John Higgins, snooker player, allegedly agreed to take a bribe

[Saltire]

here

i'm a bit at this. he always seemed to be quite down to earth. he has now been suspended.

It's being reported as "The news of the world recorded him", not "the news of the world have been given footage".
Which means they knew the alleged incident was taking place. But why target him - did they ahve info about him? or becuase he's World number 1?

Obviously it was Sue who set up the meeting.

NOTW is famous for stitch-ups and false stories and have been sued for libel many times.

Anyone who has had the displeasure of working in the corrupt, lawless and mafia/gang controlled Kiev will know how easily it is to be intimidated, and how a wealthy snooker player who has been duped into a meeting with what he believes are Russian gangsters would, as we all would, say anything to placate the chaps and then get the hell out of the country.

I know that in my one trip there I was threatened twice by people with weapons and in my work environment (a music festival) several violent incidents were reported.

The News Of The World took full advantage of this environment of fear to stitch up two great ambassadors of the sport, and to ruin their reputations and careers, simply in order to sell a few newspapers.

Please support the John Higgins Is Innocent Facebook page at:
www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=123232651021955

I was surprised that none of the snooker players seem to ahve come to Higgins defence.

I think he's been set up and I think he's handled it worngly - he should have immendiately informed snooker's governing body what had happened. Still cna't understand why they picked him though

The other players can't be seen to be defending him, they will fall foul of the governing body. There is a conspiracy of silence, and hardly anything has been said about it on the BBC throughout the whole World Championship.

John Parrott and Jimmy White have joined the John Higgins Is Innocent facebook page .

I agree he should have gone straight to Barry Hearn as soon as he got home. I guess he did not know he was being filmed, and he thought if he never spoke to the gangsters again or return to the Ukraine he would just be able to forget it ever happened.

I suppose would have kept silent, rather than spark an investigation and possibly a police investigation. I would have feared for my life, going up against Russian mafia.

Pretty obvious he's guily with me.

His manager set up the trip - after several UK based meetings. If you fear for your life at the hands of some Russain Mafia - you don't fly out to their country to meet them do you?

Guilty for me.Higgins has been friends with Barry Hearn for 20yrs..you'd think he might have mentioned the events in Kiev to him on his return.

Nancy... they did not think they were meeting Russian Mafia. They thought they were meeting executives from a major Russian investment company, looking to sponsor some snooker tournaments.

It was only when they were driven to the meeting that they realised they had been duped, although they genuinely thought (they were told this by the NOTW scum posing as mafia) they had been tricked into meeting with mafia heavies.

Higgins and Mooney had been in discussions with a FAKE Russian investment company set up by the NOTW, who had spent some time and effort grooming the two for the sting.

The full story is detailed here:

www.sportingintelligence.com/2010/05/03/revealed-the-tal-behind-the-snooker-sting-th at-leaves-higgins-in-the-fight-of-his-life-030501/

And the NOTW's fake company website, which seems to be part of a very elaborate web of lies, appears here:

www.alfa-equity.com

Imagine you've been fooled that badly, and suddenly you think you're up to your neck in Mafia-run nonsense. Again, you'd say anything.

And let's be frank, and ask ourselves, is this journalism? Is this a paper revealing something that has happened or actually creating something from scratch, using public figures like puppets to sell their papers?

The Russian Mafia has branches worldwide. Would you want to return to the UK and alert the authorities about what happened, provoking an investigation and angering some of the baddest bad-ass people on the planet? No. You'd go home, shitting yourself with fear and not tell a soul.

But again - why him? I mean he's not known for flashing the cash, or for having a wild life etc. If it had said "ROnnie O Sullivan has been caught on film" then, frankly, I wouldn't have been surprised (although I would still not believe it of him either) as he is more popular,in the media a bit more etc. The NOTW seem to have gone to a hell of alot of time and trouble and expense to set this up, but why?

Also, barry Hearn isn't , IMO doing Higgins any good with his comments to papers/BBC etc

Why Higgins? I would say they took a gamble that he's not nearly as street-wise as someone like O'Sullivan, and therefore less likely to smell a rat. Ronnie would have just told the "Russians" to fuck off.

More likely, they decided it was a very good chance Higgins was going to play in the final, and they released the story just before the final. Now if that little gamble had come off, they would have had the biggest story in sport, a real "scoop".

They should have gone for Robertson. He needed the money. Could have flown his mum out business class and all. Bless.

Oh please. Does he look scared and worried on the video - hardly.

The man deserves an oscar if that's how he can act when scared by the mafia.

Sorry for repeating a post I just made on AIBU... but it feel it sheds more light on this subject. In answer to Saltire, "Why Higgins", it appears there is much to be gained by setting up the destruction of the world champion's career.

Barry Hearn is the Chairman of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association, which has a deal with Sky to broadcast the tournaments

Higgins and manager Pat Mooney had been setting up a rival competition, to be broadcast on Eurosport.

James Murdoch is chairman of Sky and is in bed with Hearn.

Murdoch also runs, and in fact, works out of the same building as NOTW, as Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation owns both Sky and NOTW, and as we know, The Sun and The Times, which dutifully reported all this fiction as fact.

Higgins and Mooney had to be destroyed so that Murdoch and Hearn had a monopoly on broadcasting snooker.

And although this stinks worse than any stitch-up in the tabloid media in recent times, the so-called free press of the UK have simply repeated the news from NOTW and the AP wire that this is a "match-fixing scandal". There is no scandal. No matches were fixed. Nothing happened!

In all other match-fixing scandals where there has been a shred of evidence, Scotland Yard has been brought in, a proper police investigation has ensued, and players have been arrested and questioned.

Higgins has not been questioned by police, as there are no questions to answer!

It is telling that the only investigation is being held by a FORMER police officer, under the instruction of Hearn.

Please people, don't be so gullible as to believe this deliberate destruction of a glittering career. It is interesting that a few very wealthy men stand to gain a lot of money from all of this.

The facebook page has a lot more discussion on this subject, and over one thousand members now.

www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=123232651021955

He didn't commit a crime - he just agreed to commit one.

Snobear I used to work at the News of the World - i admire your detective work and conspiracy theories but it really doesn't work that way believe me.

Besides, don't the BBC already own the only snooker tournament with any clout? not sky?

Hi Nancy66. It's exciting to meet someone who worked at NOTW.

For the record, BBC have coverage rights to two or three ranking tournaments and the Masters. Eurosport have similar coverage for the remaining ranking tournaments, and the World Series. However, Barry Hearn is currently negotiating with BSkyB to cover the snooker, as it has for the Darts.

Tell me, during your tenure at NOTW, were you involved in any illegal wire-tapping of celebrity telephones?

Were you involved in data-hacking of the Royal Family?

Did you have anything to do with engineering the "plot" to kidnap Victoria Beckham?

No, I suspect you were not involved in these practices, as your former colleague Mazher Mahmood was responsible for loads of these fairy-tale stories, which have so far led to the imprisonment of over 100 (many innocent, I am sure) people.

The same Mazher Mahmood who is responsible for "breaking" this non-story about Higgins.

I am happy for you that you have left the paper and hope that you have found employment somewhere that allows a person to sleep better at night.

You really are very badly misinformed Snobear.

No celebrity phones were ever tapped and there was no data hacking of the royal family - I think what you're referring to is the tapping into voicemail messages on mobile phones.

If you can think of a 100 innocent people that have been imprisoned because of news of the world investigations i'd love you to name them - just half will do.

You are talking about something you know nothing about - i'm talking about something i know everything about.

You don't like the paper - that's fine, lots of people don't. But if you just write complete made up bollocks about them aren't you guilty of the very thing you're accusing them of?

You obviously like Higgins, fair enough. But he's guilty. they didn't just randomly pick on him - he has had a reputation for being dishonest and placing dodgy bets for a long time. He was targetted for a reason

I am pmsl at the conspiracy theories on this thread.

The man agreed to fix frames. Whether he agreed to do it for the mafia or an under cover journalist is irelevant - what is relevant is the fact he agreed to do it.

I detest the news of the world (I was in it once! ,) and while it can certainly be argued that they have been guilty of using some less than honest tactics to obtain their stories, the fact remains that if someone agrees to commit a crime it matters not whether it was to a journo or a criminal - the intent is the same. The only thing that's unfortunate is that he is clearly too greedy to realize he was being set up. Tosser.

I must admit I was disappointed by the latest revelations in NOTW. I was not looking forward to it, in fact I feared that they had been holding back something that would blow this thing wide open proving Higgins' guilt and making fools of his supporters.

It was with some relief that I read this weekend that the further revelations were that an un-named person at Ladbrokes claimed Higgins phoned to make a £1k bet on himself to lose, during the world championship final.

Firstly, in order to believe this story, we need the identity of the informant. Secondly, we need to be sure that it was Higgins on the phone. Could NOTW have made the call? Had NOTW bribed or blackmailed the informant? Is there any evidence to substantiate these allegations?

Was any bet made? Of course not.

It's not easy to believe flimsy allegations such as this, from a paper who had to pay £60,000 in damages to Max Mosley, after they bribed a prostitute to reveal details of private sex sessions which were entirely legal and without incident.

This sleazy paper can not sell copies without scintillating scandals, which is a shame as there are so many proper decent scandals to report, political, in business and in the workplace, and so many instances of exploitation around the world that they could easily fill the pages with.

Instead they just pay prozzers and drug dealers to set up sports figures and business people to make them look bad because their low IQ readers just want to read about celebs and not the real world.

god, you really are grasping at straws now.

The Ladbrokes employee wasn't named because he would lose his job. but he swore an affidavit in front of lawyers - so he exists and stands by his story.

You think the news of the world planned this over a year ago - hacked into his Ladbroke's account and illegally used his credit cards without anybody noticing? Get real. Your man is guilty.

do you honestly think the paper would invent a story that libelled somebody with power/money and just chance their arm by printing it?

Every story is gone through with a fine tooth comb by a lawyer. there are plenty that don't make it to print - the ones that do are usually backed up with hard, firm, evidence.

The Max Mosley payout was because he successfully argued that the story wasn't in the public interest - not because it was untrue. they didn't bribe anyone - she sold her story, it's how it works.

"You think the news of the world planned this over a year ago - hacked into his Ladbroke's account and illegally used his credit cards without anybody noticing?"

Yes I do.

"do you honestly think the paper would invent a story that libelled somebody with power/money and just chance their arm by printing it?"

Yes I do.

Of course NOTW would go to such extraordinary lengths. They set up an elaborate fake Russian company's website. They paid for Higgins and Mooney to be flown out to Kiev. They had actors meeting them there. It's all detailed in this article here: www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/may/10/newsoftheworld-snooker

The sting took months of planning and cost thousands of pounds. This horrid tale of entrapment will be blown wide open, my friend.

what a pile of crap.

SB do you know the whereabouts of Lord Lucan and Shergar too?

Thanks for your informed and well-articulated argument, wannaBe. Such discussion is always welcome....

........

....... not.

I shall not be so dismissive of Nancy66, regardless of the mild level of vitriol between us, because at least your posts have raised this debate above "I fink he done it", or "But he's got millions of quid so why would he do it".

NOTW went to extraordinary lengths to create this story, and some people will think this kind of entrapment is good journalism, others will disagree. Many people have dismissed Higgins' argument that they were in a state of shock and fear and were trying to say whatever they could to appear agreeable, so as to get out of the meeting and go home. Some, such as myself, who have spent time in the Ukraine, find this plausible.

Clearly nancy66, we have little hope of convincing each other to change our minds on this subject. So we'll have to agree to disagree. I would rather argue the toss with you than put up with simplistic arguments or insults from Wannabe or MorrisZapp and the like.

I agree that the NOW went to elaborate lengths - because the days of Maz being able to stick a tea towel on his head and con a VIP are (alas!) long gone.

Yes it was entrapment but you can't trap someone that doesn't accept the bait.

Higgins story doesn't add up: he was scared for his life - oh but he went along to the meeting anyway, he was scared for his life - but he accepted their cash offer, he was cared for his life...but he never went to the police.

all a bit convenient isn't it?

Hello people. The story continues with some interesting critique of the original NOTW story here:

www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/may/18/newsoftheworld-john-higgins

And in fact, the tide of public opinion seems to be turning, as comments below the original story appear to be now, in the majority, supporting Higgins and questioning the validity of the entrapment, and indeed, the public interest.