Racism in Football

[Maxiedge]

Just to brush up on what happened, did Anton Ferdinand admit to saying "Don't call me a ****ing black cunt!", in which to Terry replied sarcastically (the captured video)? OR has John Terry's defence just been that he was saying it sarcastically?

I'm a bit confused.

[Red_Polo]

Totally. Only annoying thing is that Suarez would have been found the same if he went through the system this way.

Absolutely.

it didnt help that suarez admitted he said negrito, as he thought it was perfectly acceptable. he should have had some better advice from the clubs lawyers

Not the point really, it was the inability to evidence context that led to the verdict. Terry admitted to saying '****ing black cunt'. Just claimed it was not an insult much as Suarez was entitled to do with negrito. Although I agree his legal representation appeared pretty ****.

From my admittedly somewhat out of date experience, you can, and it happens every day. I did work experience with a criminal law chambers and it really opened my eyes.

Obviously I didn't mean it was physically impossible just referring to the correct standard.

You should post about your experiences, would be interesting to hear.

[DaveMc68]

Guilty or not, he still had to stand up in court and tell them that his ma loves the scouse cock.

[Boogs]

Guilty or not, he still had to stand up in court and tell them that his ma loves the scouse cock.

And he had to say, please, 4 times

[spud_gun]

Nail on the head I think

We're all hypocrits if we think it's ok to find someone guilty when there's reasonable doubt (there just about was here). We all were up in arms that Suarez wasn't afforded the same benefit of the doubt.

Even if it is John Terry

[Red_Polo]

Just to brush up on what happened, did Anton Ferdinand admit to saying "Don't call me a ****ing black cunt!", in which to Terry replied sarcastically (the captured video)? OR has John Terry's defence just been that he was saying it sarcastically?

I'm a bit confused.

No, AF says he never accused him. JT says he thought he had and was responding to that. Magistrate said they believed AF or found him credible, but there was no evidence heard to directly refute the claim JT was repeating back something he felt he had been accused of. Therefore doubt, not guilty verdict.

[Alex]

Nail on the head I think

We're all hypocrits if we think it's ok to find someone guilty when there's reasonable doubt (there just about was here). We all were up in arms that Suarez wasn't afforded the same benefit of the doubt.

Even if it is John Terry

Your bang on mate. We're not all Hypocrites though....just most of us

[Maxiedge]

No, AF says he never accused him. JT says he thought he had and was responding to that. Magistrate said they believed AF or found him credible, but there was no evidence heard to directly refute the claim JT was repeating back something he felt he had been accused of. Therefore doubt, not guilty verdict.

wow, just wow. Are we seeing something similar here to the creation of the 'Chewbacca defence' whereby you can 'think' you heard something and respond to it accordingly. Amazing.

[Kenneth]

@RP. I'm on my phone at the moment, but most of the cases I came across were assault, criminal damage and drugs charges. The worst one I remember was a lad who was about 19 (same age as me at the time) who had been referred to the crown court for possession with intend to supply offenses and found guiltly on the basis of testimony from two other lads who had been arrested in possession who gave him as the source, and the fact that they found £150 in cash in his house. No drugs, no paraphernalia etc. I was convinced he'd been set up by the two of them.

[Red_Polo]

wow, just wow. Are we seeing something similar here to the creation of the 'Chewbacca defence' whereby you can 'think' you heard something and respond to it accordingly. Amazing.

It's neither impossible nor implausible though. Have you never misheard someone? Unlikely things happen every day, it would be a pretty **** justice system that laughed in the face of the unlikely without interrogation.

@RP. I'm on my phone at the moment, but most of the cases I came across were assault, criminal damage and drugs charges. The worst one I remember was a lad who was about 19 who had been referred to the crown court for possession with intend to supply offenses and found guiltly on the basis of testimony from two other lads who had been arrested in possession who gave him as the source, and the fact that they found £150 in cash in his house. No drugs, no paraphernalia etc. I was convinced he'd been set up by the two of them.

Wow that sounds pretty ****ed up.

[Pablo]

Alan Sutton @Alsutt1979
Tell you what isn't beyond reasonable doubt. That John Terry is a cunt

[Red_Polo]

Brilliant

[Nick77]

There is no way in hell the FA will punish him - the xenophobic **** coming from the FA for years will see to that. See Rafa & Suarez as just 2 examples, it's disgraceful but nothing will happen...

[Maxiedge]

It's neither impossible nor implausible though. Have you never misheard someone? Unlikely things happen every day, it would be a pretty **** justice system that laughed in the face of the unlikely without interrogation.
.

What did you call me??!?!

[Red_Polo]

What did you call me??!?!