Not if he deceived the club presenting a story about Madrid influence and how we need to act against it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Caso Negreira
- Thread starter ajnotkeith
- Start date
Not if he deceived the club presenting a story about Madrid influence and how we need to act against it.
ajnotkeith
Well-known member
He is still an inside ear and he explained that Barto and Rosell asked him to keep them updated on what was happening behind the scenes, and explanations behind certain decisions etc.So, Negreira approached the club and fed them a story about how big Real's influence is, and that we need to invest to fight against that? And that he is the ideal man for this task.
This makes sense initially. Not for 18 years. Surely we learned his power is zero after a short while.
So you can see how that is useful to an extent, from FCB perspective.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
You think the club never believed Real had influence in Spanish football before someone came to them?Not if he deceived the club presenting a story about Madrid influence and how we need to act against it.
Quite clearly they paid him in relation to his role.
Evident by stopping paying him when left.
ajnotkeith
Well-known member
If he told the club there was corruption in favour of Madrid and they had to pay him to act against it etc the response will be that it should have been reported through the proper channels rather than responded to with bribery.Not if he deceived the club presenting a story about Madrid influence and how we need to act against it.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
If he told the club there was corruption in favour of Madrid and they had to pay him to act against it etc the response will be that it should have been reported through the proper channels rather than responded to with bribery.
He doesnt even have to believe there is corruption towards Real either. It is only important that Barca believe it if want to have more eyes on inner workings.
All it takes is Barca to make that connection and offer up the money for more eyes on the inside.
If he told the club there was corruption in favour of Madrid and they had to pay him to act against it etc the response will be that it should have been reported through the proper channels rather than responded to with bribery.
Not clear at all. Bribery is voluntary. I approach you, and pay you to gain unfair advantage. You approach me and deceive me into feeling that I will suffer any unwanted consequences if I don't pay, it is different.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
It was linked to his role.
Bribery Barca have to have done something they want to hide and have to think the threat of being exposed vanishes when he leaves his role.
Makes no sense.
Barca dont stop paying him and son when leaves his role if that is the case.
Clearly linked to the job he was in.
Bribery Barca have to have done something they want to hide and have to think the threat of being exposed vanishes when he leaves his role.
Makes no sense.
Barca dont stop paying him and son when leaves his role if that is the case.
Clearly linked to the job he was in.
Extortion Under Color of Official Right: If you are a public official and use deceit or coercion to compel a bribe, it is a severe felony.
Unlike traditional extortion, which requires the use of actual force, violence, or threats, extortion under official right operates more subtly through the leverage of government authority.
It is the same way here.
Unlike traditional extortion, which requires the use of actual force, violence, or threats, extortion under official right operates more subtly through the leverage of government authority.
It is the same way here.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
Not even remotely relevant.
They dont stop paying him when leaves role if that is the case. The threat remains and he if anything has less to lose also.
Payments were linked to his role clearly.
What that means is impossible to tell other than didnt make way down to referees being paid and he seemingly had very little influence on what referees were picked etc.
Barca have 100% been advised to shut up shop and say 'prove it' after fairly weak arguments about reports etc.
They dont stop paying him when leaves role if that is the case. The threat remains and he if anything has less to lose also.
Payments were linked to his role clearly.
What that means is impossible to tell other than didnt make way down to referees being paid and he seemingly had very little influence on what referees were picked etc.
Barca have 100% been advised to shut up shop and say 'prove it' after fairly weak arguments about reports etc.
If he told the club there was corruption in favour of Madrid and they had to pay him to act against it etc the response will be that it should have been reported through the proper channels rather than responded to with bribery.
It is not bribery though if that happens. It's extortion.
It is not bribery if an official lies to you about corruption within the system and basically influences you to pay him so that corruption doesn't harm your interests.
An official cannot do that. So, the case is about who contacted who. And what was said when the deal was made. Who promised what, in what circumstances, and if coercion in any way was used.
Then you have bribe, or coercion depending on findings, and Barcelona as victim mostly or criminal party.
Last edited:
JamDav1982
Well-known member
No that is not extortion at all and would not force Barca to pay him.
Extortion under color of official right focuses specifically on the official. The official uses the leverage of their office to solicit or accept the payment. In federal prosecutions, the person who pays the bribe is typically viewed as the victim of the extortion, rather than a co-conspirator.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
It would be the goldmine of the century for Barca if someone from Spanish football came to them and said 'I am part of a system corrupt in favour of Real Madrid. Pay me or continues'.
In what world do Barca react to that with paying that person for 18 years?
It is not extortion at all.
In what world do Barca react to that with paying that person for 18 years?
It is not extortion at all.
Last edited:
You have no idea what it is lol. Nobody does.
I'm saying that IF the Negreira guy, using his position in CTA, approached the club and persuaded them into paying him using any false claims, misleading the club through the use of his official positions inside the CTA, it is not bribery, it is extortion.
Wether that happened, or not, is anybody's guess.
I'm saying that IF the Negreira guy, using his position in CTA, approached the club and persuaded them into paying him using any false claims, misleading the club through the use of his official positions inside the CTA, it is not bribery, it is extortion.
Wether that happened, or not, is anybody's guess.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
We can rule out inane theories that make no sense.
No it is not extortion as it is not a threat to Barca for him to come to them and say 'Real are cheating pay me or it continues'.
Barca would expose that long before paying that person who threatened them.
It doesnt make sense for Barca to even need anyone to make that claim or hold that power over them as it is not new belief in Barca either.
Absolutely is not extortion that scenario.
Cant extort Barca with the by telling them Real are cheating. Not even an imbecile would try that.
No it is not extortion as it is not a threat to Barca for him to come to them and say 'Real are cheating pay me or it continues'.
Barca would expose that long before paying that person who threatened them.
It doesnt make sense for Barca to even need anyone to make that claim or hold that power over them as it is not new belief in Barca either.
Absolutely is not extortion that scenario.
Cant extort Barca with the by telling them Real are cheating. Not even an imbecile would try that.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
'Barca were extorted by Negreira telling them Real were cheating and only way to combat it was to pay him'.
That is even worse than last claim and absolutely not extortion.. it is closer to a mutual agreement of how to deal with Real cheating.
Makes no sense at all.
That is even worse than last claim and absolutely not extortion.. it is closer to a mutual agreement of how to deal with Real cheating.
Makes no sense at all.
JamDav1982
Well-known member
What is inane about it? It's obvious this Negreira guy was an extortionist and a blackmailer. Didn't you say he tried to blackmail the club to resume payments when they stopped?
No it isnt and you have quite clearly shown dont know what those words mean.
It has been shown he may have tried it AFTER left his role and him no longer being seen as relevant to make payment to.
Barca ignored it.
No it isnt and you have quite clearly shown dont know what those words mean.
It has been shown he may have tried it AFTER left his role and him no longer being seen as relevant to make payment to.
Barca ignored it.
Haha, so he showed he is capable of blackmail and extortion.
So the possibility of that not being the first time he tried to pull off something like that is non existent to you, lol.