Hutcho 8,443 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Lipreading analysis is legal in UK ? I've always though it wasn't a legal evidence...no idea but it would appear so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif 6,006 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 There still isn't any actual hardcore proof by the way.For all we know, Terry didn't speak a single word. He could have just mouthed/lip synced the whole thing without even using his voice.Of course I don't believe that's the case, but when it comes to court, it's not what's right or wrong - it's what you can prove.So far, this lip reading nonsense has just been assumption and educated guesses.There's still no proof aside from that video, which actually isn't a huge amount of evidence itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jase 43,479 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Dan Levene @BluesChronicle Defence lawyer is suggesting to the witness that lip-reading is an imprecise matter. Not a science. Lip-reader agrees. SeB and Term-X 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ccdavies: Lip reader agrees with #Terry QC there is "fundamental unreliability" in "being able to interpret speech visibly with certainty". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ccdavies: Lip reader says she didn't see in media what incident was about before examining footage. Aware something was said, but not what. #TerryBULLSHIT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulham Broadway 17,313 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 How long is lunch at these things usually?Thats how they will drag this out for as long as possible -whos making shed loads of dosh out of this ? -the legal profession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuf 1,448 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 The court heard that Terry told Ferdinand to 'f*** off" and also called him a "f****** k*******' as the pair exchanged insults.Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz2086ONzshI'm currently reading the very interesting article from the Daily Mail, really it seems like a playground argument with some rude kids.Otherwise as I would like to improve my vocabulary lol, can you say and explain to me what is a k******* ? Knobhead, check out google images, you will understand.What's funny tho is that you can clearly see that we are the best Chelsea forum on the net, as I recall our moderators calling Term X the same way. What an outstanding understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 So basically there's no proof........See you at the Community Shield JT mediator 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TacticalBlues 2,817 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Well from my first year of law, which wasn't focusing on this area to an extent, I'd think that proximity and reasonability would fail Ferdinand's case. The Alcock precedent (Hillsborough disaster) supports that TV replays cannot be used too. I'm not too sure, but as it stands Terry doesn't seem to be guilty IMO but you don't know. I mean we know he isn't racist, some of his best friends like Cole, Drogba, SWP etc. would all support that. Nevertheless that wouldn't vindicate racial slurs, even with genuine malice or not.The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and Public Order Act 1986 state their needs to be intent to stir up racial hatred though.If Terry's found innocent he should sue him for defamation straight, the case is obvious, and the repercussions surrounding his England captaincy were severe. Term-X and Leif 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ccdavies:#Terry"s QC cross examining lip reader over words she claimed the Chelsea captain used. Questions the word "you".Looks like he's trying to argue JT said 'Yeah, I didn't say fucking black cunt' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Hate Scouse 10,326 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 ccdavies: Lip reader agrees with #Terry QC cannot exclude possibility words used were "a fucking black cunt" as opposed to "you fucking black cunt". Blue Armour and Sheva. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xPetrCechx 13,570 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 can someone sum up for me the things until now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 can someone sum up for me the things until now?Basically JT will be found innocent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TacticalBlues 2,817 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Lip reader agrees that you cannot exclude the possibility that the words used were "a fucking black cunt"So the lipreader concluded that JT said:"yeah, I" (missing word and obstruction), "you fucking black cunt"( then pause) "fucking knobhead".zzzzzzzzzzzzznmfs ,g,fndgfdmg fdh mgh gm hg"yeah, I" (didn't call), "you a fucking black cunt"(you) "fucking knobhead".Maybe?I think the fact that it was confirmed that he called him after the game to clear things up, with Cole as a witness to Ferdinand's dismissal who then saw this vague footage afterwards as the basis of this litigation, could prove his innocence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leif 6,006 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Maybe Anton said "oi you... shagging your mate's misses?"and Terry replied - "Yeah, she had a fucking black cunt...and licked my knobhead" Kezza, milanoww and chelseaAus 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zolayes 14,489 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Knobhead, check out google images, you will understand.What's funny tho is that you can clearly see that we are the best Chelsea forum on the net, as I recall our moderators calling Term X the same way. What an outstanding understanding.I still dont understand why Knobhead is a term of endearment and Dickhead is considered offensive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bir_CFC 3,455 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I'm confused. It sounds like Terry admitted to saying black c*** but his defense is that he was trying to clear up Anton's accusation. But then Anton said that he never accused Terry which can only mean that Terry did in fact call him a black c***. If this is the case then looks like JT is guilty. I mean, JT confessed to saying black c***, regardless of context, looks like guilty to me.Am I missing something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TacticalBlues 2,817 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I'm confused. It sounds like Terry admitted to saying black c*** but his defense is that he was trying to clear up Anton's accusation. But then Anton said that he never accused Terry which can only mean that Terry did in fact call him a black c***. If this is the case then looks like JT is guilty. I mean, JT confessed to saying black c***, regardless of context, looks like guilty to me.Am I missing something?It all seems confusing, he's acknowledged to saying it as a sarcastic exclamation. It's weird though because Ferdinand said he didn't hear him say anything at the time otherwise their would of been a 'fight'. But then why did JT call him up to clear the confusion after the game? We're all probably missing some details but it could show that in the heat of the moment, Ferdinand didn't actually take any particular offense to it as a racist abuse, which is what the translator also felt who had no knowledge of any details prior to arriving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSanti 290 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 It all seems confusing, he's acknowledged to saying it as a sarcastic exclamation. It's weird though because Ferdinand said he didn't hear him say anything at the time otherwise their would of been a 'fight'. But then why did JT call him up to clear the confusion after the game? We're all probably missing some details but it could show that in the heat of the moment, Ferdinand didn't actually take any particular offense to it as a racist abuse, which is what the translator also felt who had no knowledge of any details prior to arriving.Then why the fuck did Anton acused him anyway? Why the fuck is there trial atm? TacticalBlues 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bir_CFC 3,455 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 It all seems confusing, he's acknowledged to saying it as a sarcastic exclamation. It's weird though because Ferdinand said he didn't hear him say anything at the time otherwise their would of been a 'fight'. But then why did JT call him up to clear the confusion after the game? We're all probably missing some details but it could show that in the heat of the moment, Ferdinand didn't actually take any particular offense to it as a racist abuse, which is what the translator also felt who had no knowledge of any details prior to arriving.Yeah so if Anton never initially accused Terry of calling him a black c*** then Terry has no case when he says he was just trying to clear up the accusation. Sounds like he'll be found guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.