John Terry/Anton Ferdinand. Which one of them is lying?

Terry claims that during the match Ferdinand accused him of making the racist comment and that is why he repeated it during the match and was caught on camera.

Ferdinand on the other hand claims that he didnt know anything about a racist comment until after the game which is why he didnt report it to the referee.

One of them is clearly lying and this cannot possibly be a case of a mistake or misunderstanding. If Ferdinand didn't know about it until after the game then he cant possibly have questioned Terry about it during the game so Terry cannot possibly have been caught saying 'You accusing me of being a racist and calling you a black c---?' unless of course he is psychic and can see into the future.
If Terry indeed WAS saying those words because Ferdinand had accused him during the match then Ferdinand is lying and cannot have heard about it first after the game.

One is surely lying? If so doesn't that make them guilty of perjury? Prison sentence?

 

Has to be John Terry who is lying after all whenever a black man cries racism we all must side with him, especially in football or Ian Wright gets on his high horse!!!

 

Doesn't mean it's perjury. Every time someone gives a statement for the defence and the accused was found guilty that could be considered perjury.

 

I may be wrong but isn't the difference that you can make a claim based on opinion or what you BELIEVE to be the truth and that isnt perjury even if it is incorrect but a blatent and deliberate lie (ie Anton Ferdinand claiming that he didn't know about the racism till after the game when he clearly did and brought it up DURING the game) is perjury as you have deliberately lied under oath in an attempt to fool the judge and jury.

 

I did jury service once and some people were definitely lying but the issue of perjury was never brought up.

 

Terry's defence is about as believable as OJ Simpson's, so he'll probably get off!

 

If he was RACIST dont you think his black team mates would have had a go at him, stripped of the captaincy and booted out of Chelsea? He made a remark to someone which as been blown out of proportion just because his surname is FERDINAND

 

Possibly, but if I called someone a black lovely person at work and there were no witnesses but it had been caught on camera lip-reading style, then it wouldn't be up to my fellow black colleagues to get me the sack, but I would surely get sacked.

 

The reason I tend to believe the Terry argument is this. He's played alongside and against black players for ten years. Now if he was going to start shouting racist insults about just because someone had a go at him, surely this would have happened well before, in his younger, less mature years? Terry will be used to being in multi-racial dressing rooms and situations, so I just fail to see why he would just suddenly blurt out the alledged phrase across the pitch, fully aware many black teammates were standing not ten feet away. But if he WAS simply questioning Ferdinand's view, then it is logical he'd shout the phrase in his direction, on camera, within earshot of colleagues, because he would know the context of his words eradicated the racist element.

 

I dunno. Looking at this overview from the BBC, the case for the prosecution looks...

....very very flimsy. Ferdinand didn't realise he'd been racially abused until later when he saw the incident on TV? Hmmmm.

I think that John Terry is a total piece of ****, but am inclined to lean towards the view that despite his many deficiencies he's unlikely to be a racist. Ashley Cole is also a pathetic turd of a human being, but if we look at things rationally he is highly unlikely to have leapt to Terry's defence in the way that he did if he really believed that he was capable of spouting racist abuse.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18771554

 

Re: I dunno. Looking at this overview from the BBC, the case for the prosecution look

Totally bamboozled by Ferdinand's evidence. They may aswell pack up and go home now.

 

Re: I dunno. Looking at this overview from the BBC, the case for the prosecution look

Be difficult to bring perjury just if Terry is found not guilty, because the jury could say there was insufficient evidence or that they were not entirely certain. That does not necessary mean that Ferdinand was lying.
The claim is that Ferdinand had made a comment about Terry shagging his ex-teammates lass, and then Terry made the alleged racisit comment

 

Re: I dunno. Looking at this overview from the BBC, the case for the prosecution look

That is the loosest usage of the word "evidence" I have ever seen in my whole life.

 

It is Terry lying. Ferdinand says he did not accuse Terry of calling him a black lovely person during the game, as he didn't know about it until later when he saw the footage. So why did Terry say it? Maybe he misheard Ferdinand, he thought Ferdinand accused him of that, so the sarcastic remark could be true. But he is denying saying it at all at one point, but now admits saying it but not in a racist context. Ashley Cole's involvement makes Terry look guilty too. Popping his head around the door to say "You said that to me didn't you?" smacks of a friend trying to help and then Terry saying "I didn't say it at all", so what did Cole hear to make him say that? Cole knows exactly what went on. He wouldn't turn against Terry because he is his mate and even though he used a racist term probably wouldn't make him think of Terry as a racist because he knows him as a friend. I am sure Terry isn't a racist, but there is no doubting what went off IMO. He isn't a racist but is just a horrible man who thinks he can do what he wants.

 

So basically after going round the houses you've come to the same conclusion that I did, and I'm sure the jury will as well if it actually gets that far!

 

Re: I dunno. Looking at this overview from the BBC, the case for the prosecution look

I think many share the view that JT is a piece of sh.it as a man but that does not make him racist and I really don't think he is. For the first time I find myself siding with JT but the dilemma is that this doesn't necessarily make Ferdinand a liar. I think maybe Terry thought he heard something, repeated it back and Ferdinand was oblivious. Wasn't it a member of the public who made the complaint.

 

Why is Terry a 'horrible man'? He slept with a tart who threw herself at him, Wayne Bridge wasnt his 'mate' just a kid who he works with, id have done the same if any of my colleagues wives fancied a bit

 

Sorry, hadn't read your post. I don't know how the jury will see it tbf, he isn't being charged with 'being a racist'.

 

Correct. Plus, it just seems to me that there isn't really any sort of case against Terry. Anton Ferdinand himselrf has said that he didn't even think he had been racially absused until he saw the TV footage! From what the BBC have reported as to what was said in court, Ferdinand STILL doesn't seem convinced that he was racially abused! I'm not a lawyer, and obviously I'm not there in court to hear exactly what is being said, but to me the whole thing looks like an absolute waste of time and public money.