Barcelona are reportedly content with how their first public addressing of El Caso Negreira on an institutional level. While Laporta had made short affirmations of innocence, Laporta’s press conference on Monday was the first time the relationship between Barcelona and Enriquez Negreira had been addresed publicly.
According to Cadena Cope, Barcelona directors internally said that Laporta defended the club ‘very well’. They feel he showed that the reports from Javier Enriquez Romero were evidence of their innocence. They also feel at this point that there will be no legal repercussions off the back of it.
Aside from the fallout over his comments regarding Real Madrid, this has contrasted the reaction in the Spanish and Catalan media. Many feel that Laporta failed to clear up many of the issues, and were confused by the fact that Laporta could see no ethical conflict of interests in paying the company of the former Vice-President of Referees, Enriquez Negreira.
AustineJayjnr
0
Then we are in the same page sort of lol. My narrative isn’t that they did it regardless of a court decision. But that Innocent until proven guilty is for court integrity purposes only. If the courts don’t have enough evidence, it doesn’t necessitate that the allegations weren’t true. Or that Barca are actually innocent. I think you’re assuming that since I’m a Madrid fan, therefore I think Barca is guilty. That’s not part of my narrative.
I’ll allow it. You make quite a good argument…Respect ✊
18597076(deleted)
0
Oh no i understand you perfectly lol. Like i said earlier, the narrative you’re trying to push is that weather or not the court finds Barca guilty, they committed the crime, just not enough evidence to support the accusation hence the reason you used the rape scenario as a case study.
Then we are in the same page sort of lol. My narrative isn’t that they did it regardless of a court decision. But that Innocent until proven guilty is for court integrity purposes only. If the courts don’t have enough evidence, it doesn’t necessitate that the allegations weren’t true. Or that Barca are actually innocent. I think you’re assuming that since I’m a Madrid fan, therefore I think Barca is guilty. That’s not part of my narrative.
AustineJayjnr
0
Of course not. Lol somehow you’re thinking I’m arguing that an accusation is enough proof or sufficient to assess that a crime occurred. I don’t know if you’re not reading or you just want to express your emotions and angst . But we aren’t on the same page. You’re almost there though.
Oh no i understand you perfectly lol. Like i said earlier, the narrative you’re trying to push is that weather or not the court finds Barca guilty, they committed the crime, just not enough evidence to support the accusation hence the reason you used the rape scenario as a case study.
18597076(deleted)
0
If i told you right now that “I know Real Madrid pays referees to favor them in football matches” what would be your response? As an educated person I’m assuming you are, your first question would be “Do you have any proof of this” Without proof i could be saying that for a number of reasons such as hate, envy, rumors i heard etc but at the end of the day, it’s all speculations and hearsay and it holds no water. Weather or not i think Madrid is guilty doesn’t automatically make them guilty of the crimes I’ve accused them of and what is to say they aren’t completely innocent of those crimes??? You have your opinions and i can respect that but as a fan of Real Madrid, don’t pretend your analysis are morally guided or without bias.
Of course not. Lol somehow you’re thinking I’m arguing that an accusation is enough proof or sufficient to assess that a crime occurred. I don’t know if you’re not reading or you just want to express your emotions and angst . But we aren’t on the same page. You’re almost there though.
18597076(deleted)
0
By your explanation Ronaldo did in fact rape the girl that he was accused of raping but there wasn’t enough evidence against him? Did i understand you correctly? Because in the world i live in, a lot of innocent men have had their lives destroyed due to false allegations against them but according to you, a person who is accused of rape is in fact a rapist regardless of the fact that he wasn’t found guilty in the eyes of the law. Your explanation is just nonsensical because in all, i can tell for a fact that the exact point/narrative you’re trying to push is that if the court doesn’t find Barcelona guilty of the crimes they are being accused of, it doesn’t mean they are innocent of the crimes. Isn’t that the point you’re trying to make? Let’s also ignore the fact that you’re a Madrid fan and your judgements aren’t biased at all.
No lol not at all. You’re still stuck. Are you saying only courts can determine if a crime was committed? If I actually raped you, or you raped me, whatever your preference. But you couldn’t prove it, or there wasn’t physical evidence for a court to assess. Does that mean the crime didn’t happen? Am I innocent because you couldn’t prove it? Let’s deviate a little. Suppose, I raped you. But for whatever reason, trauma or I escaped jurisdiction, you didn’t report it. Does that mean I’m not guilty of having committed the crime ?
AustineJayjnr
0
No, lol my point is guilt isn’t determined by opinions or a court sanctioned verdict. A person who commits rape, is guilty of Rape. Whether proven or not. For instance by lack of evidence, doesn’t mean that the person is innocent. It just means there wasn’t enough evidence to find a guilty verdict. But It doesn’t mean person didn’t commit the crime. Which is why courts don’t say the jury finds the person “innocent” they say the jury or court finds the person Not guilty by a preponderance of the evidence.
If i told you right now that “I know Real Madrid pays referees to favor them in football matches” what would be your response? As an educated person I’m assuming you are, your first question would be “Do you have any proof of this” Without proof i could be saying that for a number of reasons such as hate, envy, rumors i heard etc but at the end of the day, it’s all speculations and hearsay and it holds no water. Weather or not i think Madrid is guilty doesn’t automatically make them guilty of the crimes I’ve accused them of and what is to say they aren’t completely innocent of those crimes??? You have your opinions and i can respect that but as a fan of Real Madrid, don’t pretend your analysis are morally guided or without bias.
AustineJayjnr
0
No, lol my point is guilt isn’t determined by opinions or a court sanctioned verdict. A person who commits rape, is guilty of Rape. Whether proven or not. For instance by lack of evidence, doesn’t mean that the person is innocent. It just means there wasn’t enough evidence to find a guilty verdict. But It doesn’t mean person didn’t commit the crime. Which is why courts don’t say the jury finds the person “innocent” they say the jury or court finds the person Not guilty by a preponderance of the evidence.
By your explanation Ronaldo did in fact rape the girl that he was accused of raping but there wasn’t enough evidence against him? Did i understand you correctly? Because in the world i live in, a lot of innocent men have had their lives destroyed due to false allegations against them but according to you, a person who is accused of rape is in fact a rapist regardless of the fact that he wasn’t found guilty in the eyes of the law. Your explanation is just nonsensical because in all, i can tell for a fact that the exact point/narrative you’re trying to push is that if the court doesn’t find Barcelona guilty of the crimes they are being accused of, it doesn’t mean they are innocent of the crimes. Isn’t that the point you’re trying to make? Let’s also ignore the fact that you’re a Madrid fan and your judgements aren’t biased at all.
18597076(deleted)
0
this case won't yield nothing I'm telling you cuz they won't get sufficient evidences. wait if you want until the end of time
Ooh lol thanks for telling me! next time I argue this with someone else. I’ll say there isn’t sufficient proof because Mor2022 said so lol
Mor2022
0
Just because you say so? If that was the case, courts wouldn’t be wasting their time. Courts are impacted as is, and don’t proceed unless there is sufficient evidence to warrant proceeding. I think your basing your knowledge on television dramas. Lawyers and court proceedings are not as cheesy as you think lol
this case won't yield nothing I'm telling you cuz they won't get sufficient evidences. wait if you want until the end of time
18597076(deleted)
0
they don't have anything they won't stop giving yourself gals hope. this smear campaign has already failed
Just because you say so? If that was the case, courts wouldn’t be wasting their time. Courts are impacted as is, and don’t proceed unless there is sufficient evidence to warrant proceeding. I think your basing your knowledge on television dramas. Lawyers and court proceedings are not as cheesy as you think lol
18597076(deleted)
0
What nonsense are you spewing? Trying really hard to sound intelligent aren’t you? So if a person is accused of rape that makes the person automatically guilty until proven otherwise? If that was the case, did you think Ronaldo was guilty when he was accused of rape?
As I said, you misunderstood. Read below
18597076(deleted)
0
Did you think Ronaldo was guilty when his accuser accused him of rape??? Was he guilty until he was proven innocent??? If your answer is No then shut the hell up and don’t speak because it concerns Barca.
Nope, you misunderstood my point. I clarified through my comment to Leddelou below.
18597076(deleted)
0
So you’re telling me Ronaldo rap because some lady said so ?
No, lol my point is guilt isn’t determined by opinions or a court sanctioned verdict. A person who commits rape, is guilty of Rape. Whether proven or not. For instance by lack of evidence, doesn’t mean that the person is innocent. It just means there wasn’t enough evidence to find a guilty verdict. But It doesn’t mean person didn’t commit the crime. Which is why courts don’t say the jury finds the person “innocent” they say the jury or court finds the person Not guilty by a preponderance of the evidence.
Mor2022
0
The accusers should be the ones to provider evidence, not Barcelona.. What we can do provide as Barcelona is explain our side of the story. it's the accusers that should bring out their evidence of Barcelona bribing refs
I mean faise hope
Mor2022
0
That’s correct. And that’s what they are doing. They have evidence they are corroborating, and building the case.
they don't have anything they won't stop giving yourself gals hope. this smear campaign has already failed
AustineJayjnr
0
Lol okay. So a person who raped, should be considered innocent ? Only because they didn’t go the through the court proceedings yet ? That’s a court process lol Guilt isn’t something they monopolize. It’s how they are treated during the court process in an attempt to be fair under a jury trial.
What nonsense are you spewing? Trying really hard to sound intelligent aren’t you? So if a person is accused of rape that makes the person automatically guilty until proven otherwise? If that was the case, did you think Ronaldo was guilty when he was accused of rape?
AustineJayjnr
0
Lol okay. So a person who raped, should be considered innocent ? Only because they didn’t go the through the court proceedings yet ? That’s a court process lol Guilt isn’t something they monopolize. It’s how they are treated during the court process in an attempt to be fair under a jury trial.
Did you think Ronaldo was guilty when his accuser accused him of rape??? Was he guilty until he was proven innocent??? If your answer is No then shut the hell up and don’t speak because it concerns Barca.
Leddelou
1
Lol okay. So a person who raped, should be considered innocent ? Only because they didn’t go the through the court proceedings yet ? That’s a court process lol Guilt isn’t something they monopolize. It’s how they are treated during the court process in an attempt to be fair under a jury trial.
So you’re telling me Ronaldo rap because some lady said so ?
18597076(deleted)
0
i m just telling that ....real Madrid is the one who got ... benefited....from Franco.....
Ooh. You’re just talking about just Franco’s regime. I’m more interested on how that has anything to do with the allegations against Barca. It seems more like a tactic to distract. But if you’re arguing is limited to the franco regime. I have no opinion, it’s not modern day football. There was a lot of corruption during those days. Not just in Franco regimes but almost everywhere.
yourdaddy1
0
You think Franco’s regime ended yesterday ? Lol
franco was a hater of Catalonia
yourdaddy1
0
You think Franco’s regime ended yesterday ? Lol
i m just telling that ....real Madrid is the one who got ... benefited....from Franco.....
18597076(deleted)
0
did you wake up now from yesterday.?
You think Franco’s regime ended yesterday ? Lol
yourdaddy1
0
What does that have to do with the current allegations against Barca?
did you wake up now from yesterday.?
barcaisinmydna
1
your mom should have swallowed you
bro came commenting with a barca badge cry me a bucket fatherless child you don't even have a real mom
18597076(deleted)
1
Innocent until proven guilty. Until then, y’all can keep your negative theories to yourselves.
Lol okay. So a person who raped, should be considered innocent ? Only because they didn’t go the through the court proceedings yet ? That’s a court process lol Guilt isn’t something they monopolize. It’s how they are treated during the court process in an attempt to be fair under a jury trial.
18597076(deleted)
0
The accusers should be the ones to provider evidence, not Barcelona.. What we can do provide as Barcelona is explain our side of the story. it's the accusers that should bring out their evidence of Barcelona bribing refs
That’s correct. And that’s what they are doing. They have evidence they are corroborating, and building the case.
18597076(deleted)
0
💀💀💀💀
[image]
What does that have to do with the current allegations against Barca?
18597076(deleted)
0
Franco's government forced Barça to change its name, they killed its president, they did not allow them to name their stadium 'Joan Gamper', they did not allow them to sign Di Stéfano and did everything get him to Real Madrid. Still RM thinks Barca was favoured bcoz they won some hard fought La Liga titles.
[image]
Lol how does that affect modern day football? Didnt Franco’s regime end in 1975? How does that have anything to do with the current allegations?
18597076(deleted)
0
lol why would Barca directors say anything else ?
yourdaddy1
0
Saving you from bankruptcy 3 times was not enough for you [Crylaugh][Crylaugh][Crylaugh][Crylaugh]. Ok this still does not explain el caso negreira. Just laporta trying to create confusion
LOL REGIME CLUB 😂😂 TRYING TO PLAY VICTIM CARD 🤡
Akekala
1
these guys are jokers😂
siwbdkmoyz
0
💀💀💀💀
[image]
Saving you from bankruptcy 3 times was not enough for you [Crylaugh][Crylaugh][Crylaugh][Crylaugh]. Ok this still does not explain el caso negreira. Just laporta trying to create confusion
siwbdkmoyz
1
Franco's government forced Barça to change its name, they killed its president, they did not allow them to name their stadium 'Joan Gamper', they did not allow them to sign Di Stéfano and did everything get him to Real Madrid. Still RM thinks Barca was favoured bcoz they won some hard fought La Liga titles.
[image]
And still barsa just talking about everyone to distract from caso negreira which he still have not address
siwbdkmoyz
1
Franco's government forced Barça to change its name, they killed its president, they did not allow them to name their stadium 'Joan Gamper', they did not allow them to sign Di Stéfano and did everything get him to Real Madrid. Still RM thinks Barca was favoured bcoz they won some hard fought La Liga titles.
[image]
You forgot to mention he saved them 3 times from bankruptcy and Madrid won some hard fought la liga from regime club
teeacdlpr
0
your mom should have swallowed you
lol
locmnoprs
0
we own N*zi Madrid
your mom should have swallowed you
locmnoprs
0
we own N*zi Madrid
dumb ass
locmnoprs
0
we own N*zi Madrid
you don't even own your stadium
Factos
6
Franco's government forced Barça to change its name, they killed its president, they did not allow them to name their stadium 'Joan Gamper', they did not allow them to sign Di Stéfano and did everything get him to Real Madrid. Still RM thinks Barca was favoured bcoz they won some hard fought La Liga titles.
KurbanBayram
0
Innocent until proven guilty. Until then, y’all can keep your negative theories to yourselves.
Nobody proven it till now and it will never be proven!!!
yourdaddy1
3
💀💀💀💀
yourdaddy1
1
THE REAL GAME STARTS NOW 💀💀
barcaisinmydna
3
we own N*zi Madrid
Braveachiever12
0
The accusers should be the ones to provider evidence, not Barcelona.. What we can do provide as Barcelona is explain our side of the story. it's the accusers that should bring out their evidence of Barcelona bribing refs
AustineJayjnr
3
Innocent until proven guilty. Until then, y’all can keep your negative theories to yourselves.