No slur intended on Rabbitoh legends
Stapleton, John. The Australian [Canberra, A.C.T] 20 Feb 2009: 7.
Show highlighting
Abstract
When he took the stage at Homebush Bay in 2006 to speak on behalf of the “no” vote, Mr [Tony Papaconstuntinos] found himself being jeered by members of the crowd as “slippery fingers Papa” and a “crook”.
Mr Holmes a Court, who remains a shareholder and director of the club, denied he had tried to enlist people who were active on various internet forums against the “no” vote during a dinner at his home “to do his dirty work” or to “stir the pot”.
“Any denigration of these people from any one on our side of the vote might be falsely interpreted that [Russell Crowe] or I held those views,” he said. “It did not help us when anyone said something bad about legends of the club.”
Full Text
IT was never the intention of multi-millionaire Peter Holmes a Court or Hollywood star Russell Crowe to denigrate the legends of rugby league in their battle to take control of South Sydney’s famous football club.
Mr Holmes a Court spent yesterday afternoon in the witness box defending himself against a defamation case arising from the heated exchanges that took place prior to their purchase of the club in 2006. The two men have since poured millions into the Rabbitohs in an attempt to revive their fortunes.
Union figure Tony Papaconstuntinos is suing Mr Holmes a Court for alleged defamation.
When he took the stage at Homebush Bay in 2006 to speak on behalf of the “no” vote, Mr Papaconstuntinos found himself being jeered by members of thecrowd as “slippery fingers Papa” and a “crook”.
Mr Holmes a Court wrote a letter to the NSW Secretary of the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union, Andrew Ferguson, alleging that Mr Papaconstuntinos had used the position of his son Jamie Papa to channel club funds to him and the CFMEU.
Mr Papaconstuntinos has told the NSW Supreme Court he was hurt and angered by the unfounded allegations.
Yesterday, Mr Holmes a Court told the NSW Supreme Court during the process he had been left scratching his head to understand why people were spending so much time and money opposing moves he saw as beneficial to the club. He became concerned about aspects of the club’s management and finances.
“I thought they were trying to stop me getting control so I could get to the bottom of this,” hesaid.
Mr Holmes a Court, who remains a shareholder and director of the club, denied he had tried to enlist people who were active on various internet forums against the “no” vote during a dinner at his home “to do his dirty work” or to “stir the pot”.
Mr Holmes a Court said some members of the “no” group were highly regarded in the rugby league community.
“Any denigration of these people from any one on our side of the vote might be falsely interpreted that Russell or I held those views,” he said. “It did not help us when anyone said something bad about legends of the club.”
The case will resume this morning.
Credit: John Stapleton