John Terry's request turned down.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail....g-evidence-trial.html

If Terry is convicted due to the lip-reading evidence, will it be the first time someone has been found guilty of not 'what was said', but what 'was seen to be said'?

[jackthehat]

No.

[Baldric]

Does anyone apart from Terry really give a stuff?

[sp1814]

Have to say Mr Terry (aside from this case) is a thoroughly nasty piece of work, and people I've spoken to at work about this have the attitude of "Sod him...who cares?"

If this happened to someone whoisheld in high esteem, I suppose there'd be a bigger outcry.

But it's John Terry.

[stokemaveric]

terry knows what he said...and that is why he wanted the lip reading ban..he is a disgrace to the sport..in fact he is a disgrace to the human race...

[mushroom25]

//... is a thoroughly nasty piece of work....//
...and so is/was lee hughes, joey barton, jonathan woodgate, etc etc.

does the sport naturally attract people like this, or is it the sport and all that goes with it, itself the corrupting agent?

[jackthehat]

...corrupting agents?
Them, too, I bet......:o)

[Zhukov]

Terry is just another thug..a very rich Chav..it just so happens,he can head a ball quite well..

[anotheoldgit]

I bet he is glad you lot won't be on the jury.

[mushroom25]

the case will be heard at westminster magistrate's court. there will be no jury.

[anotheoldgit]

Regardless of what one thinks of the person.

Convicted on someone interpretation of one's lip movements????

That is not the type of country I would wish our country to become.

It is more reminiscent of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

What next the reading of one's thoughts?

[jackthehat]

For your further education...

http://www.qebhollisw...ensic-lip-reading.pdf

[bazwillrun]

"in fact he is a disgrace to the human race"

how do you come to that conclusion, has he got a criminal record that we dont know about, or is that you just dont like him, not that you even know him.

[HowardKennitby]

I am not an expert but I hope they would use more than one speech-reader in such a case. I would also hope they would not rely on it exclusively.

[Hopkirk]

If the lip reader backs up what the alleged victim says, then I'm all for allowing it.

Otherwise someone can simply get away with denying it, one person's word against the other.

[ELVIS68]

Terry has admitted using the alleged words but with "Oi I never called you a"
In front of it.

If the ignorant chav thinks we are as thick as him then I hope he gets banned for life

[China Doll]

I'm not sure 'interpretation' is a correct word really. My mum has menieres disease and has hearing problems; she quite often turns her hearing aid off and then lip reads to follow a conversation and she follows what I say and not what I 'seem' to say perfectly well if that makes any sense, there isn't anything by way of 'interpretation', she will just say to speak slower if she isn't sure what I said and needs me to say it again.

[ELVIS68]

AOG, if it happened the other way round and Terry was on the receiving end would you be standing outside Loftus Road with your burning cross.

[jno]

no, he'll be guilty of what he said. Someone figuring out what it was by reading his lips is in the same legal position as someone listening to it with ears: just giving evidence.

He may though be able to persuade a court that the lip movements used in saying "You **** **** ****" are identical to those used in saying "You fine young fellow."

[FredPuli43]

Won't need to be much of a lip-reader or 'interpreter' if,as Elvis says, Terry is claiming he said six words (Oi, I never callled you a..) before the racist word he admits saying but the complainant says there was just the racist word . It's a matter of counting the utterances!

But his counsel is talking of the interpretation of one word. The expert evidence is of use in corroborating the complaint. Like all expert evidence it can be challenged; it's not sacred. It looks to be in the category of a lot of testimony of handwriting experts; it has limits on its value, to put it mildly.

If it's being tried by a District Judge, a trained barrister or solicitor of some years standing before he took the job, he understands the principles of evidence and the use of expert evidence. That may not bode well for Mr Terry.

[Gromit]

Is this an attempt to enter a Guilty plea early?

I am no lip reader, but I saw the video and I could tell what Terry said.

The FA is run by a bunch of idiots, it is embarrassing.