Terry charged by the FA

[Judge Jules]

It is true, I'm afraid. Under the FA's rules, merely using a racial term is an offence there and then. That's why Terry's been charged. The fact that those rules are idiotic, and that the FA may ultimately choose to ignore them in cases such as Terry's so they don't look even more stupid, doesn't change the rules themselves.

 

[dantes]

It is true, I'm afraid. Under the FA's rules, merely using a racial term is an offence there and then. That's why Terry's been charged. The fact that those rules are idiotic, and that the FA may ultimately choose to ignore them in cases such as Terry's so they don't look even more stupid, doesn't change the rules themselves.

Why do you have to be a pain? The FA's rules are vague on this which is why they could exploit them to fuck Suarez. From that dumb document this is what they say:

In deciding whether there has been a breach of Rule E3, it is necessary to ask what has to
be proved in order to establish a breach. In particular, is it sufficient to prove that in a case
such as this, the words or behaviour are objectively speaking abusive or insulting in the
judgment of the Commission (the objective test)? Or is it necessary to go further and prove
that, in addition to the words or behaviour being abusive or insulting, the alleged offender
subjectively intended them to be abusive or insulting (the subjective test)? The Commission
invited the parties to address it on this particular issue.

Note the words "objectively speaking". So a bit later on after our solicitor acted like a bitch and conceded everything he possibly could to them, this is what they say:

In our judgment, the test for breach of Rule E3(1) is objective. The question is simply
whether the words or behaviour are abusive or insulting. This is a matter for the
Commission to decide, having regard to all the relevant facts and circumstances of the
case. It is not necessary that the alleged offender intends his words or behaviour to be
abusive or insulting in order for him to breach Rule E3(1). There are a number of reasons
which lead us to this conclusion.

Their sarcastic use of italics would have been enough for me to bring the FA to an end if I was the one being charged. Anyway, they used that special needs translator to falsely claim that "negro" is objectively speaking an insult. For Terry, he was speaking in plain English. The FA have no bullshit translation to come to their rescue this time. What he said was objectively speaking not an insult. So their charge is ridiculously thick. The only way the FA can fuck Terry is if they claim his entire defence is a lie, and that everyone else involved in the police investigation and at Westminster Magistrates' Court were too stupid to notice this lie. Poor the FA.

 

[Rosco]

The judge in the trial said Terry's version of events was highly unlikely to be true, but since there was no other contradictory witness evidence he had to accept it.

That may not be the case here

 

[dantes]

The judge in the trial said Terry's version of events was highly unlikely to be true, but since there was no other contradictory witness evidence he had to accept it.

That may not be the case here

You're an even bigger pain. The Judge was talking about it being highly unlikely that Anton Ferdinand had accused Terry of using the words in the first place. But that is irrelevant. Given that Ferdinand was saying something at the time (which we spoke about the other day of him being a coward and not admitting what he said), and given the crowd noise, the fact players are mentally tired at the end of the game, the fact Terry is getting old and his hearing is fading, all of those things meant the judge was more than happy to believe Terry could genuinely have misunderstood what Ferdinand was shouting.

The FA have to show outright that Terry was probably lying. You know, by using those stupid tests about his demeanor being funny, or his credibility as a witness, the consistency of his evidence, the probability of his account being true, etc. Good luck with that.

 

[Jack D Rips]

Rio's been charged for being a twat on twitter

 

[dantes]

One of the things the judge was too stupid to understand is that he gave John Terry credit for putting his defense out there before he'd seen the footage. And thought that was a high risk strategy. Bullshit. Terry would know his words were for example "You fucking black cunt! You fucking Knobhead". And had that been proven by lip readers, his contigency would be to say that is was still a question, as in "You fucking black cunt??!!!??? You fucking knobhead", which is possible the way people use English. But the judge doesn't know how to put himself in his shoes and think two or three steps ahead like that.

 

[Skullflower]

rio is such a fucking choc ice.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

rio is such a fucking choc ice.

i bet you can't get this into 10 threads by night's end ... so far, 2 ... good luck oh wise one.

 

[Skullflower]

you're a fucking choc ice, dude.

 

[LeTallecWiz]

You're still stuck at 2 though that wasn't bad ...