Cibaman wrote:
Its a slightly, but significantly, different charge to the court case. He was charged by the CPS with using racially abusive language likely to cause alarm or distress. He was acquitted on the basis, that although he accepted using the language, it wasnt proven that it would have been likely to cause alarm or distress, because of the context. The FA charge is that he used racially abusive language. Nothing about it causing alarm or distress. The context, whether Ferdinand was likely to be offended, is irrelevant.
If it hadnt been for the Suarez case I'm sure the FA would have let the matter drop. But because of the Suarez case and the justification for that verdict (ie that the context is irrelevant, its only what he said that matters) the FA didnt have much option than to bring the charge. Otherwise they would have been wide open to the accusation of treating Suarez unfairly compared to Terry.
I know that scousers like to deny this, but the panel rejected Suarez's "cultural differences" excuse because of the repetition of the comments. He might have got away with it if it was one use, but Evra had clearly got pi55ed off and he carried on.
The legal charges are obviously going to be different to the FA charges. There's practically no way that legal language can ever meet fully the FA rules. But this case is close enough to mean that if it doesn't apply in this case, then will it never apply. And right now the FA need to answer why they don't have to follow their own rules when they were the ones who wrote the rules in the first place.
In many ways if the FA did have to withdraw the case because of rule 6.8 that would have been a victory and a loss for Terry though. While he wouldn't have been punished by the FA, he would still carry the public verdict of guilty because he would have got off on a legal technicality. At least now he has the chance to clear his name. But how much of a chance he is actually getting is questionable. And whether his name would ever be clear even if this tribunal came with a not guilty verdict is just as questionable.
Another question the FA need to answer is why Anton Ferdinand isn't up on the foul and abusive language charge along with Terry. Ferdinand was equally guilty of that as Terry clearly was. I don't accept whatsoever the notion that you can't use witness testimony to damn someone. They are potentially using the testimony of a person declared not guilty to damn him. The events as told to the courts by both parties had Ferdinand as the instigator, the cause of the argument and the first one to use foul and abusive language. He was only the witness because he wasn't on camera.
