As I have stated many times on this site I don’t exclusively lobby for change. I also act for change. To this end I have written to The Takeover Panel today to inquire why career criminal David Cunningham King has not yet been the subject of a formal Cold Shoulder order; nor has he been summoned to the Court of Session for a hearing apropos a judicial order to compel King to make an offer of 20p for the shares not within his concert party’s gift.
I wrote to the Executive and Hearings Committee. I have redacted their e-mail address to make it more difficult for the Gullibillies to write in support of King. My letter as published on this site will be in bold blue italic typeface
‘The above email address should be used to notify the Executive and the Hearings Committee of a request that the Hearings Committee be convened in order to review a ruling of the Executive. After such notice is received, the Secretary to the hearing will notify all interested parties to the requested hearing of the contact details to be used for subsequent communications.’
I write to you in my capacity as a shareholder in RIFC Plc. I also write in my capacity as the creator and principal author of an award-winning social media blog which currently has fast approaching 14.5m hits and is read by up to 40,000 individuals on a daily basis (www.johnjamessite.com).
By way of a preface to my remittance, I have chosen to reproduce the following clause from the Takeover Appeal Board’s findings:
106. We have reached the conclusion, having regard to the grounds and basis of the appeal and taking account of all the evidential materials placed before the Board, that Mr King was acting in concert with Messrs Letham, Taylor and Park in the acquisition of the shares in Rangers on 31 December 2014 and 2 January 2015. On the “acting in concert” point we uphold the findings and ruling of the Committee.
Having followed this matter with interest and having written copious articles thereon, I could see no other conclusion than Mr. King was acting in concert. Allow me to state for the record that David Cunningham King is a career criminal. He has been accused in South Africa of bribing a tax official (who was subsequently forced to resign) and having the audacity to attempt to have the ensuing, inordinately lenient tax settlement, accepted by a court of law. It was summarily thrown out.
Mr. King attempted to have his name removed from the South African Tax Register by mendaciously claiming that he earned less than the Rand equivalent of £5,000 per annum. In this subterfuge he even went so far as to caddy for Gary Player at The Masters in Augusta. The prosaic facts of the matter was that his monthly credit card expenditure of circa £80,000 was being paid in full from significant cash deposits held in Guernsey.
Mr. King was described by Gauteng appeals court judge, Brian Southwood as:
‘A glib and shameless liar who would not hesitate to lie if it served his interests to do so. He should not be believed on any matter unless supported by objective evidence.”
Mr. King has been charged with Racketeering. Only three witnesses were prepared to testify against him, which led to the collapse of the state prosecutor’s case. It was subsequently revealed that Mr. King paid an underworld figure to intimidate the witnesses.
In his four decades as a career criminal he has only been convicted of 41 counts of tax evasion and one count of contempt of court. This is a drop in the ocean compared to the slew of allegations of fraud, share manipulation and insider trading.
Mr. King has also breached South Africa’s concert party rules with his third party acquisition of shares in MHG in his daughter’s name. The mysterious benefactor who instructed the purchase of shares to boost her stake to 75% was none other than Mr. King. The Takeover Panel should be in no doubt that King will lie, cheat, deceive and steal at the drop of a hat. As an example of King’s duplicity, I enclose the following from your findings:
59.In emails to the Secretary Mr.King re-iterated his position that the key representations should be from NOAL as the purchaser of the shares in Rangers, that NOAL was the real party and that he had no locus to represent it. In his replies the Secretary again reminded Mr King of the procedure for NOAL to attend or to make submissions on the appeal. NOAL had made no application to be heard by the Committee and had made no written submissions to it. It has not made any application to be heard by the Board and has not made any written representations to it.
86. Further, Mr. King’s repeated denial that he has any interest in those shares and any voting rights in Rangers is at odds with the evidence as to their acquisition and as to NOAL’s requisition of an EGM that led to Mr King and his nominees constituting the Rangers board, which both clearly indicate that Mr. King had “general control” over the shares within the terms of the Code’s definition of “interest in securities.”
The Takeover Panel Appeal Board came to the following conclusion:
104. We dismiss the appeal and affirm the ruling of the Committee, save that we vary the date and direct that within 30 days of this decision (i.e. by 12 April 2017) Mr. King announce an offer pursuant to Rule 9 of the Code and, save as to the offer date, such offer to be in accordance with the Executive’s ruling of 7 June 2016, as summarised in paragraphs 19 and 20 above.
Mr. King, not to anyone’s surprise, has paid no heed to this conclusion. He has played cat and mouse with the TPE and its Appellate Board. The TPE also stated that they would pursue a petition to The Court of Session with a view to compelling Mr. King to comply with Rule 9.
To date, I see no movement by the TPE. Mr. King, who attended Ibrox on Saturday 12th August and chaired a meeting of his board, is continuing to make fiduciary decisions on behalf of RIFC Plc. There are those who read my blog who assert that the TPE have no teeth. One went so far as to suggest that you are a group of ‘blowhard paper-shufflers.’
I do not concur with this view but it’s difficult to escape the conclusion that Mr. King is acting with impunity and is making complete fools of the TPE.
Mr. King is a slippery character.This trait has kept him out of prison to date. Mike Ashley of Sports Direct had to go to elaborate lengths to serve Mr. King with a court summons.
Is this the rationale for the TPE’s inertia? Are you unable to serve King?
Mr. King, who likes the sound of his own voice, rarely hides his light under a bushel but on his last trip he slipped in and out without fanfare. Was this his way of avoiding a summons?
Plesase advise my readers and I as to when a Cold Shoulder order will be implemented and the term of this order. Please also advise on the latest news in regard to the Court of Session petition. Has Mr. King paid the costs for his spurious appeal to the Takeover Appeal Board?
I would be grateful if the TPE could apprise my readers and I on the impact of a Cold Shoulder order. Will it in any way affect RIFC Plc or its supply chain? Will Metro Bank be compelled to withdraw banking facilities from RIFC Plc? Will RIFC be prohibited from engaging in transfer activity on behalf of its subsidiary, The Rangers Football Club Limited?
I cannot conceive of anyone more deserving of a cold shoulder than career criminal David Cunningham King.
John James (nom de plume).
n.b. I am loath to reveal my real name as Mr. King will leak this to his ‘militia’ who have to date issued three credible death threats. I live in exile to avoid assassination. However if non disclosure guarantees were forthcoming, I will revert to you with my name to accompany my request for a review.”
I will revert to readers should I receive a response.