In short, he basically said that he wasn't anywhere near the incident so didn't hear what Terry said for himself. But, it's plain to see via video evidence what was said and that the FA shouldn't be allowing the case to continue in the manor that they have.
His casepoint being, that if it were anyone else (eg: Evra / Suarez case) then it would have been resolved within days, not being dragged through court and costing the taxpayers money.
for helping black kids on the streets of London.
But can he be found guilty by the FA if proved innocent in court? The FA only need the same level of proof to the Saurez case don't need to prove guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt' like a court of law.
Why Black kids and why London? Why not kids in general?
So who did hear it? Are they just going off what it did look like on TV?
How can he press charges and go into court and say "I didn't hear it"?
[video=youtube;OfoaoQImtaI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=OfoaoQImtaI[/video]
Was it meant to be fucking black c-unit?
What did Terry say he said?
Would he shout Black C-unit when Ashley Cole was stood next to him?
Would it shag is best mates bird behind his and his wifes back?
Would he sell a tour of the training ground for £10k?
I wouldn't try to use normal logic with Terry.
I do think a lot of people just don't like Terry. Whether he is a twat or not has no bearing whatsoever on this case. Think people assume that because he is a twat he must have done it and that is plain wrong.
Some interesting points in post 5 - he really sounds like he understands the law.
http://www.courtoffside.com/forum/showthread.php?t=110039
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?