John Terry trial thread - Banned for 4 games and 220k fine

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Photek
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Dublin

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - verdict due 2pm on Friday
by Photek » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:38 pm

TigaSefi wrote:See two post above you... The entire UK would be prisoned :lol:

ie. lots of "he said that, she said this" etc.....

also really the FA should have had balls in the first place and dished out the same treatment and procedure Suarez got.

But Terry's English.

Image
User avatar
Photek
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Dublin

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - verdict due 2pm on Friday
by Photek » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:40 pm

Moggy wrote:If he is found not guilty, the FA will do nothing. And rightly so.

If he is found guilty, I hope for a lengthy ban. And rightly so.

Suarez case wouldn't have been admissible in court let alone heard, so how come terry gets off from the FA?

Image
User avatar
Photek
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Dublin

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Photek » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:41 pm

Scotticus Erroticus wrote:I don't think he's a racist.

That's not the issue.

Image
User avatar
PsychicSykes
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Sykes Stadium

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by PsychicSykes » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:41 pm

IIRC, the FA can't do anything while it was a police matter. Since there's no charge to answer for, it's unlikely they'll follow this up imo.

User avatar
Somebody Else's Problem
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: Wherever you want me to be, baby

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Somebody Else's Problem » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:44 pm

Cal wrote:
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:What a completely despicable banana split. The amount of gooseberry fool he gets away with because he happens to be a footballer is ridiculous.


On the other hand, I'm glad it's all over. I was never convinced Terry was guilty of being racist and I'm satisfied he's proved his innocence. I won't pretend casual racism doesn't exist in football; we all know it does at whatever level, but in this case, given the support he's been given by those acting as character witnesses I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, rather like the Court decided to. At the very worst, he's shown contrition and expressed his abhorrence of racism in a public forum. Now the rest is up to him.


That's strange, you're normally very "anti-rich-people-getting-away-with-stuff".

ImageImage
User avatar
Eighthours
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Eighthours » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:45 pm

degoose wrote:a bit surprised everyone thinks this is a joke, nobody heard terry swear at ferdinand, even ferdinand didnt hear it and wasnt aware until later that something might have been said. Plus also it was found out that basically ferdinand had been having a dig at Terry in the same match. In all honesty there was no decent proof.

By the way i am not a chelsea fan , actually a spurs fan but also i don't know John Terry so really can't judge him like it seems many of you can without ever meeting him.


I think that JT's history is plenty enough for us to judge his worth as a human being.

There was the certain little matter of video evidence. I presume that Atreyu can come on and enlighten us about burden of proof and all that. JT was so obviously guilty - I don't think he's a racist, but he was definitely using racist language in an insulting manner.

User avatar
SpaceJebus
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by SpaceJebus » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:48 pm

PsychicSykes wrote:IIRC, the FA can't do anything while it was a police matter. Since there's no charge to answer for, it's unlikely they'll follow this up imo.


There could still be a charge to answer for though as they would be different proceedings, charges and disciplinary hearings. That said they have been handed their get out of jail free card and spineless as they usually are, will use it.

Image
User avatar
Eighthours
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Eighthours » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:50 pm

SpaceJebus wrote:
PsychicSykes wrote:IIRC, the FA can't do anything while it was a police matter. Since there's no charge to answer for, it's unlikely they'll follow this up imo.


There could still be a charge to answer for though as they would be different proceedings, charges and disciplinary hearings. That said they have been handed their get out of jail free card and spineless as they usually are, will use it.


Sadly, I think you're right.

User avatar
Cal
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Cal » Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:57 pm

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:
Cal wrote:
Somebody Else's Problem wrote:What a completely despicable banana split. The amount of gooseberry fool he gets away with because he happens to be a footballer is ridiculous.


On the other hand, I'm glad it's all over. I was never convinced Terry was guilty of being racist and I'm satisfied he's proved his innocence. I won't pretend casual racism doesn't exist in football; we all know it does at whatever level, but in this case, given the support he's been given by those acting as character witnesses I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, rather like the Court decided to. At the very worst, he's shown contrition and expressed his abhorrence of racism in a public forum. Now the rest is up to him.


That's strange, you're normally very "anti-rich-people-getting-away-with-stuff".


True, and I certainly have no love for the general 'rich footballer 'preening diva'' mentality, but in this case I just found the whiff of a politically-correct media-led witchunt a bit too distasteful. Terry might well have said something foolish; apparently there's even video evidence he did, but I don't consider his emotional outburst a good case for ruining his career.

Image
User avatar
Jamo3103
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Manchester

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Jamo3103 » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:07 pm

I don't think that John Terry is a racist, but I do think he was guilty on the count of directing a racist term at Anton Ferdinand (More out of his own ignorance than anything) and I think the verdict is frankly ridiculous.

It would be hoped now that the FA deal with it in the same way they dealt with Suarez, as it is a similar incident with even more evidence behind it. Unfortunately I don't think there's much chance of that happening in light of the verdict today, despite the criterias for proof being entirely different.

I personally can't help but feel that if it had been another footballer who does not get the media-love in that John Terry does then it would have been an entirely different outcome. Let's say for example Joey Barton was at the centre of it.

At the end of the day John Terry is an utterly detestable human being, a really nasty piece of work off the pitch and an awful representative of his club and country, I look forward to the day karma catches up with him.

User avatar
Venom
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Location: London
Contact:

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Venom » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:10 pm

So normally when there is a accusation of racism there is always the element of doubt of whether something racist was actually said. But in this instance John Terry said a racist insult, was filmed saying a racist insult, admitted saying a racist insult, but his excuse was that he only said a racist insult because he thought somebody said it to him, and he repeated it back as question because he was puzzled by it?! And he is found NOT guilty! :slol: . strawberry float me he had some ballsy evil genius lawyers.

I don't want to make generalisations but John Terry epitomises a type of man that this country has that feel they have more of a right to live in this country than other British citizens. A type who carry with them a sense of entitlement and feel they can make certain 'jokey' comments to upset others.

The legacy of Ashley Cole's actions, speaking up for Terry, will help to make casual racist abuse more acceptable. Because for those who hold racist opinions they will now believe that if Ashley Cole 'didn't seem to mind about Terry's words, then they are not so bad after all.' :(

Last edited by Venom on Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
DML
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - verdict due 2pm on Friday
by DML » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:21 pm

Photek wrote:
Moggy wrote:If he is found not guilty, the FA will do nothing. And rightly so.

If he is found guilty, I hope for a lengthy ban. And rightly so.

Suarez case wouldn't have been admissible in court let alone heard, so how come terry gets off from the FA?


Hes been found not guilty by the law of the country, what do expect them to do? Go against that? Its an unfortunate circumstance of the law getting involved in the case.

Image
User avatar
Eighthours
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Eighthours » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:23 pm

I've now read the full judgement. Terry was acquitted because of reasonable doubt, not because the judge felt he was innocent. The prosecution didn't do a good enough job - it's very clear that the judge didn't believe Terry's explanation for why he said the offending words.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Moggy » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:41 pm

I hate John Terry and think he was actually guilty here. But, the court has found him not guilty and as such the matter should be laid to rest.

It will probably only be a few games into the next season before he does something ban worthy and the FA can punish him then. 8-)

User avatar
Monkey Man
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty
by Monkey Man » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 pm

The FA says it will 'seek to conclude its own inquiry' into John Terry racism allegations after today's court case.


The FA has said its inquiry into the incident will resume next week.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18827915

ImageImage
Ste
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: ScouseStevmed
Contact:

PostJohn Terry trial thread - Not Guilty/FA inquiry next week
by Ste » Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:30 pm

I seem to be missing something here.

When did Terry admit he CALLED Ferdinand what was alleged?

My understanding is that he asked Ferdinand "Do you think I've just called you a ....."

While clearly this seems unlikely, it's not racist and unless the CPS had a couple of witnesses to confirm he said it in the way alleged they were never going to prove it "beyond reasonable doubt" - the standard required.

They didn't therefore this should never have got to court.

User avatar
Saint of Killers
Member
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: The John Terry trial thread - verdict due 2pm on Friday
by Saint of Killers » Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:37 pm

Photek wrote:
TigaSefi wrote:See two post above you... The entire UK would be prisoned :lol:

ie. lots of "he said that, she said this" etc.....

also really the FA should have had balls in the first place and dished out the same treatment and procedure Suarez got.

But Terry's English.


And the two of you are seemingly incapable of understanding the reason behind why the F.A. couldn't act on the matter. No big surprise there though.

Did the judge say *why* it was unlikely for Terry to have said what he was accused of saying?

| (•_•)| S: This is the best date I've been on since my last date. PB: This is not a date.
S: Neither was the last one. It was a robbery. M: Really? S: Yeah. She stole my heart. And my crown. (❍ᴥ❍ʋ)
User avatar
Eighthours
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty/FA inquiry next wee
by Eighthours » Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:42 pm

ScouseStevmed wrote:My understanding is that he asked Ferdinand "Do you think I've just called you a ....."


Not quite. It all hangs on whether you believe there was a full stop or a question mark. Observe:

The Guardian wrote:Terry was in court because, by his own admission, he had used the words "strawberry float off, strawberry float off … strawberry floating black banana split, strawberry floating nobhead" during a row with Anton Ferdinand when Chelsea played at QPR last October. Except Terry's argument was that he actually said "strawberry float off, strawberry float off … strawberry floating black banana split? strawberry floating nobhead." It was all about that question mark, Terry argued – "sarcastic exclamation", in shocked response to being accused of racism.

Ste
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: ScouseStevmed
Contact:

PostJohn Terry trial thread - Not Guilty/FA inquiry next week
by Ste » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:01 pm

Eighthours wrote:
Not quite. It all hangs on whether you believe there was a full stop or a question mark. Observe:

The Guardian wrote:Terry was in court because, by his own admission, he had used the words "strawberry float off, strawberry float off … strawberry floating black banana split, strawberry floating nobhead" during a row with Anton Ferdinand when Chelsea played at QPR last October. Except Terry's argument was that he actually said "strawberry float off, strawberry float off … strawberry floating black banana split? strawberry floating nobhead." It was all about that question mark, Terry argued – "sarcastic exclamation", in shocked response to being accused of racism.



Ok, right, I wasn't aware of that.

But still, from the outset, Terry's position was that he said the words but in the context he was questioning whether Ferdinand had thought he'd said that. Without reliable witnesses to confirm what he said Terry was never going to be convicted.

User avatar
Eighthours
Emeritus
Emeritus
Joined in 2008
Location: Bristol

PostRe: John Terry trial thread - Not Guilty/FA inquiry next wee
by Eighthours » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:06 pm

This is the first time I've ever complained to the BBC. :x

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18827915

In his written judgement, he (the judge) said that after weighing the evidence it was "highly unlikely" that Mr Terry abused Mr Ferdinand in the manner he was accused of.


The actual judgement text:

Weighing all the evidence together, I think it is highly unlikely that Mr
Ferdinand accused Mr Terry on the pitch of calling him a black banana split.


This is one of the most stupid factual errors I have EVER SEEN in an article, and it changes the whole meaning of the paragraph in a massively misleading way. Actual rage.


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Akai XIII, Brerlappin, Cuttooth, Dig Dug, Dowbocop, Errkal, Frank, HSH28, Lagamorph, Mafro, Skarjo, Spindash and 40 guests