone? Not let go as such, but contract cancelled due to a criminal offence.

Jemal Johnson in 2011 is one, http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16251646

Michael Ricketts was also criminally overweight for a professional footballer.

 

[Floval Flyer]

We've stood by others who've done worse. Hello Ryan Hall.

and we still love Stan the man, despite Ulrika having his boot imprint on her cranium :-)

 

[MK Shrimper]

Jemal Johnson in 2011 is one, http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/16251646

Cheers, can't say I remember him.

 

[AndyT]

He might get sentenced in May for 3 months, so that works out perfect.

Good to see the courts taking the football season into consideration. :thumbsup::winking:

 

[Napster]

Have we ever sacked anyone? Not let go as such, but contract cancelled due to a criminal offence.

Darryl was "released" because he got drunk at a do.
Plus there's Roche (from an earlier thread): Roche was involved in an incident with the bouncers at a club in Newcastle in which either he or his mate pulled out a gun. He was then transferred from Doncaster to Southend (i.e. a lot further from Newcastle) before the police (or the bouncers and their mates!) had caught up with him.

He was arrested whilst sitting in the East Stand just before the kick-off of a game against Wolves. You may wonder, as I did, if the police (who had travelled all the way from Newcastle) hoped he'd be playing so they could arrest him on the pitch!

When the story came out, quite a few people speculated privately whether Steve Thompson actually knew he was in serious danger of being "dealt with" by those who were after him (and I don't mean the police) when he signed him. After all, he had mates at Doncaster and knew Roche as a player - therefore he presumably knew that he was an average player 2 divisions below us and not up to the standard of our then level. Anyway, we'll never know....

Roche's bail conditions stipulated that he was not to set foot in Newcastle. However, this ban was lifted for one day so he could attend a relative's funeral. Being an idiot, he then decided to go out drinking, not just anywhere in Newcastle but in the infamous Byker district, where he was spotted and subsequently shot through the kneecaps.

He got about 4 years for the original offence and Southend sacked him because he was not in a position to fulfill the terms of his contract.

 

[rigsby]

deleted wrong quote

 

[Napster]

He might get sentenced in May for 3 months, so that works out perfect.

Good to see the courts taking the football season into consideration. :thumbsup::winking:

He won't go down - I reckon a community order.

 

[Floval Flyer]

He might get sentenced in May for 3 months, so that works out perfect.

Good to see the courts taking the football season into consideration. :thumbsup::winking:

bummer for him, i heard he'd just booked Ibiza...

 

[AndyT]

:omg: ... but who is going to look after 'Silver'!

 

[rigsby]

bummer for him, i heard he'd just booked Ibiza...

probably using someone else's card.

 

[Napster]

:omg: ... but who is going to look after 'Silver'!

Ho ho. Or should I say hi ho.

 

[Firestorm]

and we still love Stan the man, despite Ulrika having his boot imprint on her cranium :-)

Was Stan found guilty of assault ?