An independent inquiry into the 'independent' inquiry

[One of the lads]

This person is a bigot, clearly shown on another thread (amazingly on the LFC board) which makes any contribution to a Liverpool related debate suspect in the very least.

Ironic really since he seems to have spent an inordinate time spent in the board of a people he clearly despises arguing about bigotry. He doth protest too much springs to mind.

Shakespeare. Now that's more like it!

 

[StJohn_Red_Legend]

I can't think of a reason why the FA would want to support Evra and engineer a guilty verdict for Suarez. If they wanted to do that they wouldn't have asked an independent panel to judge the case, they would have done it themselves. Unless the independent panel was paid by the FA to come to a predetermined conclusion? If so the pay off must have been huge as QC's make a lot of money but why would the FA waste a load of money on that? There are a lot of theories that could be put forward in defence of Suarez, there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty.

The FA have a 99.5% success rate in bringing cases to a 'positive' conclusion (i.e. a guilty finding and a ban) - even in the worst, most corrupt dictatorships across the globe they don't have that success rate.

And since you talk about facts, perhaps you can define the word 'fact', as opposed to 'opinion' or 'theory'...

I have read the report.

You must be ready to WOW us with the FACTS you claim to have seen.

Please enlighten us - give us the FACTS as stated in the report...

The fact is the independent panel judged Suarez to be a liar and that he racially abused Evra. Fact (as Rafa might say).

It can't always be everybody else's fault.

So, you have no facts, despite having said, and I quote,

there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty.

You're just as ignorant as all the rest of the haters out there...

 

[carlsberg]

as already stated. the people at the FA are anti-Blatter, the anti-racism stance was just the perfect response to blatter for them.

as yet, you are still unable to provide any facts for why suarez was found guilty.
just because the 'independent' panel have judged him to be guilty, and even then, they only managed that on a highly-tenous, unproven (and actually unprovable) 'balance of probability' does not mean they were correct. any statistician would have a field day taking apart the panels 'probabilities'.

so which 'facts' have you actually found that provide ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that suarez is actually guilty of any racist abuse?

 

[One of the lads]

So, you have no facts, despite having said, and I quote,

You're just as ignorant as all the rest of the haters out there...

I gave you a fact. Suarez was found guilty. As Rafa would say, fact.

You can't deal with that fact, I understand that. Club loyalty does funny things to people. Look at Kenny in his comical t-shirt which he no doubt regrets.

What has become apparent is that any contrary opinion to the Liverpool gospel is met with abuse.

 

[saintanton]

I gave you a fact. Suarez was found guilty. As Rafa would say, fact.

You can't deal with that fact, I understand that. Club loyalty does funny things to people. Look at Kenny in his comical t-shirt which he no doubt regrets.

What has become apparent is that any contrary opinion to the Liverpool gospel is met with abuse.

Not much abuse here- just a rational dismantling of your argument.

 

[Ivan Dobsky]

and i can think of a very good reason for the FA to support evra, they wanted to get back at blatter for some of his comments about racism, and an extreme hardline stance on racism was the perfect way.

The decision came on the same day the CPS announced John Terry would face prosecution in a PROPER court, therefore was sub-judice and untouchable to the FA until the case is heard. They had hysterical pressure from various single-issue pressure group and an unholy alliance of right-on newspapers (Guardian, Independent) and reactionary rags like the Sun and the Volksher Mail trying to prove their anti-racist credentials in the shadow of the Lawrence retrial. Suarez was caught in a perfect storm of hypocrisy.

And no, i don't 'condone' racism at all. But this Disneyfied version of Evra innocently skipping along the pich when the swathy, greasy, dag gaucho edged towards him and racially slur him for no better reason than to wind him up and belittle him. IF you have read the report, and not just skim read the summary like that tit James lawton with a hangover on New Year's Day to come with that bizarre conclusion that the report shows 'irrefutable truth' that Suarez called Evra 'blackie' seven times (even Evra never claimed that) then you'd have to be pre-determined in your belief of Suarez's guilt to not see that at every stage the FA have bent over backwards to discount Evra inconsistency in Evra's evidence ('Your sister's pussy' specially translated into Spanish was an 'exclaimation, ffs, and the cack about Evra changing what he was called because he couldn't bring himself to utter the word 'nigga' - YouTube?) and allow any contradiction in Suarez's evidence (such as the motive behind the pinch that evra didn't even remember) to be proof positive of his 'unconvincing' status as a witness.

But, as people are still asking that if the case was flawed why Liverpool didn't appeal (and those same papers and journalists that urged Liverpool not to appeal for the good of the game were the ones who immeadiately turned around and said the non-appeal was proof of guilt!) to turn this around and say why, if the evidence was so strong, Suarez did not find himself in a criminal court like Terry? The only one in this scenario who had admitted aggivated, abusive behaviour (arguably racist too, as there's as much evidence that he called Suarez a 'Sudaca' as Suarez called him anything racist in INTENT) is Evra. Oh how we wish that this farrago HAD ended up in a crown court as Luther Blissett wanted.

 

[Diego Gomezjurado]

So basically you're condoning racist abuse. Good luck to you. Sepp Blatter would be proud of that statement!

As a South American Linguist I believe that the panel got it wrong. I am not condoning racism, I just believe things said on the pitch should stay on the pitch.

 

[carlsberg]

donga, it would have been nice to have it in a proper court. at least then there would be fair hearing, and even the press would have had to be fairer in their reporting. but it would never have got that far if following legal procedures.
the police wouldn't even have got as far as pressing charges due to a complete lack of evidence.
and assuming, hypothetically, that he was charged, the cps would drop the case before it got anywhere near court based on there being 0% chance of actually getting a conviction.
something people like 'no one famous' seem to be completely unable to get into their heads.

 

[One of the lads]

Not much abuse here- just a rational dismantling of your argument.

All I've said is that the independent panel found Suarez guilty. That's a fact. A fact that some people aren't able to deal with. They can be as "rational" or abusive as they like, it won't change the fact that Suarez was found guilty and that Liverpool dealt with the case so poorly that 3 apologies had to be issued (far too late).

 

[StJohn_Red_Legend]

I gave you a fact. Suarez was found guilty. As Rafa would say, fact.

You can't deal with that fact, I understand that. Club loyalty does funny things to people. Look at Kenny in his comical t-shirt which he no doubt regrets.

What has become apparent is that any contrary opinion to the Liverpool gospel is met with abuse.

Opinion is NOT fact. You said "there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty."

I hate to burst your delusional bubble, but since there are no facts within the report that are undisputed, other than Suarez' own accepted statement that he said "Por que, Negro?" which the lingusitic experts agreed could be said in a conciliatory way, to say the fact he's guilty is because the report says to lacks logic.

I asked for you to back up the quoted statement that there are facts. You simply can't do that because there are no 'facts' that led to him being found guilty. There are opinions only.

As for the rest - I'll give YOU some facts. The lack of any substantial evidence is the reason why the CPS have taken absolutely no action in this case and why all the comical calls from various media figures for Suarez to be prosecuted will come to nothing. I do hope one of these bollockless knobheads actually finds a pair and tries a private prosecution, because a QC would destroy any prosecution case in a court of Law.

Perhaps it could be you taking Suarez to court - you seem offended enough that a supposed racist is allowed to continue to be employed and paid a huge salary compared to your Income Support payments. You might even get legal aid to do it, but I doubt it would also cover the damages awarded against you for malicious prosecution and defamation of character...

 

[One of the lads]

Opinion is NOT fact. You said "there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty."

I hate to burst your delusional bubble, but since there are no facts within the report that are undisputed, other than Suarez' own accepted statement that he said "Por que, Negro?" which the lingusitic experts agreed could be said in a conciliatory way, to say the fact he's guilty is because the report says to lacks logic.

I asked for you to back up the quoted statement that there are facts. You simply can't do that because there are no 'facts' that led to him being found guilty. There are opinions only.

As for the rest - I'll give YOU some facts. The lack of any substantial evidence is the reason why the CPS have taken absolutely no action in this case and why all the comical calls from various media figures for Suarez to be prosecuted will come to nothing. I do hope one of these bollockless knobheads actually finds a pair and tries a private prosecution, because a QC would destroy any prosecution case in a court of Law.

Perhaps it could be you taking Suarez to court - you seem offended enough that a supposed racist is allowed to continue to be employed and paid a huge salary compared to your Income Support payments. You might even get legal aid to do it, but I doubt it would also cover the damages awarded against you for malicious prosecution and defamation of character...

That's quality. "Rational".

 

[StJohn_Red_Legend]

There are a lot of theories that could be put forward in defence of Suarez, there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty.

Come on, give me two facts from in the report that the panel relied on to come to the guilty verdict?

Just two, that should be easy for you. You're a genius, aren't you.

 

[Diego Gomezjurado]

Come on, give me two facts from in the report that the panel relied on to come to the guilty verdict?

Just two, that should be easy for you. You're a genius, aren't you.

We analysed this incident in my sociolinguistics course and came to the conclusion that the panel had no real evidence to condemn Suarez.

 

[One of the lads]

Come on, give me two facts from in the report that the panel relied on to come to the guilty verdict?

Just two, that should be easy for you. You're a genius, aren't you.

Genius? If you say so. Ta.

 

[johnsonsbaby]

"...there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty."



So give us some of those facts. The only 'fact' that you've come up with so far is that he was found guilty, which is outside of your statement. Give us some facts - 'that led' to him being found guilty?



I smell lettuce!!!!

 

[carlsberg]

All I've said is that the independent panel found Suarez guilty. That's a fact. A fact that some people aren't able to deal with



NO. it's not that we're not able to deal with it. it's that we believe it's an incorrect verdict, achieved with no supporting evidence whatsoever, using a very flawed procedure by a biased governing body with an investiture in reaching a particular verdict in order to provide them with support in a dispute with another party (blatter)

and as for he's guilty because the panel found him guilty, the birmingham six, the guildford four, the maguire seven, all cases were innocent parties were wrongly found guilty in a criminal court of law, where the requirement for proof of guilt are much more strenous, and the safeguards for mistakes much higher, because one part, the police, had an agenda. all convictions were later quashed.
if mistaken convictions can be made because one part of the police/cps/courts/jury had an agenda, when all parts are separate, then is it not reasonable to concur that in suarez's case a wrongful guilty verdict can be made when what constitutes the equivalent of the police/cps/court and jury are all part of the same body - the FA, especially when the FA has an advantage/preference for a particular verdict to be reached?

and you have STILL NOT supplied a single fact to support the reaching of a guilty verdict.

 

[One of the lads]

I don't think the FA are biased in favour of Manchester United or that they have an agenda against Liverpool.

 

[DirtyFrank]

What's really interesting is I had a little lurk on the United Board(somewhere I had not been until that point)

I was just interested to see if they discuss us as much there as they do here. And you know what? Going by the number of threads; They discuss us even more!

Most interesting is a thread discussing how we ?scousers?? Won't let the issue lie, that we are a disgrace that don't know that by keeping the issue going we are doing more damage to our reputation.

Funny thing is though one of the loudest" voices" on that thread was No One At Alls. And yet here he is today single handedly stoking one thread & actually dug out & revived an old thread on the issue. He's not the only one mind you, many of the names you see here constantly were there shaking their Internet heads condemning us for continuing.

Obsessed since 1892.

 

[One of the lads]

"...there are also the facts that led to him being found guilty."



So give us some of those facts. The only 'fact' that you've come up with so far is that he was found guilty, which is outside of your statement. Give us some facts - 'that led' to him being found guilty?



I smell lettuce!!!!

I thought BringBackBenitez was lettuce, whoever he is!

 

[johnsonsbaby]

So no facts then?