• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

JT - Captain. Leader. Legend. Qunt

The Judge said there was not enough evidence to convict. The fact that Terry claims to be repeating what Ferdinand said to him cannot be disproved as there is no footage evidence or witness. That's why he's not guilty.
 
Terry got off because the defence introduced an element of doubt into proceedings. If there is any doubt at all then they will acquit.

In my mind there is no doubt he insulted Ferdinand as the alternative version is so implausible as to be funny. Good defense lawyers can argue black is white (;)) is the moral of this story.

Crooks has penned a good piece on the Guardian website here.
 
Huddy said:
The Judge said there was not enough evidence to convict. The fact that Terry claims to be repeating what Ferdinand said to him cannot be disproved as there is no footage evidence or witness. That's why he's not guilty.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, and agree that it's justice being served, because this is what stops many innocent people getting convicted. There has to be complete proof.

But in that case should it have really gone to court? Maybe it did serve it's purpose in terms of highlighting the racism issue...but then all it seems to have done is levelled more abuse at the Ferdinand brothers by pond-life Chelsea scum, and since he was found not guilty anyway it sort of makes even that endeavor pretty pointless.
 
This is the exact phrase the Judge read out in Court:


"The issue for the court is not to decide whether Mr Terry is a racist - I have received unchallenged evidence, he is NOT"
 
SPURS said:
On sky news, they put up an excert from the Judgement where the judge says of Terry, He is not racist. I've just seen it.
Click to expand...

Do you mean this quote from the written judgement?

It may be worth mentioning here that the issue for this court to decide is not
whether Mr Terry is a racist, in the broadest sense of the word. I have received
a substantial volume of unchallenged evidence from witnesses, both in person
and in writing, to confirm that he is not. I understand why Mr Terry wants to
make this point. His reputation is at stake. Although I am grateful to all those
witnesses who have taken the trouble to provide information on this point, it
does not help me in reaching a verdict. It is not relevant to the issue I must
decide.
Click to expand...

You can read the full judgement here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/13_07_12_r_v_john_terry.pdf
 
"I said to him: 'How can you call me a c**t? You shagged your team-mate's missus, you're a c**t!'" - Anton Ferdinand gives an example of the kind of Wildean quips and bon mots exchanged by footballers in the heat of battle.
Click to expand...
Barney Ronay
 
SPURS said:
This is the exact phrase the Judge read out in Court:


"The issue for the court is not to decide whether Mr Terry is a racist - I have received unchallenged evidence, he is NOT"
Click to expand...

That was not the judge's ruling, that was the judge saying that he received evidence from witnesses (Terry's mates etc) saying that he is NOT. Did you even read the part where the judge said 'The issue for the court is not to decide wither Terry is a racist' ?
 
Jo ‏@joe0005
#Spurs good news: several really good signings,exciting new manager, cool new kit #Chelsea good news: you can't prove our captain is racist

:D
 
How about letting us all see what he said on the pitch without pixelating his mouth? Then get a lip reading expert to tell us word for word what was said.
 
Roy1983 said:
Is the judge a Chelsea fan? Laughable end to a not so laughable case.
Click to expand...

and Jury....

nqzsw5.png
 
In Scotland there is a 3rd option, not proven. Guilty, not guilty, not proven.

In this case, surely, it would have been a not proven. The aquittal is based on doubt over the intent, no one denies he said the words.

None of this will change the views of hundreds of thousands of away fans next season.

Personally I feel Terry is very lucky here.
 
Spurs7891 said:
Suarez should sue the English FA for this. He got banned 8 matches while Terry goes free. How is that ? They conveniently postponed Terry's trial to let him complete PL matches and play in Euro2012. In contrast Suarez got humiliated all around.
Click to expand...

But didn't Suarez admit that he called Evra negrito? He just claimed that negrito wasn't a racist term but the FA disagreed
 
Wriggly said:
Like Terry, you obviously didn't mean that as an insult, so your good to carry on.......
Click to expand...

Of course I didn't... I was merely 'repeating what I thought i'd heard' at pretty much EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE GROUND THAT CHELSEA HAPPEN TO BE PLAYING AT!!!
 
josferatu said:
But didn't Suarez admit that he called Evra negrito? He just claimed that negrito wasn't a racist term but the FA disagreed
Click to expand...

...and Terry admitted he'd SAID the words "you fudging black ****" ...but as he was merely repeating what he thought he'd heard, it doesn't count!

here's an idea... if EVERY PLAYER next season says "John Terry's a fudging ****", he'll be OBLIGED to repeat those words again and again, EVERY time he hears them, to tie in with his story...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back