the United players were asked to testify what Evra said to them, not what Suarez said to Evra. and considering he spoke to them seperately and they were asked their questions some time after the events occurred, the vagueness of their testimony is understandable. also irrelevant to the event.
it's obvious Suarez is guilty, so trying to get off because there's no 100% concrete evidence beyond reasonable doubt makes the law into a loophole.
but you know what? the more I think about it (it's 6am & I'm tired), the more I think the case
was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
it wasn't proven beyond
any doubt, there is no
absolute certainty, no 100% concrete evidence... but you don't need that. you need to prove beyond any reasonable doubt. and I'd say that was definitely achieved.
Evra stated his case well, and made a sensible argument (and one that seems likely given Suarez's general disposition as a total WUM) which is backed up by what little video footage they have. and when Suarez was asked to answer he offered some rather unbelieveable guff, then changed his story a bit, then was contradicted by his manager, then by his team-mate & sporting director, then suggested Evra was only pursuing this to get revenge for Suarez not apologising for a tackle. basically,
his entire defence fell to pieces under cross-examination. it doesn't stand up to any logical analysis.
and that, to me, is proof beyond reasonable doubt that he's guilty.
happy muhfuckin' new year, everyone!
That's actually what should be important. Liverpool's defense and its quality is of limited relevance unless Evra can actually prove his claims. The burden of proof is clearly on Evra, as the report itself states but then completely ignores in its 115 pages.
Although, clearly biased against one party, find this evidence beyond any doubt, it'd never stand in a real court of law. There's basically not one piece of concrete evidence in these 115 pages, nothing, it's all circumstantial at best. With a charge as serious as racism claims like "it's obvious that he did" are completely worthless. There's no video/audio evidence backing it up, not even witnesses confirming it. It's a man's word against the other's.
This is pretty much the same argument people were using with Busquets last season. "He's a diver, a chear and just look at the video, it's OBVIOUS that he did it".
And you think that deciding the case in a real court of law is exploiting a loophole? While a judgement where someone accuses another person of racism and doesn't have to offer concrete evidence of it is fair?!
Habeas Corpus be damned
As you previously stated, it's a feeble case and one that the CPS would immediately throw out. I do however find it quite telling that the FA and even Evra haven't reported it to the CPS. It is a serious crime and if they're as adamant of Suarez's guilt, give him up for criminal protection.
Any reasonable person should ask themselves why the FA and Evra haven't done that.
Indeed. Racism is a very serious offense. If the FA and Evra are so sure that Suarez is guilty, they should definitely have filed a criminal complaint against him. I mean, I do know why, they have no case.
I really hope Liverpool don't give up their case. If they do and the current decision stands, it'll open a very dangerous precedent: any player in the future can accuse any other player of racism and hope to get a decision based on hearsay despite complete lack of evidence.
GOD you are a freaking incorrigible!
how much more damning does it get!
Suarez tells Comollio what he says in Spanish, Comollio translates it as 'because you are black'
Suarez tells Kuyt what he says in Dutch, Kuyt translates it as 'because you are black'
why can't the FA use that to blow a massive hole in Suarez's pathetic defence, especially after he changed his story again and again to make it look more favourable for him?
It isn't just on Evra just to prove he said it. It is on other witnesses also. 2 witnesses for Suarez both say Suarez said the same thing. As for the Man Utd players, it was only Giggs that Evra told what happened on the pitch and Giggs came up with 'he called me black'. The rest of his teammates came up with what Evra said and did in the dressing room after the game.
ADD TO THAT SUAREZ ADMITTED TO CALLING HIM 'NEGRO'! DOES THAT MEAN NOTHING?
God you are ....... I won't even bother saying it.
But one legal expert suggested that Liverpool would be ill-advised to appeal given the level of detail in the report. Steven Friel, a lawyer for Brown Rudnick who specialise in complex disputes, said: "Paul Goulding QC didn't draft a 115-page document for the love of writing. He did so because he wanted to 'appeal-proof' the decision, and he has done a very good job. Liverpool face an uphill struggle in overturning the decision, and the risks of trying but failing to do so are huge. Of all the options that are open to him, an appeal should be far down the list."
Lol, you're just proving my point. You do realize that this is a trial for racism, right? Suarez isn't being accused of stealing Evra's lunch money, he's being accused of insulting a man racially, which is a criminal offense.
That evidence of he said, she said is worth very little, even less so with different languages and translations involved. A decision like this can never be based on hearsay.
Which one of those "findings" proves this beyond any reasonable doubt?
5. The FA's case, in short, was as follows. In the goalmouth, Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to
each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the
foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because
you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch
you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr
Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr
Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie".
As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr
Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to
him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he
just called me a fucking black".
This is the accusation and it's not even remotely proved by the accusers.
And yeah, Liverpool should forget the appeal, they should take the case to a real court of law, after this report any hope of getting a non-joking, based on real evidence, decision from the FA is surely gone.
