FOOTBALLER John Terry was goaded about an alleged affair before throwing a racist insult at Anton Ferdinand, a court heard yesterday.
Chelsea and England defender Terry, 31, is accused of swearing at Ferdinand and delivering racist abuse during a Premier League match last October.
Appearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court yesterday, Terry sat in the dock wearing a light grey suit, white shirt and pink tie.
The court heard Terry and Queens Park Rangers player Ferdinand exchanged insults during the game at Loftus Road, London. It is then alleged the Chelsea captain called Ferdinand black, with the addition of extreme sexual swear words.
Opening the prosecution yesterday, Duncan Penny said: "The Crown alleges that the defendant – most probably in response to physical gestures being made by Mr Ferdinand which the defendant understood to refer to the well-publicised allegation of an extra-marital affair with a team-mate's wife – shouted at Mr Ferdinand."
He went on: "The Crown's case is that the words were abusive and insulting in a straight-forward sense and that a term was uttered as an abusive insult demonstrating hostility based on Mr Ferdinand's membership of a racial group."
Terry maintains he was only sarcastically repeating words that Ferdinand wrongly thought he had used.
He is accused of a racially aggravated public order offence, which he denies.
Chelsea were down to nine men in the game, when Ferdinand and Terry began trading insults over a penalty claim, the court heard.
Giving evidence yesterday, Ferdinand said Terry swore at him and he swore back. He added: "He gave me a gesture as if to say my breath smelled."
Ferdinand then made reference to Terry's alleged affair with Vanessa Perroncel, the ex-girlfriend of his former Chelsea teammate Wayne Bridge.
Ferdinand jogged down the pitch making a fist gesture to imply sex, he told the court.
At first Ferdinand did not think any racist insult had been used. He shook hands with Terry and accepted their clash was "handbags" and "banter".
But after the match, his then girlfriend showed him a clip of their exchange posted on YouTube, and he believed Terry had used the racist obscenity.
Ferdinand told the court that if he had realised at the time he would have told officials.
He said: "I would have been obviously very hurt and I probably wouldn't have reacted at the time because, being a professional, you can't do that. I probably would have let the officials know what happened and dealt with it after the game.
"When someone brings your colour into it, it takes things to another level and it's very hurtful."
Ferdinand told the court Terry met him after the match to ask what had happened. He added: "Mr Terry said, 'Do you think I racially abused you?' I said, 'No, that never came out of my mouth'. Then Ashley Cole popped his head round and said 'Yeah, didn't you say that to me?'. I said 'I didn't say that at all'."
George Carter-Stephenson, QC, acting for Terry, claimed Ferdinand's agent, Justin Rigby, said there was a fear that if no further action was taken, black footballers would see it as "a white man's word against a black man's word".
He alleged Ferdinand only decided to go to the police when Mr Rigby persuaded him to, but the QPR player denied this.
The case is being heard by Chief Magistrate Howard Riddle, and there is no jury.
Both television clips and unbroadcast footage of the incident, which would normally be used for training purposes, were shown to the court.
In a statement made to police last November, Terry said he was offended by the accusation that he had used racist language.
He said his words to the other player were meant to make it clear he had not used a racist insult, and that Ferdinand was stupid for thinking he had. The statement read: "While foot-ballers are used to industrial language, using racist terms is completely unacceptable whatever [the] situation.
"I was completely taken aback by this remark as I have never been accused of something like that and I did not take his remark lightly at all, and took strong offence to his suggestion."
The trial, expected to last five days, continues today.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article