I hoped chelsea wouldn't be involved in abuse scandal but feared the worst...tonight'S headlines that an ex-head scout from the 70s abused someone at the club is bad enough...but if it's true we paid the victim money to keep quiet when they came forward a few years ago, makes me a little sick to be honest...can only hope it's bs somehow

When I read the initial articles about a premier league club being involved I immediately thought s**t I hope that wasn't us. The people who made that decision if true are probably long gone from the club but still puts us in a awful light.

 

Edit....I just read that they say the money was paid two years ago. If true, well s**t

Edited November 30, 20169 yr by Kev123

The club have hired a law firm to investigate an individual who worked with the club in the 70s

Christ I hope nothing comes of this, this would be horrendous

Paid off two years ago??? f**k me....brace yourselves. This is going to be horrific.

I won't jump to any conclusions. As we all know, plenty of false, misleading, and/or incomplete information gets disseminated. However, I'm worried that the club has not denied paying hush money. 

The club has a lot of questions to answer. I hope they know that by staying silent (except when confidentiality is legally or ethically required), it looks worse for them and is a disservice to efforts to combat sexual abuse in football. 

According to the Telegraph, the alleged victim also contacted the police. They have a lot to answer too. 

I'm confident the details will come out. Presumably - perhaps this is a false presumption - the club investigated the claim. That means many people would have been interviewed or otherwise known about the investigation. Someone will say something. 

Edited November 30, 20169 yr by offside

Good grief this is all we need, another scandal to fuel the abuse from opposition fans.

I just hope and pray we did nothing wrong as a club and acted with integrity.

2 hours ago, 1905 said:

Good grief this is all we need, another scandal to fuel the abuse from opposition fans.

I just hope and pray we did nothing wrong as a club and acted with integrity.

Not many fans are going to be able to hurl abuse, it's a wide spread thing with a lot of clubs involved. 

F.ck it, this could be really, really bad for the club.

Well it's been a couple of years since we had a scandal that made us look awful, was bound to be us.

 

This looks bad...

I just hope it doesn't affect us on the pitch. We're in great form and the mood around the club of late has been great, the last thing we need is a big scandal marring the hard work Antonio & the players have done of late.

 JT and Bridge

JT and Anton

Paris Train Incident 

José and Eva

Now this. F#$k sake every year another story drags us through the mud.

i hope it's not someone with a grudge against the club. i feel for the genuine abuse victims, but you always get the occasional chancer with a vendetta. if it is true, i just hope it wasn't roman who was personally involved in seeing that this person was hushed up

I hope nobody on here is only affected by this story because its US. It is a disgusting story whoever it involves. Some people on here posting comments like "I really hoped it wasn't us"... Why does it matter who it is? Whichever club/people it was are disgusting and it is unforgivable. I'm sure that's not how people intend those comments but it comes across as people more worried about our reputation as a club rather than the hideous events that have happened and the fact that justice needs to be served no matter which club or people are involved.

This is about more than club rivalries, about more than football. It's about justice. And if people at Chelsea are guilty of some of these stories then I hope they are hit hard and punished for their disgusting and immoral actions.

Well obviously this is an utterly horrible situation for all involved and all associated with the club. Should the allegations be false it is still horrible that someone would want to smear us with this. Obviously I hope that the story is untrue (although I fear the worst), not just to protect the club's image, but more importantly, to know that no one had to suffer through what can only be impossibly foul abuse.

It's worth bearing in mind, love for the club aside, that the most important thing here is that the truth be discovered, the welfare of our young players and all young players in football be ascertained, and that justice (if necessary) be served.

Didn't the article say it had been reported to the met police as well? Would a hush payment to the victim then stop them investigating?

I'm confused where the club stands from a legal perspective. Was anything illegal done? Or just incredibly shady? Or are these kind of payments fairly common?

 

Obviously from a moral point of view it's awful if true, but what they could have done about it differently? If it had already been reported to the police, is there anything the club could actually have done to help the investigation, since it happened so long ago?

 

I don't know anything about the legalities, so it seems to me that the club just had a choice of protect their own image and name and hush it up, or let it go public and be dragged through the mud, which is happening anyway and much worse now since they tried to hush it up. Of course if they'd let it go public, it may have helped others to come forward sooner, not that they were to know that. But then there is also the possibility that the accusations were untrue and they just wanted them to go away.

 

Will just have to wait and see how all this goes. But I think it's safe to say that if anyone involved in the hush up is still at the club, they should be removed. Though it depends how high up it goes. If the board knew about it, can you really get rid of all of them? They'd have to get rid of themselves.

 

All very messy and yet another stain on the club. Why can't we just be a nice, quiet club.

^ Paging @youlots

You just knew we'd be dragged into this mess somehow. 

Jesus

Shame the thousands of kids involved in the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal didn't get this kind of wall to wall coverage by the media.

And now thousands of kids gone missing say Barnardos, but even this story got pushed down on the BBC agenda in favour of the football sexual abuse victims.

 

You've only got to look north of the border to see instances of fans bringing stuff like this up on the terraces to score points. I'd be inclined to expect the worst from opposition fans here. Think Adam Johnson x 10 if it drags on.

This is really what the club needed after our recent revival more bad press. I feel the media spends all their time digging stuff about Chelsea (not talking about this case) but in general. Hope the clubs clear our name and hopefully it is false allegations.  

3 hours ago, Remodez said:

Not many fans are going to be able to hurl abuse, it's a wide spread thing with a lot of clubs involved. 

This goes beyond the abuse itself - which is bad enough. But we are alledged to have paid off a victim, recently too. 

Unfortunate this happened it sickens me to my stomach that this when on and i am sue it happened all over the country. This country has a sicken history of child abuse which has been hidden and covered up by the elite and the old boys club.

happens in all sectors i am sure. police service across the country have likely done stuff, the same for churches, the same with hospitals etc, etc. all these people/services regarded as higher morally have dark histories without a doubt, whether it be hidden or not. 

 

5 hours ago, enigma said:

i hope it's not someone with a grudge against the club. i feel for the genuine abuse victims, but you always get the occasional chancer with a vendetta. if it is true, i just hope it wasn't roman who was personally involved in seeing that this person was hushed up

 

5 hours ago, Zeta Orionis said:

Didn't the article say it had been reported to the met police as well? Would a hush payment to the victim then stop them investigating?

I'm confused where the club stands from a legal perspective. Was anything illegal done? Or just incredibly shady? Or are these kind of payments fairly common?

 

Obviously from a moral point of view it's awful if true, but what they could have done about it differently? If it had already been reported to the police, is there anything the club could actually have done to help the investigation, since it happened so long ago?

 

I don't know anything about the legalities, so it seems to me that the club just had a choice of protect their own image and name and hush it up, or let it go public and be dragged through the mud, which is happening anyway and much worse now since they tried to hush it up. Of course if they'd let it go public, it may have helped others to come forward sooner, not that they were to know that. But then there is also the possibility that the accusations were untrue and they just wanted them to go away.

 

Will just have to wait and see how all this goes. But I think it's safe to say that if anyone involved in the hush up is still at the club, they should be removed. Though it depends how high up it goes. If the board knew about it, can you really get rid of all of them? They'd have to get rid of themselves.

 

All very messy and yet another stain on the club. Why can't we just be a nice, quiet club.

 

This is what the Telegraph said:

The alleged victim was paid off after threatening to go public with claims he was sexually assaulted in the 1970s by Eddie Heath, Chelsea’s influential chief scout for more than a decade.

The payment, made in the past three years, was agreed on condition that the victim, his family and lawyers were banned from talking about the alleged abuse.

The confidentiality agreement is so stringent, the parties involved in the case are not even allowed to acknowledge its existence. But after being approached by The Telegraph, which first disclosed that a payment had been made by a Premier League side, Chelsea issued a statement on Tuesday night confirming it had “retained” an outside law firm to carry out a full investigation concerning an individual employed by the club in the 1970s, who is now deceased.

The club, owned by the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, did not deny the claim that they had paid Heath’s accuser and settled the case. It is not known at what level the payment was authorised. The Telegraph has learnt that the victim took his allegation to Chelsea about three years ago, emboldened by the publicity over the unmasking of Jimmy Savile as a serial paedophile. He had also taken his complaint to the Metropolitan Police.

It is understood the club initially rebuffed the claim, but decided to make a payment when the victim threatened to make the allegations public. It is understood the club did not accept liability.

Heath, who had died before the allegation was made and was therefore unable to defend himself, was Chelsea’s chief scout from 1968 to 1979 and discovered some of the club’s greatest players, including Ray Wilkins.

A source has told The Telegraph: “He [the alleged victim] thought there were more [victims] but it was never publicised and the case settled. These were very serious offences.” 

In an official statement published on Chelsea’s website on Tuesday night, the club said: “Chelsea Football Club has retained an external law firm to carry out an investigation concerning an individual employed by the club in the 1970s, who is now deceased. The club has also contacted the FA to ensure that all possible assistance is provided as part of their wider investigation. This will include providing the FA with any relevant information arising out of the club’s investigation.

“While the club’s investigation is ongoing, we will make no further comment on this matter.” 

The Telegraph is not aware of any evidence corroborating the claim made against Heath by his accuser, although rumours of the chief scout’s alleged behaviour had been circulating among some of Chelsea’s former players.

 

A lot is unknown, and I don't think we should read too much into the Telegraph's choice of words. For example, when they talk about the alleged victim threatening to go public, we shouldn't conclude that this means he approached the club and was like, "Pay me or else I'll drag your name through the mud". Of course it could have meant that, but it also could have meant that the he told the club, the club said we don't care, then he said okay I'll tell the press and that will force you to investigate, and the club were like no no we believe you, take this money and shut up. 

We simply don't know, and the Telegraph probably doesn't either. 

I'm particularly curious about the role of the Metropolitan Police and what they did/didn't do.