Ferdinand will have his credibility tested by Terry’s lawyers

[Stanley]

The credibility of Queens Park Rangers defender Anton Ferdinand will be tested by John Terry’s lawyers at the England star’s racism trial, a court heard today (Monday).

Terry’s QC George Carter-Stephenson said he is to apply for ‘bad character’ evidence ‘in relation to two incidents’ to be levelled against Mr Ferdinand.

More...

[QPRDave]

So JT's defence is.............but Anton's done bad things in the past? What i don't understand is a doctor will be called to say he didn't insult Anton.So did this doctor hear him then? Because right after the incident Jt's own team mates standing next to him claimed they heard nothing.......very strange.

[andythefish]

I think it's farsical that Terry's team of lip readers are at loggerheads with Antons,maybe they need a 13year old to tell them what he said! Can't wait to hear what they think he said!

[brightonr]

Disgraceful stunt to pull. Should throw the book at him and increase his punishment for even attempting such a thing.

[Bluehoop]

The credibility of Queens Park Rangers defender Anton Ferdinand will be tested by John Terry’s lawyers at the England star’s racism trial, a court heard today (Monday).

Terry’s QC George Carter-Stephenson said he is to apply for ‘bad character’ evidence ‘in relation to two incidents’ to be levelled against Mr Ferdinand.

More...

What, are they trying to prove that Anton is indeed what Terry called him?

[wicksta]

I thought Terry had already admitted that he had said "f***** black c***" but that he had said "I didn't call you a" before it. Changing his story now?

[klonk]

it's all a bit bizarre...

terry's statement was "I'm disappointed that people have leapt to the wrong conclusions about the context of what I was seen to be saying to Anton Ferdinand", he never actually stated what it was he was "seen to be saying". but anton allegedly didn't hear what he said and more to the point has never made a direct accusation against terry - so why is his character 'good', 'bad', whatever, an issue here.

presumably, they'll discuss terry's farcical excuse for his sending off against barcelona as evidence of his reliability...

[W12hoops]

So JT's defence is.............but Anton's done bad things in the past? What i don't understand is a doctor will be called to say he didn't insult Anton.So did this doctor hear him then? Because right after the incident Jt's own team mates standing next to him claimed they heard nothing.......very strange.

Absolutely mental, a doctor called in as a witness.. So he did participate in that game then? He stood a few yards away from him when he said it?

[Westbyfleetr]

Pathetic. That's not what the case is about.

I had to contest the tribunal appeal of a director I removed from my agency for bullying. Her line of defence was to try to smear numerous colleagues, myself included, without attempting to address the accusations made against her by a number of staff. It just made her look even more of a nasty piece of work in the eyes of an independent commission. She got bugger all.