Suarez is also a liar & had his testimony rubbished so what? Evra being a liar doesn't alter the fact that Suarez is a loathsome maggot

Evra wrote this song and had to pursue legal action against Henry to get his royalties.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZiPySFzQdc

Its just a bad cover of a Louis Suarez original

sorry i jumped on your original....and funny post

It's got nothing to do with studying law. It's called common sense. Evra's story doesn't stack up, there are massive in-consistencies. During the time when he was likely to give his most reliable testimony he couldn't;

A) - Recall what exactly was said to him.

B) - The amount of times it was said.

IMO opinion there were also other mitigating factors that contributed to the verdict only going one way. They were Blatter's 'settle it with a handshake' comments. The FA had to be seen to be tough on racism after preaching to FIFA and UEFA, about how tough they are on racism and how it isn't a problem in this country.

Also the minute Suarez, stupidly, admitted to saying the word 'negro' he was done for. That was exactly what panel were hoping for. They could ignore any context and hang him on that word alone.

So you don't really understand the law or how it works....
If only the solicitors of the Birmingham six used common sense

They were Blatter's 'settle it with a handshake' comments.

----------------

Exactly, this case fitted the FA's agenda at the time perfectly.

The u-turn in the media was breathtaking, in the end according to the red top rags and Sky Blatter was right I found their blatant hypocrisy hilarious.

Batter admitted to knowing FIFA members took corporate bribes....hardly a beacon of justice for you to use

Worse than trying to justify stuff by saying Ferguson was a thugs.

Felliani's

Just because I haven;t studied law, doesn't mean I don't understand it or how it works.

Why don't you actually try to address the points I have made instead of making spurious analogies between the Evra-Suarez case and the Birmingham 6.

Lets start with this. Given what I have said, do you still think Evra hadn't lied?

The point is....if you don't know the finer points of law....how can you assume common sense will help.

It never reared its head at OT in theactions.of both players?

I will never know the truth in this case....however men better versed in the game rules judged suarez guilty and banned him for his crime

Felliani's

Common sense helps because there is a glaring error in Evra's story on the events that took place that day. You don't have to be a solicitor, barrister, QC, judge or FA panel member to see it.

I know about eye-witness testimony through studying Psychology. It is what the police use, and account for, when taking statements from those who have witnessed a crime.

You asked why Evra was a liar. I have given you examples. Do you care to comment on those examples? Or are you going to keep swerving it as if they were never given?

We, Liverpool fans, feel aggrieved at the way the hearing was handled. There were in-consistencies that were over-looked on Evra's part, but highlighted as a factor to use against Suarez. Evra was also given the advantage of recalling his testimony whilst watching a video of the event.

There are even United fans, Red666 being one, that agree with us.

I feel you are being obtuse because you are an Everton fan, and you can't see past your loyalty to them/rivalry with us. I hope you could possibly take a look with objective eyes.

He was guilty anyway only a balloon would argue otherwise

You asked why Evra was a liar. I have given you examples. Do you care to comment on those examples? Or are you going to keep swerving it as if they were never given?
--------------------------------

You are arguing/debating with a LFC obsessed functional simpleton. It's pointless.

In his obsessed world Liverpool = Bad and that's that.

Tobes

Yes that approach works if you just read the headlines and pay no attention to the wider details of the story.

I'll ask you, seeing as Felliani's is being elusive. Given the examples I have given do you think Evra lied?

I think Evra over exaggerated the events of that day but that doesn't alter the fact that he was racially abused by Suarez

If you put this in terms of gender, Suarez called Patricia a silly cow. Patricia then went and and got her 7 foot tall, 23 stone of solid muscle, ex special forces fiance and told him "he called me a filthy c^^t. 10 times".

Then Suarez got owned.

The end.

Tobes

So Evra's claims about never saying, and hating, the word n****r. But then being found using that word are not lies?

Evra saying he was called a n****r, straight after the match (when the incident was still fresh in his mind) was not a lie?

These lies, or over exaggerations if you want to call them that, cast huge shadows over the reliability of Evra's testimony, and allegations against Suarez.

Racist abuse is racist abuse pal

Most racist comments/actions in order :

1. Anton Ferdinand
2. Rio Ferdinand
3. Suarez
4. Evra
5. Terry

Tobes

But if doubts have been cast about Evra's version of events straight after the match. Is it not reasonable to cast doubts about the allegations on the whole?

The claim that Evra is a liar is accurate. That's been proven. Why should we trust the testimony over someone who lied? Why do you take it as given that everything he said afterwards is the truth?

**" Why should we trust the testimony OF someone who lied?"

He made reference to his skin colour in a manner that was patently derogatory ergo it was racial abuse, that's it

i think "ergo" is the important word

Did he?

Said who?

Oh yeah, Patrice Evra. Because that's what it came down to in the end. It was Evra's word against Suarez's.

When Evra's memory was at it's most reliable, straight after the incident, he claimed that he was called a n****r. Then he claimed that he'd been abused 10 plus times, on Canal+. Non of these turned out to be true.