Myths of the Rangers FTT Result – An Occasional Series – Part 1 – Dr Poon’s Dissent

The Rangers saga will make a number of exceptional case studies, covering numerous areas of law, together with PR, journalism, and even some football!

The comments which have flowed like lava from Krakatoa (which is west of Java, despite the film title) since the declaration of the FTT result are a fine example of the way in which people, on the Internet and in the media, fit the facts into their own narrative, rather than the other way about.

It is a human trait to do so, and I am sure I have been guilty of it myself.

One area of comment I have seen popping up over the last couple of days relates to the dissenting opinion from Dr Heidi Poon, and the status of that opinion.

The narrative which is being pushed and indeed is being believed runs as follows.

• The dissenting opinion was only published in an appendix and therefore is not part of the decision.
• It is therefore of no importance in the case and can be disregarded.
• The majority opinion ignored what Dr Poon had to say because her decision was in some way nonsensical and not worthy of analysis.
• Dr Poon is not a lawyer and therefore her opinion can be ignored because the two lawyers on the panel reached a different conclusion.