John Terrys Court Case

[Gary the Enfield]

He isn't a racist.

None of his family are racists.

His dad will sell coke to anyone.

[Verbal]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/jo ... 36075.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ohjimmyjimmy]

If he had anything about him he'd have waited til the judge said 'simon says' first

[Bruce Rioja]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/jo ... 36075.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I heard that on the radio earlier. I thought it was a (poor) joke!

[Worthy4England]

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

[Bruce Rioja]

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

And "fecking black c*nts" at that!

[Annoyed Grunt]

It's Suarez I feel sorry for.

[boltonboris]

Rawk will be in meltdown..

Actually......... I'll see you in a bit.

[Puskas]

Rawk will be in meltdown..

Actually......... I'll see you in a bit.

But no doubt all the posts will be from people who've followed the case every day, possibly attending court themselves, and carefully read the verdict, so they can give an informed opinion.

[Puskas]

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

And "fecking black c*nts" at that!

That's not actually what the verdict says.

Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle: "It is therefore possible that what he [Terry] said was not intended as an insult, but rather as a challenge to what he believed had been said to him. In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty."

So he has been cleared on the basis of "reasonable doubt" - there was insufficient evidence to convict him. If we were in Scotland, I believe he would have had a "not proven" verdict...

[boltonboris]

Which is fair enough.

[Puskas]

Which is fair enough.

Indeed.

It's important to remember he was on trial for a specific offence - and it was deemed there was insufficient evidence to convict him of that offence, so not guilty is the correct outcome.

He wasn't on trial for being an obnoxious, vile twunt...

[Worthy4England]

Which is fair enough.

Indeed.

It's important to remember he was on trial for a specific offence - and it was deemed there was insufficient evidence to convict him of that offence, so not guilty is the correct outcome.

He wasn't on trial for being an obnoxious, vile twunt...

The prosecution should have presented those things as mitigating factors. before the verdict.

[bobo the clown]

Look, if OJ Simpson, 'Appy 'Arry & the Steven Lawrence geezers were found not guilty how was Terry ever going to be ?

[Worthy4England]

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

And "fecking black c*nts" at that!

That's not actually what the verdict says.

Where's your sense of hyperbole? Boooooooooooooooooo!

[Bruce Rioja]

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

And "fecking black c*nts" at that!

That's not actually what the verdict says.

Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle: "It is therefore possible that what he [Terry] said was not intended as an insult, but rather as a challenge to what he believed had been said to him. In those circumstances, there being a doubt, the only verdict the court can record is one of not guilty."

So he has been cleared on the basis of "reasonable doubt" - there was insufficient evidence to convict him. If we were in Scotland, I believe he would have had a "not proven" verdict...

Be off with you, and take your simple sword of truth and your trusty shield of British fair play with you whilst your at it. Booooooooo!

[Salford Trotter]

The FA may still have a part to play and I'm assuming the burden of proof with them won't be as high

[bobo the clown]

The FA may still have a part to play and I'm assuming the burden of proof with them won't be as high

Correct, though I'd bet that ... having waited while the Court case went ahead ... they'd not go any further now.

[a1]

The FA may still have a part to play and I'm assuming the burden of proof with them won't be as high

if a super high up court carnt even get clear video of terry saying

*i never called him* a [someone walks infront] f....[someone's heads in the road]...g blac..[someone earns dollar bills supping lucozade sport when theyre not thirsty] .. c..[someone else walks infront directly towards him facing forwards blocking the camera yet again, but somehow cannot tell or hear what terry is saying and is never called as a witness]..

then they're (the fa arent) never gonna get the qpr player going "john terrys just called anton a b***********c******** "

and theyre never ever gonna get video of terry saying it originally without the f word in front.

until someone invents that cctv they use on star trek that's kinda similar to that cool microsoft photosynth software, theyve got no chance.

So it's now entirely ligitimate to call folks "black c*nts" - glad that one's sorted.

thats one of them latin thingies, maybe this one-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

maybe this-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

something, jumping to conclusions like anyway.

john terry is a cockend however. [not literally.. i dont think]

:/

[Salford Trotter]

FA charge John Terry so we've not seen the last of this yet