The Suarez/Evra Racism Row

[Jack D Rips]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Rosco link=topic=48021.msg1453745#msg1453745 date=1325444475]
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453736#msg1453736 date=1325442926]
Im up to paragraph 70 so far. One of the things that surprises me is that, apparently, we agreed to a verdict based on probability. Why the fuck would we do that?
[/quote]

Because all civil law matters are decided on the basis of the balance of probabilities. There is absolutely nothing unusual about it.
[/quote]

This is clearly total bollox. It states clearly that all parties agreed to probability. Therefore I would suggest to you tht we DIDNT have to agree to it.

And has been pointed out numerous times in the report this is not about civil law. e.g. subjective and objective intent

 

[Atlas]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

If all parties agreed to probability why are we sti concerned about the fact they used probability?

Re evra he has a track record at least Chelsea groundsman and world cup crap also

 

[Jack D Rips]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Atlas link=topic=48021.msg1453859#msg1453859 date=1325464286]
If all parties agreed to probability why are we sti concerned about the fact they used probability?

Re evra he has a track record at least Chelsea groundsman and world cup crap also
[/quote]

Hello? that was my point. I dont know why we agreed to it but apparently we did.

 

[refugee]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453861#msg1453861 date=1325465078]
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=48021.msg1453859#msg1453859 date=1325464286]
If all parties agreed to probability why are we sti concerned about the fact they used probability?

Re evra he has a track record at least Chelsea groundsman and world cup crap also
[/quote]

Hello? that was my point. I dont know why we agreed to it but apparently we did.
[/quote]

Hello

 

[spider-Neil]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=refugee link=topic=48021.msg1453866#msg1453866 date=1325465943]
[quote author=Jack D Rips link=topic=48021.msg1453861#msg1453861 date=1325465078]
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=48021.msg1453859#msg1453859 date=1325464286]
If all parties agreed to probability why are we sti concerned about the fact they used probability?

Re evra he has a track record at least Chelsea groundsman and world cup crap also
[/quote]

Hello? that was my point. I dont know why we agreed to it but apparently we did.
[/quote]

Hello
[/quote]

is it me you're looking for?

 

[RedZeppelin]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

This whole thing where he has "damaged the image of English football around the world" .....is that not a bit over the top ?

And the headlines of him abusing Evra exactly 7 times are shite ....can evra really remember how many times exactly 'negro' was said if he went "negro, negro, negro..."

I couldn't be bothered reading all those 115 pages but is the jist of this that they have no other witnesses to back this up but made their decision on who to believe because of emotions shown on video and because they believed Evra to be more reliable and credible ? Would that be enough in a real court of law ? One man's word against another's ?

Anyway all i have learned is if you're going abuse someone in spanish using the word "negro" then do it with a fake smile on your face .

 

[kingjulian]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

I'm not buying Oncy's argument that Suarez is a racist and that he should be sold.

We should fight this as a matter of principle, and the best result for me would be if this triggers an investigation in to the F.A's activities. People say Italian football is corrupt, but i doubt English football is far behind.

They need to justify their verdict. They can't choose to hound out a player (a good one at that) based on probabilities. Suarez had it quite bad with out this.

There has to be a point where the club has to think enough is enough, and i believe the F.A have crossed that point for the club to react in the way they did. I hope they follow through with fighting the verdict and show us all how shamefully the F.A have acted in this case.

What's with the preachy posts? I know what's racism and i'm against it. But i also know how it's a double edged sword and can be used either way. The only thing clear about that report is that the investigation was worked with the intention of passing a guilty verdict and making an example off.....at other times, like when Masher argued to the referee and got a 4 match ban, we wore it on the chin, but not this time......we can't let them piss around with our investments like this to suit their agenda.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/liverpool-left-diminished-by-mishandled-case-6283930.html

The implication that Evra is an unreliable witness has been rehearsed over and over by Liverpool in the past two months but the Football Association's commission's115-page reasoning for Suarez's conviction reveals it was entirely absent from the Uruguayan's case, put by Peter McCormick QC.

The written note Ferguson suggested Marriner take in that chaotic first hour at Anfield proved deeply significant in the commission's damning conclusion. It described as "implausible" and "simply incredible" Suarez's defence: that his use of the words "por que, negro?" in an exchange with Evra was entirely harmless. If there was one lesson Liverpool might have taken from United on matters like this, it is the importance of intelligent, consistent evidence. When United claimed racial abuse against Chelsea after the so-called "Battle of Stamford Bridge" in 2008, a commission damned the club for the "inconsistent" and "exaggerated" evidence of coaches Mike Phelan and Tony Strudwick.

Liverpool's evidence was worse – incomparably worse – and the club appear to have been blinded by pure contempt that a United player should lay this claim at their door. Liverpool threatened to pursue a defamation claim against Evra within 24 hours of his allegation and when Gordon Taylor, the Professional Footballers' Association chief executive, appealed for dialogue and an apology for any offence caused, Liverpool would have none of it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/liverpool/8987529/Liverpool-under-mounting-pressure-to-abandon-plans-to-appeal-against-Luis-Suarezs-eight-match-ban.html

In one of many startling revelations, Suarez’s legal representative, Peter McCormick, admitted some of the club’s own evidence was the subject of “bad drafting”.

Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish had complained about the length of time to hold the hearing, but the written report reveals it was the availability of McCormick, representing Suarez, that determined the dates.

In another twist, it has emerged Suarez’s legal representative McCormick was involved in the last high profile FA dispute involving Liverpool and Manchester United in 2007.

McCormick was one of a two-man FA commission which ruled against Liverpool in deciding United had no legal obligation to sell Gabriel Heinze when the Argentine defender wanted to move to Anfield for £6.8 million.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

LUIS SUAREZ could follow John Terry into the courts to face a racism charge.

Police are studying the FA's 115-page report on why they banned the Liverpool striker for eight games for his blast at Manchester United's Patrice Evra.

Chelsea and England skipper Terry has been charged with allegedly directing racial abuse at QPR's Anton Ferdinand during a fiery clash in October. He is due in court on February 1.

Now prominent anti-racism campaigner, Luther Blissett, reckons the Kop's Uruguayan star could soon suffer the same fate.

Liverpool have until January 13 to decide whether to appeal against the FA's historic ban and £40,000 fine.

But they risk seeing Suarez's ban increased if disciplinary chiefs believe the Reds do not present a strong enough case for appeal.

Former Watford and AC Milan star Blissett, an ambassador for Show Racism the Red Card, said: "You have to look at supporters who have been found guilty of this sort of thing and people have gone to jail for it.

"You could anticipate the same sort of thing happening to him.

"You look at his profile and people label sportsmen in the public eye as a role model, then it is doubly important they do something about it.

"He should be treated like everyone else. It doesn't matter how much money you have, the law is the law."

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/293098/Show-some-class

On page 64 of the document, Suarez’s solicitor, Peter McCormick, admits to the Commission that the inconsistencies in the player’s first witness statement, in which he said that by pinching Evra he was trying to calm the confrontation, were down to ‘bad drafting’.

It was an admission that should have set alarm bells ringing in his head and most certainly those of Natalie Wignall, Liverpool’s general counsel, and club secretary Zoe Ward.

Yet still Liverpool shot from the lip – accusing the FA of a witch-hunt, trying to rubbish Evra’s credibility and hurling all manner of other insults – before modelling those T-shirts at Wigan in support of their downtrodden team-mate.

Liverpool will be stupid if they appeal because they have no chance of winning. Yet the blind loyalty they have shown in a player, who needs to start taking responsibility for his actions, means they will think they will look stupid if they do not.

It is this episode that illustrates how the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing at Liverpool, and why one of the abiding lessons is that owner Henry needs to take more control of his club.

Henry, and chairman Tom Werner, will no doubt be aghast when flicking through the report because it is highly unlikely they will recognise that version of events to what has been relayed to them in phone calls and emails across the Atlantic.

It is understandable that they want to continue basing themselves in the US. But they need more high-profile representation on Merseyside that is not linked with the previous dysfunctional regime.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/opinion/Luis-Suarez-and-Patrice-Evra-racism-row-Why-Liverpool-chiefs-should-forget-appealing-the-Suarez-ruling-article848102.html

The Commission points out that Liverpool did not object to the make-up of the panel and that as regards the release of the verdict: “Neither party suggested we should depart from the normal course of announcing the decision at the hearing.” As for the allegation against the FA, the fact that it took a month for the charges to be laid, following extensive interviews, dismiss that argument out of court.

For Liverpool players to wear T-shirts supporting Suarez before the Wigan game, which seemed beyond parody at the time, now looks even more ill-judged.

Had Suarez pleaded guilty at the outset, apologising to Evra while putting forward a mitigation of cultural differences, the incident would not have been investigated in such detail and he would probably have escaped with a three-game ban.

That approach was destroyed by the club’s stance – and their backing for Suarez may now be causing internal concerns, although we have no way yet of knowing what owner John Henry is thinking.

Liverpool have until January 13 to decide whether to appeal but their best option appears to be to wait until after tomorrow’s game at Manchester City before confirming the ban will be served.

Should the club draw their FA Cup third-round tie with Oldham, or a fourth-round match, Suarez would miss just four Premier League matches before being available for the February 11 visit to Old Trafford.

In the meantime, some people at Anfield need to think long and hard about their actions and decide if they have acted in a manner befitting Liverpool Football Club.

 

[Y1]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=monsieurdantes link=topic=48021.msg1453777#msg1453777 date=1325449583]
The reason I am so confident here is because this can always go to the European Court of Human Rights. I'm less confident they'll have the patience to see it through that far if that's what it comes to. It means fuck all what the FA rules and regulations state, what other laws we need to refer to, how to apply this to that. At most it's just delaying the inevitable. Unless you are utterly blind, you can see how unfairly Suarez has been treated by the FA and in this hearing. It doesn't matter what rules you apply, you are simply NOT allowed to do what the FA have done to Suarez.

Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

[/quote]

Bravo Dantes. Why are FA regulations above the common law and therefore above common justice? If the FA rules are draconian and unjust, surely there must be channels to correct injustice.

 

[King Binny]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/sport-news/liverpool-fc/2012/01/02/comment-is-it-acceptable-to-smear-liverpool-fc-striker-luis-suarez-s-reputation-on-the-hunch-of-three-men-55578-30044028/

IF you have neither the time nor inclination to read the Football Association’s hefty report on their investigation into the Luis Suarez/ Patrice Evra racism row, let me save you the trouble.

After two months and 115-pages, the entire case came down to one man’s word against another’s.

There was no evidence nor supporting witnesses to back up either player’s version of the events.

And in the end, the much discussed linguistic nuances of the word “negro” and its use in South American Spanish mattered little.

Language experts brought in by the FA concluded that what Suarez admits to having said – “what, negro?” – wouldn’t be considered offensive in his native Uruguay, but what Evra says he hurled at him would be.

So it all came down to who the three-man panel believed.

They decided Evra was the more credible witness, chiefly because his version of events tallied closer to the television footage of the incident than Suarez’s

It is worth noting, however, that while the Frenchman was allowed to give his evidence while watching the video of the confrontation, Suarez was not.

The FA report also claimed that the Manchester United player’s testimony was preferred because he remained calm throughout – importantly, though, he was not the one on trial.

As a result of the report’s publication, most media outlets are now presenting Evra’s claim to have been racially abused “seven times in two minutes” as fact when that is far from the case.

Unlike in a court of law, the panel did not need to be satisfied that Suarez was guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, working instead to a balance of probability rule. And the word “probably” can be found in plentiful supply in the report.

Essentially the Liverpool striker has been convicted on the hunch of three men.

Is that acceptable when a man’s reputation is on the line?

If Suarez used the word negro with the frequency and in the manner in which Evra alleges, he deserves every game of his eight-match suspension.

But only the two players will be aware of the truth.

And try as the FA might to suggest otherwise, the report hasn’t changed that.

 

[justdoit]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

FA's judgement excerpt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
116
We found the evidence of Mr Marriner on this point to be credible and plausible. He recalled Mr Evra telling him that he was being called black. This is consistent with Mr Evra's evidence of what he told Mr Marriner at that time, and also with Mr Giggs' evidence of what Mr Evra said to him shortly afterwards. In light of this, we reject Mr Kuyt's evidence that Mr Evra said that the referee was only booking him because he was black, however certain Mr Kuyt was that he heard it. Moreover, it would make no sense in the circumstances for Mr Evra to accuse the referee of only booking him because he was black. Not only had Mr Evra pushed Mr Kuyt away, which he is likely to have realised had led to his booking, but his concern at that stage was that he had been called black (bearing in mind that, at the very least, Mr Suarez admits having called Mr Evra "negro"
by this stage of the game).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evra accused the referee of only booking him because he was black. It was because he thought Luis racially abused him and reported to the ref but no booking was made. Now he pushed Kuyt and he's booked. Double standard only because he's black. Perfectly reasonable but the commission simply just rejected the claim and justified anything Evra said.

That was just one example and the judgement was full of it. I read though 80 pages and I can't take it anymore. It's like it was written by a ManU fan.

Such as Evra reported to the ref Luis called him "black" when he at the the time thought "nergo" meant "n*gger". When U make a complaint, would u downgrade the seriousness of the incident? Did the commission challenge him the way he challenged Luis' statement?

He told french TV Luis abused him 10 times when the fact it's not. But that's not really overstatement because it's cultural diff. Instead every single word Luis said was monitored and analysed literally under microscope.

I know I'm bias but I try my best to be objective. My impression is that the commission believed everything evra said and justified any discrepancies. Luis had ZERO benefit of doubt. We have zero chance to win any appeal against the FA.

 

[Asbo]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

"Why did you kick me?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH50lwwBRms&sns=em#t=01m13s

The Tackle is at 1:20 and its fucking obvious he didn't touch him at all

 

[Judge Jules]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Lewy link=topic=48021.msg1453856#msg1453856 date=1325462700]
[quote author=Atlas link=topic=48021.msg1453844#msg1453844 date=1325459277]
I'm not sticking up for anyone up the road, I'm not believing everything they said all I'm doing is not doing the same for Suarez.

Re evra as a character can't trust him cos the twat lied and cheats and well suarez also has a chequered past, but we will no doubt back him cos our own and we fucking stick up for our own... Until they turn around and speak ill of the club or something.

Iv said I don't believe everything Suarez and fergie said it's kinda stupid to do so, but when our manager player and whatever the heck comoli is can't get a simple story straight you gota start questioning stuff!


[/quote]

when has evra lied? he's never accused anyone of racism before this case, i dont know why so many of our fans, and our own club going by their statement, find that so hard to accept
[/quote]

Go back and read what the FA themselves said about him over that incident at Chelsea when he was banned for 4 games. It's all in this thread.

 

[Judge Jules]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=48021.msg1453888#msg1453888 date=1325477420]
I'm not buying Oncy's argument that Suarez is a racist and that he should be sold.

We should fight this as a matter of principle, and the best result for me would be if this triggers an investigation in to the F.A's activities. People say Italian football is corrupt, but i doubt English football is far behind.

They need to justify their verdict. They can't choose to hound out a player (a good one at that) based on probabilities. Suarez had it quite bad with out this.

There has to be a point where the club has to think enough is enough, and i believe the F.A have crossed that point for the club to react in the way they did. I hope they follow through with fighting the verdict and show us all how shamefully the F.A have acted in this case.

What's with the preachy posts? I know what's racism and i'm against it. But i also know how it's a double edged sword and can be used either way. The only thing clear about that report is that the investigation was worked with the intention of passing a guilty verdict and making an example off.....at other times, like when Masher argued to the referee and got a 4 match ban, we wore it on the chin, but not this time......we can't let them piss around with our investments like this to suit their agenda.
[/quote]

This. Absolutely this. I'd be prepared to bet that this is exactly the decision which the owners and Kenny have taken, or we'd have dropped the whole thing by now.

 

[Judge Jules]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=justdoit link=topic=48021.msg1453926#msg1453926 date=1325497485]
FA's judgement excerpt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
116
We found the evidence of Mr Marriner on this point to be credible and plausible. He recalled Mr Evra telling him that he was being called black. This is consistent with Mr Evra's evidence of what he told Mr Marriner at that time, and also with Mr Giggs' evidence of what Mr Evra said to him shortly afterwards. In light of this, we reject Mr Kuyt's evidence that Mr Evra said that the referee was only booking him because he was black, however certain Mr Kuyt was that he heard it. Moreover, it would make no sense in the circumstances for Mr Evra to accuse the referee of only booking him because he was black. Not only had Mr Evra pushed Mr Kuyt away, which he is likely to have realised had led to his booking, but his concern at that stage was that he had been called black (bearing in mind that, at the very least, Mr Suarez admits having called Mr Evra "negro"
by this stage of the game).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evra accused the referee of only booking him because he was black. It was because he thought Luis racially abused him and reported to the ref but no booking was made. Now he pushed Kuyt and he's booked. Double standard only because he's black. Perfectly reasonable but the commission simply just rejected the claim and justified anything Evra said.

That was just one example and the judgement was full of it. I read though 80 pages and I can't take it anymore. It's like it was written by a ManU fan.

Such as Evra reported to the ref Luis called him "black" when he at the the time thought "nergo" meant "n*gger". When U make a complaint, would u downgrade the seriousness of the incident? Did the commission challenge him the way he challenged Luis' statement?

He told french TV Luis abused him 10 times when the fact it's not. But that's not really overstatement because it's cultural diff. Instead every single word Luis said was monitored and analysed literally under microscope.

I know I'm bias but I try my best to be objective. My impression is that the commission believed everything evra said and justified any discrepancies. Luis had ZERO benefit of doubt. We have zero chance to win any appeal against the FA.
[/quote]

The reason for appealing is not that it's likely to get us anywhere in itself. It's that we can't take this further beyond the FA's own procedures unless we jump through that hoop first.

 

[Y1]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=48021.msg1453946#msg1453946 date=1325500525]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=48021.msg1453888#msg1453888 date=1325477420]
I'm not buying Oncy's argument that Suarez is a racist and that he should be sold.

We should fight this as a matter of principle, and the best result for me would be if this triggers an investigation in to the F.A's activities. People say Italian football is corrupt, but i doubt English football is far behind.

They need to justify their verdict. They can't choose to hound out a player (a good one at that) based on probabilities. Suarez had it quite bad with out this.

There has to be a point where the club has to think enough is enough, and i believe the F.A have crossed that point for the club to react in the way they did. I hope they follow through with fighting the verdict and show us all how shamefully the F.A have acted in this case.

What's with the preachy posts? I know what's racism and i'm against it. But i also know how it's a double edged sword and can be used either way. The only thing clear about that report is that the investigation was worked with the intention of passing a guilty verdict and making an example off.....at other times, like when Masher argued to the referee and got a 4 match ban, we wore it on the chin, but not this time......we can't let them piss around with our investments like this to suit their agenda.
[/quote]

This. Absolutely this. I'd be prepared to bet that this is exactly the decision which the owners and Kenny have taken, or we'd have dropped the whole thing by now.
[/quote]

aye

 

[jexykrodic]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

A governing body, private club or any other entity can not insulate itself from the law, civil or criminal.

It's obviously reasonable to exhaust the FA procedures first before considering another avenue for redress, if it's considered a case can be made.

 

[Woland]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

One thing that's obvious is that after all these years and takeovers we're still being managed by a bunch of fucking dickheads.

 

[Portly]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Judge Jules link=topic=48021.msg1453946#msg1453946 date=1325500525]
This. Absolutely this. I'd be prepared to bet that this is exactly the decision which the owners and Kenny have taken, or we'd have dropped the whole thing by now.
[/quote]

At first sight, the FA committee's 115-page statement looks very damning. It claims to give a blow-by-blow account of who did what and who said what to who in the goalmouth exchanges.

The media have universally swallowed this hook, line and sinker and I don't hear any journalists taking Suarez' side. It seems that to a man, they are saying that Liverpool are demeaning themselves by contesting the conclusions, and they should take it all on the chin to avoid damaging the reputation of the club.

I hope that further consideration of the document will show that this detailed description of events is in fact Evra's version and the committee had decided - as they state themselves - that Evra was a reliable witness whereas Suarez wasn't.

I think a further factor in the sanctimonious attitude of the media boils down to pure football tribalism. Most journalists support clubs other than Liverpool. They are quite happy to see Liverpool under the cosh.

 

[Judge Jules]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Largely agree, but in fairness there are honourable exceptions. Dion Fanning did a good article some days ago, and another's just been quoted in the "We should wear the ban" thread.

 

[Vlads Quiff]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Binny link=topic=48021.msg1453902#msg1453902 date=1325482073]

LUIS SUAREZ could follow John Terry into the courts to face a racism charge.

Police are studying the FA's 115-page report on why they banned the Liverpool striker for eight games for his blast at Manchester United's Patrice Evra.

Chelsea and England skipper Terry has been charged with allegedly directing racial abuse at QPR's Anton Ferdinand during a fiery clash in October. He is due in court on February 1.

Now prominent anti-racism campaigner, Luther Blissett, reckons the Kop's Uruguayan star could soon suffer the same fate.

Liverpool have until January 13 to decide whether to appeal against the FA's historic ban and £40,000 fine.

But they risk seeing Suarez's ban increased if disciplinary chiefs believe the Reds do not present a strong enough case for appeal.

Former Watford and AC Milan star Blissett, an ambassador for Show Racism the Red Card, said: "You have to look at supporters who have been found guilty of this sort of thing and people have gone to jail for it.

"You could anticipate the same sort of thing happening to him.

"You look at his profile and people label sportsmen in the public eye as a role model, then it is doubly important they do something about it.

"He should be treated like everyone else. It doesn't matter how much money you have, the law is the law."

[/quote]

This would be the best thing that could happen, not that the CPS would be as mental to let it get anywhere near court.

regards

 

[Judge Jules]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Even if/when they decide not to, we need to go through the reasons with a fine toothcomb, as there may well be stuff there which could be helpful in any appeal and subsequently.

 

[Vlads Quiff]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

The guy from the post has nailed it

It really is fucking comical, well it would be if it were not so serious how a three man committee have done this without a shred of hard evidence or any witness including their own officials or United players. This was patently not fair nor have we seen justice as we know it here.
Those of you who think Suarez probably is guilty should be more concerned with the method used than the outcome, if this method was used to convict any other person in any other walk of life the whining from the Civil Liberties brigade would be deafening.
I am not sure what to think about guilt or not, and indeed that should not come into it, what I do know and and am now certain of is that our man did not have a fair hearing and unless he does have a fair hearing , where real evidence is available and presented in a proper manner or an appeal is upheld then I personally will never consider him guilty, the rest of you can think what the fuck you like.
For you lawyers and barrack room lawyers what about Lord Hewart from Rex v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy:

“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”

This does not apply just in courts of law but in all conflicts, and if anyone after all these pages of discussion can say justice has seen to be done I would be amazed

It's actually disgusting, and I am amazed that so many posters I have a lot of respect for can argue otherwise.

regards

 

[jimmy]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Well said, Vlad.
It's reassuring for me to read the posts of posters I respect like yourself and like JJ on this thread.

 

[RedZeppelin]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Is it just me or does the language of the FA's report read very amateurish ? I just expected something a little more professional .

And lots of it just seems like they've filled in the gaps and made conclusions without really knowing for sure . Like in this bit below :

Moreover, it would make no sense in the circumstances for Mr Evra to accuse the referee of only booking him because he was black. Not only had Mr Evra pushed Mr Kuyt away, which he is likely to have realised had led to his booking, but his concern at that stage was that he had been called black

Yeah it make might make no sense in the circumstance but how do they really know . And how do they know what his concern was ?

Anyway whatever , the whole thing is boring now .

 

[Oncy]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Vlads Quiff link=topic=48021.msg1453998#msg1453998 date=1325505088]
The guy from the post has nailed it

It really is fucking comical, well it would be if it were not so serious how a three man committee have done this without a shred of hard evidence or any witness including their own officials or United players. This was patently not fair nor have we seen justice as we know it here.
Those of you who think Suarez probably is guilty should be more concerned with the method used than the outcome, if this method was used to convict any other person in any other walk of life the whining from the Civil Liberties brigade would be deafening.
I am not sure what to think about guilt or not, and indeed that should not come into it, what I do know and and am now certain of is that our man did not have a fair hearing and unless he does have a fair hearing , where real evidence is available and presented in a proper manner or an appeal is upheld then I personally will never consider him guilty, the rest of you can think what the fuck you like.
For you lawyers and barrack room lawyers what about Lord Hewart from Rex v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy:

“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”

This does not apply just in courts of law but in all conflicts, and if anyone after all these pages of discussion can say justice has seen to be done I would be amazed

It's actually disgusting, and I am amazed that so many posters I have a lot of respect for can argue otherwise.

regards
[/quote]Good post Vlad.
I think my take on it is slightly different in that Ive seen the same evidence you have and have drawn the logical conclusion that I have come to. I dont really care what the FA take on it is, ultimately the lad will miss a few games of football, hes not going the gulag or owt.
Whats of more concern to me is that i dont like him, I KNOW hes a cheat and a liar as ive seen it MANY times with my own eyes, I dont think ive seen anything to suggest I should see him as the innocent party here.
Like I said you ultimately have to make up your own mind about what you think took place as there isnt a great deal of hard evidence, all I can say is it looks to me like there is ANOTHER unsavoury aspect to luis Suarez aside from the ones we already know.

Maybe youre right about a kangaroo court and all that and maybe others are right in that certain individuals care so much about costing Liverpool that they would attemp to ruin a players good name on a whim.
Me I tend to think the lad is a racist who has been fingered and caught.
I think perhaps based on the evidence they have, we could appeal and win as there isnt any PROOF of guilt. But I dont think we should appeal. Simply because I think he did it, and as a club we should have more class than to try and get someone who racially abused another player off on a technicality.
Just my own opinion. Not right or wrong of course.

 

[Molbystwin]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

[quote author=Vlads Quiff link=topic=48021.msg1453998#msg1453998 date=1325505088]
The guy from the post has nailed it

It really is fucking comical, well it would be if it were not so serious how a three man committee have done this without a shred of hard evidence or any witness including their own officials or United players. This was patently not fair nor have we seen justice as we know it here.
Those of you who think Suarez probably is guilty should be more concerned with the method used than the outcome, if this method was used to convict any other person in any other walk of life the whining from the Civil Liberties brigade would be deafening.
I am not sure what to think about guilt or not, and indeed that should not come into it, what I do know and and am now certain of is that our man did not have a fair hearing and unless he does have a fair hearing , where real evidence is available and presented in a proper manner or an appeal is upheld then I personally will never consider him guilty, the rest of you can think what the fuck you like.
For you lawyers and barrack room lawyers what about Lord Hewart from Rex v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy:

“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”

This does not apply just in courts of law but in all conflicts, and if anyone after all these pages of discussion can say justice has seen to be done I would be amazed

It's actually disgusting, and I am amazed that so many posters I have a lot of respect for can argue otherwise.

regards
[/quote]
I respect everyone be default and have not been arguing against the likes of yourselves for a laugh Vlad I can assure you. It comes down to hard evidence I agree but thats it though Vlad, hard evidence, reading it they do refer to previoulsy unshown footage and all of a sudden they have fleshed out a full and pretty damning conversation or at least thats the impression they have left in the report.

IF they can show him saying the things on camera that they say he said then I do not honestly see any possible appeal on grounds of culture/linguistics etc.

I hope that it is just bullshit and the FA just taking Evras word for it without evidence but I find it too specific for them just to be making it up. I'm certainly not hoping or wishing its true. The quote from Blissett and the pressure on us to just swallow the findings of the commision and wear the ban were always going to be immense considering the staunch defence the club made and the attacks of Evra. I dont see us wriggling out of it in the climate that we've helped to create, I wish i did, i may be wrong but I honestly feel that the longer we kick up a fuss and claim innocence the more shitty its gonna get.

 

[RedZeppelin]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Actually how does it work in a real legal case ? Would one person's word be taken over another's without any other evidence ? Like say i reported to the police that i was racially abused by someone but had no witnesses and the other person denied it , would they do anything about it ? I didn't think so but i'm confused to fuck now.

 

[Vlads Quiff]

Re: The Suarez/Evra Racism Row (continued)

Thank you Jimmy, you see I think some peoples superior knowledge of the law, and their not insignificant ability to argue the point and muddy the waters, (and in some cases possibly a personal aversion to Suarez himself), coupled with their strong feelings on subject matter of the charge are letting their hearts rule their heads and ignore just how this decision was arrived at, and just how much it flies in the face of what is, thank God, our real system of justice, it's like something from Ceausescu's Romania.
They might even have been better throwing Suarez in the Mersey and if he floated he was a witch and if he sank and drowned he was innocent.
I hope we spend lots and lots of money hiring a fancy-Dan barrister to rip the fuck out of the panel and the decision, which I would have thought would be like taking sweets from kids


regards