Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 129 of 129

Thread: Leeds United - v - Hull City ** Carabao Cup ***Matchday Thread***

  1. #121
    Should say not rather than now.

  2. #122
    just the slightest suggestion that you could be racist is enough to convict these days.

  3. #123
    Sad but true - what happened to due process and rules. Sure some of the sports bodies get into trouble by straying into areas they should just leave to the courts and people better places to judge the issues.

  4. #124
    if you are white and male, the authorities should start with the premise that you ARE racist until proved otherwise, this will save the courts time and money, obvious excemptions for the wokes, snowflakes and the LMBQTPQT crowd.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by asturianblanco View Post
    if you are white and male, the authorities should start with the premise that you ARE racist until proved otherwise, this will save the courts time and money, obvious excemptions for the wokes, snowflakes and the LMBQTPQT crowd.
    I think you make a reasonable point - it does all go too far generally. Clearly a few of us differ on this particular example and i'm quite happy to respect other people's interpretations of the evidence - mine remains that he was racist and hasn't apologised for it.

    The process was the one in place for dealing with such incidents within the organisation that governs his trade - he could have appealed to a legal court or accused the accuser of defamation, and looked at clearing his name afterwards. He didn't do any of that.

    As HO states, the outcome was on the balance of probability. That is the same process for every decision made by every court. In the end, we disagree on the outcome's judgement of probability.

    He could even have come out and said something like 'i did not do this, but i regret if anything i did say was interpreted in the way it was' - and then made a statement against racism and use of words like that in particular. But he didn't do any of that either.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    10,986
    My stance on it has never changed.

    If your a cnut your a cnut regardless of colour/gender but I can't be doing with this horrible spoilt snowflake generation we have these days.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,532
    Documents said he roomed on away games with Ghanaian Mubarak Wakaso when at Espanyol and they and families still friends today. Also decision was weighed against him for having too many character witnesses !!!!.. FA live in their own world and make it up as they go along

    If the players decided to give him the armband, that says it all for me

  8. #128
    Quote Originally Posted by Jezleeds View Post
    I think you make a reasonable point - it does all go too far generally. Clearly a few of us differ on this particular example and i'm quite happy to respect other people's interpretations of the evidence - mine remains that he was racist and hasn't apologised for it.

    The process was the one in place for dealing with such incidents within the organisation that governs his trade - he could have appealed to a legal court or accused the accuser of defamation, and looked at clearing his name afterwards. He didn't do any of that.

    As HO states, the outcome was on the balance of probability. That is the same process for every decision made by every court. In the end, we disagree on the outcome's judgement of probability.

    He could even have come out and said something like 'i did not do this, but i regret if anything i did say was interpreted in the way it was' - and then made a statement against racism and use of words like that in particular. But he didn't do any of that either.
    Almost but not quite - criminal courts are to a beyond reasonable doubt (which often is thought to be about 80% convinced but that itself is not the test).

    Racist comments would usually be dealt with by criminal courts by way of prosecution.

    The accounts of who said what were not really corroborated by any other player so it was one word against another and because of some of the other things Kiko and the Leeds employee said the tribunal found him less credible than Leko.

    From what was available from the judgement it seems clear Lego thought he had been racially abused not least from how he reacted at the time and afterwards.

    Herein lies the rub you can have people who are bigoted and racist who are careful with what they say but you can have people who abhor those things and who would be said to be decent who in the heat of the moment say something that they would never intend and never do again.

    Our ‘civilised’ society seems very keen to condemn people very quickly which does not actually seem very civilised at all.

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by whitestomper45 View Post
    Documents said he roomed on away games with Ghanaian Mubarak Wakaso when at Espanyol and they and families still friends today. Also decision was weighed against him for having too many character witnesses !!!!.. FA live in their own world and make it up as they go along

    If the players decided to give him the armband, that says it all for me
    Some of his defence around the actual word used was crazy though WS - he claimed to never ever have heard the word before and then the timing of events afterwards from both Kiko and the Leeds employee was from memory very strange. It was so unbelievable that it made the credibility of everything else he said less favourable than Leko’s account according to the tribunal.

    I do agree that people’s ability to take offence and complain or justify belief that said person uttering said words is the vilest person ever to have lived seems to be somewhat greater than it ever used to be.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •