FA Panel Dismiss Terry Defence and Cole Evidence In Race Case

John Terry's defence against racially abusing Anton Ferdinand was 'not credible' and 'improbable, implausible and contrived', The Football Association's independent panel have found.

Terry, who was banned for four matches and fined £220,000 after being found guilty by the commission of racially abusing Ferdinand in October 2011, was deemed to have submitted a weak defence in responce to the racial abuse charge.

The former England captain had chosen against giving evidence at the hearing, instead relying on his acquittal at Westminster Magistrates Court in July as his burden of innocence.

"The Commission is quite satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that there is no credible basis for Mr. Terry's defence that his use of the words "fucking black cunt" were directed at Ferdinand by way of forceful rejection and/or inquiry" the FA panel's written reasons said.

"Instead, we are quite satisfied, and find on the balance of probabilities, that the offending words were said by way of insult.

The panel add: "There are then further aspects of Mr. Terry"s defence that the Commission finds improbable, implausible and contrived, and which serve to underline and reinforce our decision."

The incident at Loftus Road last year occurred during a confrontation between both players during Queens Park Rangers' 1-0 win over Chelsea, it which it was alleged that Terry said the words 'f**king black c**t' as an insult.

The 33 year old had claimed the words were in reply to an insult from Ferdinand earlier during the pair's argument, a defence which Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle said was 'highly unlikely'; a ruling the FA panel concurred with during their findings.

"It is tolerably clear that the Chief Magistrate would not have been satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that Mr. Ferdinand did accuse Mr. Terry on the pitch of calling him a "black cunt".

"In particular, his use of the words "inherently unlikely" in that context would obviously be inconsistent with a finding to the civil standard of proof that Mr. Ferdinand did use the words "black cunt".

"We are driven to conclude not just that it is "highly unlikely" that Mr. Ferdinand accused Mr. Terry on the pitch of calling him a "black cunt", but that he did not."

"It is accepted by everyone involved in the criminal and disciplinary proceedings that Mr. Terry is not a racist," the panel added.

The Chelsea skipper's four game ban was half of the punishment Liverpool's Luis Suarez received for racially abusing Patrice Evra, with the Uruguayan banned for eight games after an FA panel reached a guilty verdict.

The Panel have confirmed that had Terry's insult was uttered only once, and in contrast the Suarez case last year, leads to a reduced punishment.

"In contrast with a previous high profile FA disciplinary case involving racial abuse, Mr. Terry's racist insult was issued only once.

"Although once is clearly once too many, the Commission accepts that it was said in the heat of the moment. Had it been said more than once, the entry point penalty would have applied to successive insults."

Amid the panel's finding, the written statement provided by Ashley Cole, the Chelsea and England defender, is said to have 'evolved' and that significant alterations were made to bolster Terry's defence.

Cole was interviewed five days after the incident by FA's Head of Off-Field Regulations Jenni Kennedy in order to piece together a statement, which was submitted as evidence to the hearing.

The original statement drafted from the interview, taken from Cole's words during the interview, did not include a reference to the word 'black' which the full-back later claimed he could have heard during the altercation between Terry and Ferdinand.

After an email exchange between The FA and Chelsea secretary David Barnard, the statement was altered to include the word 'black', following a conversation with Cole, but not change to include 'fucking' or 'cunt' which contradicts a later statement made by Barnard.

The severity of the alteration, information that was not submitted to the Chief Magistrate, the FA panel conclude could have led to greater scrutiny over the evidence in court given by Cole.

"These highly material issues relating to Mr. Cole's evidence were not addressed by the Chief Magistrate - he clearly did not have the interview notes of the FA's interviewers, or Mr. Barnard"s statement before him - and they do not appear in his judgment. Accordingly, that material can and should properly be regarded as cogent new evidence.

"Had it been before him, the Commission has no doubt that the Chief Magistrate would have examined Mr. Cole's evidence as to what he claims he heard Mr. Ferdinand say to Mr. Terry on the pitch very carefully indeed, or scrutinised it even more closely than he may have done.

"Like the Commission, the issues that have arisen would have informed his view as to whether Mr. Cole"s evidence was capable of providing reliable corroboration for Mr. Terry's case. On the evidence before us, the Commission has considerable doubts in that regard."