John Terry Trial
Jul 12th 2012, 7:27 am
#46
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,553
Re: John Terry Trial
Few thoughts.
Firstly, much as I don't think racist abuse is acceptable, I don't see why it should be treated any differently to other abuse. You can prefix an expletive with 'fat' or 'hairy' or 'bald', and that's ok, but if you use 'black', somehow that is criminal?
Secondly, much as JT's personal life is rather public, and he does not exactly come out of it well, I would imagine that any abuse towards him relating to that is going to cause much more genuine upset and offence than a general racist comment to a black player might. Apparently the FA and the courts are fine with you hurling abuse of a deeply personal nature about someone's love life (no doubt with the intention to elicit a response), but if someone retorts to such provocation with a remark that mentions skin colour, suddenly it's a criminal case?
Finally, it seems AF didn't even hear the abuse at the time which does tend to diminish the effect somewhat.
Does it really need a 5 day court case to deal with this?
Ferdinand has openly admitted to abusing JT regarding his personal life, but nobody is suggesting any punishment for this?
Firstly, much as I don't think racist abuse is acceptable, I don't see why it should be treated any differently to other abuse. You can prefix an expletive with 'fat' or 'hairy' or 'bald', and that's ok, but if you use 'black', somehow that is criminal?
Secondly, much as JT's personal life is rather public, and he does not exactly come out of it well, I would imagine that any abuse towards him relating to that is going to cause much more genuine upset and offence than a general racist comment to a black player might. Apparently the FA and the courts are fine with you hurling abuse of a deeply personal nature about someone's love life (no doubt with the intention to elicit a response), but if someone retorts to such provocation with a remark that mentions skin colour, suddenly it's a criminal case?
Finally, it seems AF didn't even hear the abuse at the time which does tend to diminish the effect somewhat.
Does it really need a 5 day court case to deal with this?
Ferdinand has openly admitted to abusing JT regarding his personal life, but nobody is suggesting any punishment for this?
Jul 12th 2012, 7:29 am
#47
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Downtown, Dubai
Posts: 782
Re: John Terry Trial
It the prefix was 'white' would that make it a criminal offence. I suspect not, I'm afraid the UK has tangled itself in a web on this, admittedly with good intentions, and getting out of it isn't going to be easy.
Jul 12th 2012, 7:54 am
#48
Bored liberal
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Over there ----->
Posts: 13,713
Re: John Terry Trial
Had the player JT 'abused' been a red-head and he has called him a ginger c*** would there still be a case? Or Irish? Is the use of the word black an adjective or a term of abuse?
I can't stand Terry, but I do think there are far more offensive and worrying cases of racial abuse for taxpayers' money to be spend on.
Jul 12th 2012, 8:58 am
#49
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Downtown, Dubai
Posts: 782
Re: John Terry Trial
That's the problem though isn't it, depending on whether what follows is deemed to be positive or negative then it can be either.
And as you say, if 'Scottish' had been the preface to the abuse would that have made it racially aggravated? I'm mean when I get called a 'Scottish c***' at least 50% of the statement is factually correct, and I've never perceived the use of 'Scottish' as making the use of 'c***' any more or less offensive. When then the law starts to get into the reams of predicting peoples perceptions waters become very muddy.
An example from here would be hearing an Indian colleague calling a Pakistani a 'Paki'. Whilst my UK perception of the term is that it is offensive, neither the Indian or the Pakistani here found it so. It was just an abbreviation.
And as you say, if 'Scottish' had been the preface to the abuse would that have made it racially aggravated? I'm mean when I get called a 'Scottish c***' at least 50% of the statement is factually correct, and I've never perceived the use of 'Scottish' as making the use of 'c***' any more or less offensive. When then the law starts to get into the reams of predicting peoples perceptions waters become very muddy.
An example from here would be hearing an Indian colleague calling a Pakistani a 'Paki'. Whilst my UK perception of the term is that it is offensive, neither the Indian or the Pakistani here found it so. It was just an abbreviation.
Jul 12th 2012, 9:06 am
#50
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 13,553
Re: John Terry Trial
That's the problem though isn't it, depending on whether what follows is deemed to be positive or negative then it can be either.
And as you say, if 'Scottish' had been the preface to the abuse would that have made it racially aggravated? I'm mean when I get called a 'Scottish c***' at least 50% of the statement is factually correct, and I've never perceived the use of 'Scottish' as making the use of 'c***' any more or less offensive. When then the law starts to get into the reams of predicting peoples perceptions waters become very muddy.
An example from here would be hearing an Indian colleague calling a Pakistani a 'Paki'. Whilst my UK perception of the term is that it is offensive, neither the Indian or the Pakistani here found it so. It was just an abbreviation.
And as you say, if 'Scottish' had been the preface to the abuse would that have made it racially aggravated? I'm mean when I get called a 'Scottish c***' at least 50% of the statement is factually correct, and I've never perceived the use of 'Scottish' as making the use of 'c***' any more or less offensive. When then the law starts to get into the reams of predicting peoples perceptions waters become very muddy.
An example from here would be hearing an Indian colleague calling a Pakistani a 'Paki'. Whilst my UK perception of the term is that it is offensive, neither the Indian or the Pakistani here found it so. It was just an abbreviation.
Amen to that.............. never understood how/why 'Paki' became offensive, while, say, 'Aussie' didn't........ I suspect it's more to do with the people who use the term, rather than the term itself - and the skin colour of the person in question.
Jul 12th 2012, 11:24 am
#51
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 65,493
Re: John Terry Trial
It was just an abbreviation.
Amen to that.............. never understood how/why 'Paki' became offensive, while, say, 'Aussie' didn't........ I suspect it's more to do with the people who use the term, rather than the term itself - and the skin colour of the person in question.
Amen to that.............. never understood how/why 'Paki' became offensive, while, say, 'Aussie' didn't........ I suspect it's more to do with the people who use the term, rather than the term itself - and the skin colour of the person in question.
Jul 12th 2012, 11:47 am
#52
Just Joined
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 19
Re: John Terry Trial
Have followed the whole trial so far, will be down Westminster tomorrow for when he leaves court with a not-guilty verdict. Won't go into it too much but if anybody has any questions feel free to ask. I was also there at Loftus road that day about 3 rows back from the alleged 'incident', though i obviously heard nothing.
Should never of gone to court. Evidence based on words which where not heard by anybody, no chance of a conviction. Bring on tomorrow.
Should never of gone to court. Evidence based on words which where not heard by anybody, no chance of a conviction. Bring on tomorrow.
Jul 12th 2012, 1:08 pm
#53
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,641
Re: John Terry Trial
This (Terry accusation) is the most asinine reason for a trial.
Jul 12th 2012, 1:41 pm
#55
Bored liberal
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Over there ----->
Posts: 13,713
Re: John Terry Trial
Have followed the whole trial so far, will be down Westminster tomorrow for when he leaves court with a not-guilty verdict. Won't go into it too much but if anybody has any questions feel free to ask. I was also there at Loftus road that day about 3 rows back from the alleged 'incident', though i obviously heard nothing.
Should never of gone to court. Evidence based on words which where not heard by anybody, no chance of a conviction. Bring on tomorrow.
Should never of gone to court. Evidence based on words which where not heard by anybody, no chance of a conviction. Bring on tomorrow.
Jul 13th 2012, 6:34 am
#57
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Al-Khobar & Alicante
Posts: 253
Re: John Terry Trial
Some very interesting observations and opinions coming out of this thread...good to see without it descending into anarchy.
For my own two pennths' worth...and with no intention of trivialising racism in sport or in general and in no way a supporter of JT but based on what I have read and the court proceedings so far....
1) I believe AF was herded into making a complaint by others for ulterior motives.
2) The evidence is in no way incriminating enough to justify it even reaching a court - the CPS should be reprimanded for wasting public money.
3) The allegation has and possibly will continue to affect JT's career.
4) THe verdict will be "not guilty" of the charge.
The verdict is due later this afternoon.
For my own two pennths' worth...and with no intention of trivialising racism in sport or in general and in no way a supporter of JT but based on what I have read and the court proceedings so far....
1) I believe AF was herded into making a complaint by others for ulterior motives.
2) The evidence is in no way incriminating enough to justify it even reaching a court - the CPS should be reprimanded for wasting public money.
3) The allegation has and possibly will continue to affect JT's career.
4) THe verdict will be "not guilty" of the charge.
The verdict is due later this afternoon.
Jul 13th 2012, 8:48 am
#58
Just Joined
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 19
Re: John Terry Trial
Point 3 is an extremely good one. Feel extremely sorry for him. Surely he could take action against the CPS for bringing up such charges.
Jul 13th 2012, 8:57 am
#59
banned
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,611
Re: John Terry Trial
Terry is a vile prick, however this whole charade is a complete waste of time.
I played football at a semi-pro level years and years ago and was constanly abused for my scottish ginger appearance.
As mentioned by other posters..I don't see any difference in '****ing ginger jock ****' to ' fiucking black bastard' or '****ing paki ****'
They are all extremely offensive, yet only 2 of the above would merit any reaction from the police or PC brigade...that is the mess this country finds itself in.
I played football at a semi-pro level years and years ago and was constanly abused for my scottish ginger appearance.
As mentioned by other posters..I don't see any difference in '****ing ginger jock ****' to ' fiucking black bastard' or '****ing paki ****'
They are all extremely offensive, yet only 2 of the above would merit any reaction from the police or PC brigade...that is the mess this country finds itself in.
Jul 13th 2012, 11:06 am
#60
Account Closed
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 0
Re: John Terry Trial
Terry is a vile prick, however this whole charade is a complete waste of time.
I played football at a semi-pro level years and years ago and was constanly abused for my scottish ginger appearance.
As mentioned by other posters..I don't see any difference in '****ing ginger jock ****' to ' fiucking black bastard' or '****ing paki ****'
They are all extremely offensive, yet only 2 of the above would merit any reaction from the police or PC brigade...that is the mess this country finds itself in.
I played football at a semi-pro level years and years ago and was constanly abused for my scottish ginger appearance.
As mentioned by other posters..I don't see any difference in '****ing ginger jock ****' to ' fiucking black bastard' or '****ing paki ****'
They are all extremely offensive, yet only 2 of the above would merit any reaction from the police or PC brigade...that is the mess this country finds itself in.