gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I have had cause to read a handful of legal judgments in the course of my working life and one thing in particular that has struck me with them is the temperate use of language when dishing out criticism. For example if the Appeal Court says that a Judge in a lower court reached a decision that "based on the facts before us we would not have arrived at" this translates as : "he has fucked up on an epic scale".
On that basis,the use of the terms 'unconvincing' and 'inconsistent' in relation to his evidence is nothing but a condemnation of Suarez as a lying little shit.
On that basis,the use of the terms 'unconvincing' and 'inconsistent' in relation to his evidence is nothing but a condemnation of Suarez as a lying little shit.