And once more you're asking Suarez to prove himself innocent, as opposed to an accused (which is what he was, even under the standards of civil law) being presumed innocent unless EVIDENCE was forthcoming. The contradiction is that the FA stated this themselves in the pre-amble to its report, then went on to base the whole of their assumption that Suarez went on to say the words 'blackie' and 'negro'(neither words which Evra originally cited him using) for a further six times than what he admitted (again, to a number that Evra never claimed even after he'd sat down and changed his evidence with the FA before the witchtrial) completely based upon that Suarez couldn't prove by video evidence that he didn't say those things. The contradiction is that Suarez doesn't have to prove, even under the balance of probabilities, that he didn't go on to say anything other than he admitted, the FA had to use video evidence (or any other form) to prove that he did.that's not just balance of probabilities, that's the presumption of innocence he was entitled to as he was accused and evra was simply a witness for the prosecution. In absence of this the FA determined that the contraditions in his evidence re the arm pinch were sufficient to deem him an 'unreliable' witness, which was perhaps their right regarding his intent over his admitted use of the word negro at the start of the exchange (not that I agree with them, but THAT was in their agreed remit). Given though the equal, if not greater contraditions and changes to Evra's evidence (do I REALLY have to post the paragraph were he stated under oath that he'd altered what he'd said about being called a '******' because he couldn't bear to utter the word, and contrast this with his Youtube antics, or his statement that when he and Suarez were foirst called over by Marriner he said he's just been called "a ****ing black" and marriner denied he said any such thing until he booked ten minutes later?). THE FA COMPLETELY contradicted its whole purpose by ignoring all this, and the lack of positive video evidence, to presume guilt that Suarez had then gone on to further abuse Evra based upon NOTHING but Suarez's evasiveness over what he intended in his admitted response to being racially discriminated by Evra and Suarez being unable to prove that he didn't further abuse Evra. Btw, it isn't just Liverpool fans (including legal professionals) who picked holes in the language thing. The original language experts that reported to the panel, and an eminent professor of Spanish from Montevideo, based in the US, all said it was extremely unlikely that Suarez would have said 'tu es' after using the phrase "Por que", but that if people whose first language was not Spanisg, let alon Rioplate Spanish, were to believe he's said "because" rather than "why" in Spanish, they would unconsciously inser the words "tu es" so that it made sense being translated into Rrench or Dutch. It isn't the biggest contradiction anyway - The FA, under the balance of probabilitities AND the assumption of innocence still had the right to take Suarez's admission of the use of the word negro, evra's admission that he'd abused Suarez to start the 'argument', Suarez's inability to explain adaquately his arm pinch, had 'enough' evidence to support a guilty verdict. For that, and nothing else. I don't agree with it, never had and never will, but that was the remit they set themselves. To then go on, with no evidence whatsover, and knowing that Evra had changed his evidence before he got to the hearing and that the FA had tried to withhold this development, was a complete contradiction of its own stated intentions, its rules and contradicts with they way Suarez's inconsistencies were dealt with in comparison to evra's. Don't take my word for it anyway. IF what they said was true there is more than enough evidence for Suarez to be charged in a criminal court for hate crimes, and as Herbert has reminded everyone, it's not up to Evra to report this (indeed, as an officer of the court Goulding is obliged to report it himself). Why has Luis suarez never been charged in a real court? And please, don't pretend it's due to the benevolence of Evra: there is no statute time on public order/race crimes, knock yourselves out and report him yourselves.
I'm hoping Chavski get the book thrown at them for this obvious ploy of drawing attention away from the JT saga.
Are you sore that the poster has actually used facts in his post instead of mindless biased gibberish? I believe he's 100% correct in what he's said. You're throwing abuse because you've been left lost for words.
Brainwashed dickhead shock. Actually, he was asked to provide a quote from the report which would contradict the actual report and failed to do so. So, I believe you're 100% talking our of your arse. You'll be banned again soon enough so make the most of the time you have, ****.
He didn't post a single fact and nor will he ever post one. He posted a bunch of feeble justifications and arguments with zero factual basis behind them. The language experts said it was "unlikely" Suarez said X is 100% grade A bullshit. What he said was never in doubt, Suarez's defence (one of them) was that he meant it in a friendly way. So we have a bunch of ****ing "experts" proving Suarez didn't say the thing he admitted to saying and that's supposed to be proof? Are you a complete fking idiot? The rest is all supposition, irrelevant and not backed up by any evidence whatsoever.
More bias. Here is Evra's evidence. I don't know what Luis Suarez called me but he said it 5 times. A week later, Luis Suarez called me negro 10 times. Evra, when the incident occured never told anyone that he called Luis Suarez' sister a whore. A week later Evra admitted to the FA that he called Suarez' sister a whore. Unless Suarez whispered, he didn't say anything, as nobody else from either side heard anything. Why didn't Evra tell one of his team-mates that Suarez said something? This is a natural reaction. I think its you pal that is making up fabricated nonsense.
He just headbutts the keyboard while chanting "**** Slurgie! **** Slurgie! **** Slurgie!" and then hits post.
please log in to view this image Remember the game we're playing, it was called "Having proof". You lost again. Case dismissed!
This was never a debate, just donga spewing the same half baked arguments out for the thousandth time. Fed up of debunking him and making him look stupid, but he obviously isn't yet. Maybe he thinks next week when he posts the same crap we'll all have an epiphany and agree with him....
I'll never agree with an apologist for racism. I very much doubt Dong or KPR would have the balls to defend Suarez in person to a black man.
