tonyh29 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Why should it be handled only by the FA though, there are plenty of recent examples of people being prosecuted for using racist language/insults why should footballers be outside of the law just because they have the FA? If I said what Terry is alleged to have said and someone made a police complaint and their was footage I wouldn't be getting a punishment from the governing body in my industry I'd be facing prosecution. Footballers should not be any different to anyone else in the eyes of the law. If found guilty then Terry should then relieve an 8 match ban just as Suarez did and Suarez can consider himself lucky he didn't end up in court. Whilst I agree that footballers aren't outside the law and it should in theory be handled by the police ... i agree with Mike in that this has been a complete waste of time (and money) Ferdinand didn't raise a complaint , the referee didn't either and they were the closest 2 people to the incident ...that some do gooder at home can feel the need to be outraged and go down the road and report it to his local police station without knowing the full facts is frankly absurd and the policeman that dealt with the complaint should have borrowed chief Wiggums invisible typewriter to type up the complaint Terry may be a cock of the highest order but on the evidence (or lack of) presented he can only be found not guilty , and rightly so ... he clearly isn't a racist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 I will also add, that i think Terry is innocent regardless of how much of a complete prick he is!!! Cracking centre-half tho mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Why should it be handled only by the FA though, there are plenty of recent examples of people being prosecuted for using racist language/insults why should footballers be outside of the law just because they have the FA? If I said what Terry is alleged to have said and someone made a police complaint and their was footage I wouldn't be getting a punishment from the governing body in my industry I'd be facing prosecution. Footballers should not be any different to anyone else in the eyes of the law. If found guilty then Terry should then relieve an 8 match ban just as Suarez did and Suarez can consider himself lucky he didn't end up in court. Whilst I agree that footballers aren't outside the law and it should in theory be handled by the police ... i agree with Mike in that this has been a complete waste of time (and money) Ferdinand didn't raise a complaint , the referee didn't either and they were the closest 2 people to the incident ...that some do gooder at home can feel the need to be outraged and go down the road and report it to his local police station without knowing the full facts is frankly absurd and the policeman that dealt with the complaint should have borrowed chief Wiggums invisible typewriter to type up the complaint Terry may be a cock of the highest order but on the evidence (or lack of) presented he can only be found not guilty , and rightly so ... he clearly isn't a racist I'm sorry Tony I completely disagree, and the charge is not that Terry is a racist, its that he commited a Sec. 5 Public Order offence. Which clearly he is guilty of - regardless of his "I was repeating what Anton said to me, honestly guv" attempts to cover his tracks. The notion that using racist language makes you a racist is frankly absurd. You can have a drink and not be an alchoholic after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 You can have a drink and not be an alchoholic after all. Oh thank god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Which clearly he is guilty of - will I guess we will find out at around 2 pm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 Whilst I agree that footballers aren't outside the law and it should in theory be handled by the police ... i agree with Mike in that this has been a complete waste of time (and money) I'm struggling with the logic of this stance to be honest Tony. On the one hand you seemingly agree that it should be handled by the police and that footballers aren't outside the law but when these things are actioned you think it a waste of time and money. To be honest I couldn't disagree more. If not why bother having the laws in the first place? If you aren't willing to enforce a law and sanction those who brake it you have to question the value of the law itself. As far as I'm concerned this law has a value and so should be inforced and therefore is worth the time and expense. Ferdinand didn't raise a complaint , the referee didn't either and they were the closest 2 people to the incident Because neither heard it. ...that some do gooder at home can feel the need to be outraged and go down the road and report it to his local police station without knowing the full facts is frankly absurd and the policeman that dealt with the complaint should have borrowed chief Wiggums invisible typewriter to type up the complaint Some do gooder? How do you know the guy hadn't himself been subjected to racial abuse and was genuinely offended or outraged to see this sort of thing in football? It is too easy to dismiss it as being some bitter football fan sat at home who wants to see Terry brought down a peg or two. Although it has crossed my mind if it was Wayne Bridge I fail to see how this is really any different to the guy jailed for racist abuse on Twitter or the women on the tube. The only difference is the person alleged to have been abused didn't hear it themselves. Terry may be a cock of the highest order but on the evidence (or lack of) presented he can only be found not guilty , and rightly so ... he clearly isn't a racist Well we will see I guess, I expect him to be found not guilty but I think he said it and I don't believe he was repeating what Ferdinand said for one moment. It is completely irrelevent if Terry is racist or not, he isn't charged with being racist he is charged with using racist language isn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 I get the feeling the public will only accept a guilty verdict. They'll treat an innocent verdict as "oh yeah, cuz he's a footballer". The public have the ability to make their minds up without any evidence at all Not long now anyway. Just over an hour away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 You mean other than the video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 If it is a case that he was asking if Anton thought he had called him a u-know-what when he hadn't, then there is a scenario where video can be more damaging. As I said, I'll leave it to those with all the info. Whereas I'll let the clearly more informed pub-based lawyers make their own minds up too. They will need to leave their pitchforks at the pub door though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 Well it should be perfectly simple to clarify this one with one simple question, "Anton, did you at any time accuse John Terry of calling you x?" If he says no, then that kind of leaves Terry's defence in tatters doesn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 Trent, I know you're not one of those posters who thinks you can simplify something like that into a single question. So to answer what I think is a slightly facetious question, no I don't think it does leave a defence in tatters. For one thing, it very much depends on how Terry came to think Anton had thought he'd said it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 Wanting justice is seen as a weakness now. Wanting all of the evidence to be carefully considered is seen as somehow backing Terry rather than backing the idea of a fair trial. The mob see you as some softy. If he's guilty he's guilty. If he's innocent he's innocent. As long as the decision; whatever it may be; is reached in the right way, then I'll accept it. I won't assume to know more than those whose job it was to reach that decision. And I hope very much against hope that most others would feel the same way. But people think they have the right to pass judgement on things they don't know enough about. And the internet has given them more than enough ways of venting their misplaced and ill-thought out 'opinions'. Ho hum. /misanthrope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 I'm struggling with the logic of this stance to be honest Tony. On the one hand you seemingly agree that it should be handled by the police and that footballers aren't outside the law but when these things are actioned you think it a waste of time and money. I was talking generally rather than this actual instance .. had Terry launched a vile clearly racist barrage like Tube lady then I would expect it to have been dealt with via the law rather than the FA ( i think the original poster was suggesting the FA should deal with all instances ?) As far as I'm concerned this law has a value and so should be inforced and therefore is worth the time and expense. I can agree with that but there really isn't a case to answer here though, nobody heard it , a lip reader has a vague idea but without any context or seeing the whole scene .... by all means investigate it but it should never have gone to trial .. arguably the Suarez case WAS clear cut and should have gone to trial I think BOF summed it up perfectly , Although it has crossed my mind if it was Wayne Bridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 It was a slightly facetious question BOF but then if you are being labelled part of the mob because you believe Terry to be guilty it is hardly surprising. You have seemingly made your mind up that anyone who thinks him guilty is tooled up with a pitchfolk. I think Terry is guilty, not because I'm part of a lynch mob but because on the balance of probability and the video and the fact it has got this far and I might add his defence which I think is rather laughable. For Terry to have though Ferdinand had accused him he either had to have heard Ferdinand say it or someone else would have had to say to him "John, he thinks you called him x" in which case why isn't that 3rd party giving evidence? It is obvious from the fact they aren't that Terry's defence rest on the notion he was countering what Ferdinand had said, in fact I think he has actually said as much in his evidence. I don't assume to know more than those who reach decisions in these matters but I do remember that being found not guilty is not the same as being found innocent. I refer to Harry Redknapp's recent case for example, he was found not guilty but it doesn't mean I have to believe him innocent. If Terry is found not guilty and I fully expect him to be, I will still believe that he said it even though I don't think he is racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 You lumped yourself in there Trent. My OP on this page was not in response to you, so my continuation of referring to 'the mob' did not mean to include you. As for 'the balance of probability'. That is highly dangerous logic which fairly clearly means that if a person on trial is in a scenario where most people in the past have been found guilty, then you by default adopt that as a starting point. That's pretty much exactly why a person is supposed to be innocent until guilty. Because a prejudicial set of circumstances should not automatically alter anyone's starting position. I also agree that saying it doesn't automatically make him a racist. He's on trial for the public order offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 heard Ferdinand say it or someone else would have had to say to him "John, he thinks you called him x" in which case why isn't that 3rd party giving evidence? didn't Ashley Cole say as much during his evidence ? He told the court he did not hear what Terry had said during the clash, but that he made out Ferdinand saying the words 'black' and 'c***'. He added that Terry approached him towards the end of the game and said something along the lines of: "He (Ferdinand) thinks I'm being a racist." and then after the game Cole said: ‘I think John said, “Did you think I called you a black c***, did you think I was being racist?” Then I said, “Did you think John was being racist?” Anton said, “No, no”.’ The players then shook hands and left. Terry appears to have been constant throughout , Ferdinand not so much so .. doesn't prove anything either way i suppose , but it would make me more inclined on face value to believe Terry over Ferdinand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted July 13, 2012 Share Posted July 13, 2012 Well it should be perfectly simple to clarify this one with one simple question, "Anton, did you at any time accuse John Terry of calling you x?" If he says no, then that kind of leaves Terry's defence in tatters doesn't it. Having just read the wording of the Act, I can't see how Terry can be found not guilty. Given that he as a) admitted using the language and that the defences outlined in the Act, (in a dwelling, noone else around, no reason to believe that anyone hearing it would be offended) don't appear to apply in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 No I didn't BOF, you are making a sweeping generalisation about anyone who thinks Terry is guilty so by default you did include me. When I said balance of probability that had nothing to do with people who have been in court for the same offence previously, I meant it purely in terms of on the balance of what I've seen and read and what I know of those involved. I doubt very much Rio Ferdinand would have gone out on a limb and risked his England future over something he was less than sure about. As I said, I think Terry said it. I think he was stupid and I don't think he is a racist but I think he is guilty of saying it, something he doesn't even deny any more but has previously. I expect him to be found not guilty but to repeat my previous point being found not guilty does not make him innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 But I like sweeping generalisations Plus they're not 100% by their very definition! They're general. T-23 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 13, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 13, 2012 Cole said: ‘I think John said, “Did you think I called you a black c***, did you think I was being racist?” Then I said, “Did you think John was being racist?” Anton said, “No, no”.’ The players then shook hands and left. Terry appears to have been constant throughout , Ferdinand not so much so .. doesn't prove anything either way i suppose , but it would make me more inclined on face value to believe Terry over Ferdinand Yes but at that time Ferdinand hadn't seen the video and has said, consistantly I might add, that he didn't hear it at the time. So he would have said no at the time when asked, he changed his view on seeing the video. As I said previously in response to BOF, I'm still struggling to see why Terry thought Ferdinand thought he had said it. Anyway decision due very shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts