Suárez vs Terry.

[goodspam]

To keep the topic of Suarez entering the Terry thread....

Also, could someone please remind me why there were two on field incidents of (alleged) racism, that took two different paths - one to a FA hearing and the other to criminal court.
I recall that this was explained in the Suarez thread, however I cannot remember and can't be arsed reading through that long thread.
I’m sure someone can provide a succinct explanation.
Thanks in advance!

 

[Fabio]

Suarez there was no concrete evidence, only viewpoints

Terry has concrete evidence showing him saying it. The query is why he said it

 

[Mamma Mia]

Should this be two separate threads?

 

[goodspam]

Should this be two separate threads?

Well, people started to discuss both in the Terry thread and they were asked not to.

 

[goodspam]

Suarez there was no concrete evidence, only viewpoints

Terry has concrete evidence showing him saying it. The query is why he said it

Thanks Fab.

So, in the case of Suarez, why were there no criminal proceedings after the FA hearing found him guilty? Is that because Evra chose not to pursue the matter any further?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

So, in the case of Suarez, why were there no criminal proceedings after the FA hearing found him guilty? Is that because Evra chose not to pursue the matter any further?

No, it's because the case would have been laughed out of court.

 

[Mamma Mia]

Well, people started to discuss both in the Terry thread and they were asked not to.

I mean your original post. Are you allowed to ask two different questions when starting a thread? Seems like asking for trouble to me.

 

[Judge Jules]

Goodspam: no. The authorities could have prosecuted Suarez whether or not Evra pursued the matter, and it would have been their decision one way or the other even if he had, unless he took out a private prosecution off his own bat. There's also no way they could have been unaware of the incident. They clearly didn't think there was any prospect of obtaining a criminal conviction.

 

[goodspam]

Goodspam: no. The authorities could have prosecuted Suarez whether or not Evra pursued the matter, and it would have been their decision one way or the other even if he had, unless he took out a private prosecution off his own bat. There's also no way they could have been unaware of the incident. They clearly didn't think there was any prospect of obtaining a criminal conviction.

OK got it, thanks JJ
So, if Terry is found guilty, then the FA will be forced to give him a suspension similar to Suarez? or not?

 

[Judge Jules]

They would be if they had any principles. Since they couldn't give a flying f'ck about anything except what will benefit them, and since suspending Terry would (some say) harm the England team, they'll do exactly what they did when Shearer kicked Lennon in the head on camera, i.e.sweet FA, if you'll pardon the expression.

 

[El Pistolero]

I'm i right in saying Barton received an additional ban after being convicted. Surely they set a precedent there.

 

[Judge Jules]

If so, then yes, you'd think they had set themselves a precedent there, but I'd bet the Lottery jackpot they'll find some way to wriggle out of following it.

 

[goodspam]

Well it's speculation until the Terry case is over and the FA responds, so we'll wait and see.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

PLEASE NO - do not bring up the Suarez case. It just causes problems. Pleeeeeeeease

 

[themn]

dantes, dantes, dantes, dantes, dantes.........

 

[Jack D Rips]

I thought the difference was that in the Terry case a member of the public reported it to the police. That didnt happen in the Suarez case because no fucker saw it or heard it ( either amongst the 42 thousand at the match or the countless millions watching on tv) ,apart from evra.

 

[Dreambeliever]

It would be pretty strange for the FA not to ban Terry for 8 games after stating that they know Suarez is not a racist but any use of racial slurs regardless of intent warrant a hefty ban.

Time will tell.

 

[goodspam]

PLEASE NO - do not bring up the Suarez case. It just causes problems. Pleeeeeeeease

Sorry boet! I'm not trying to stir the pot - I was honestly confused by the two paths these incidents have taken.

 

[Whaddapie]

I thought the difference was that in the Terry case a member of the public reported it to the police. That didnt happen in the Suarez case because no fucker saw it or heard it ( either amongst the 42 thousand at the match or the countless millions watching on tv) ,apart from evra.

A. I too think that this is the why EBRJT is in court, while LS was not.
B. That's because "it" never happened.

 

[Gerry_A_Trick]

I thought the difference was that in the Terry case a member of the public reported it to the police. That didnt happen in the Suarez case.

Yes, that's the reason.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

Sorry boet! I'm not trying to stir the pot - I was honestly confused by the two paths these incidents have taken.

You don't have to apologize bru - I just am 'scared' of this topic as no thread has caused as much damage to this community as the Suarez one, and maybe it's best to leave it buried. Btw, you should post more.

 

[goodspam]

Lord Ouseley, who was key in launching Kick It Out anti-racism campaign, told ESPN: "I expect the FA to consider the evidence and to decide whether it contravenes the FA's rule and regulations or not.
"I would expect the football regulatory body, that is the FA, to re-commence its disciplinary procedures which were interrupted by the police action and the subsequent court case.
"I believe that John Terry has this final hurdle to get over. We have to wait and see, though, if the FA decides to charge him. What we do know is that the FA has a responsibility to uphold the game."
A statement from the FA said it had "noted the decision in the John Terry case'' and would "now seek to conclude its own inquiries''. It added: "The FA will make no further comment at this time.''
But the BBC presenter and pundit Garth Crooks told the BBC News channel: "This saga is not over for Terry. He's still under investigation by the Football Association based on what he's admitted - saying those words.
"The FA need to decide if he's broken any of their rules: ungentlemanly conduct, bringing the game into disrepute and so on. I'm afraid that for John Terry, this is only half-time. This is not over.
"No-one knows when the FA will do anything, but we have an Olympics round the corner. The world is watching this saga and it's an unedifying spectacle. I'm sure the FA will want to put this to bed before the Olympic Games start."

 

[Portly]

Also, could someone please remind me why there were two on field incidents of (alleged) racism, that took two different paths - one to a FA hearing and the other to criminal court.

Merseyside Police said at the time that they couldn't have charged Suarez with anything, because no complaint had been received from a member of the public.

 

[Molbystwin]

The FA will have to charge him with at the very least ungentlemanly conduct if not bringing the game into disrepute.

I think under a charge of ungentlemanly conduct they must be on a surefire winner, he is after all pure horrible cunt.

They will give him at least a game ban surely....it fucking stinks....

 

[Judge Jules]

Ferdinand should get the same medicine IMO.

 

[mark1975]

John Terry is a cunt.

 

[tombrown]

If Suarez can be banned for calling someone Negrito, despite the fact he said it was a term of endearment, then surely there is only one outcome for JT who called someone a f* black c* and claimed it was sarcasm

 

[Hansern]

They used the same burden of evidence to find Suarez guilty. I think this case wont go away as easy as the FA think. By admitting to saying the words they have to do something. They've already said the intent doesnt matter.

 

[Rosco]

Thanks Fab.

So, in the case of Suarez, why were there no criminal proceedings after the FA hearing found him guilty? Is that because Evra chose not to pursue the matter any further?

Because there was no complaint to the police.

 

[Rosco]

If Suarez can be banned for calling someone Negrito, despite the fact he said it was a term of endearment, then surely there is only one outcome for JT who called someone a f* black c* and claimed it was sarcasm

Why do people still think Suarez said Negrito, when he himself admitted to using Negro ?