[united]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...rez?CMP=twt_gu
Suárez's claims that he pinched Evra's skin in an attempt to defuse the row in the Liverpool goalmouth and that his use of the word "negro" to address his opponent was conciliatory and friendly were rejected out of hand. "To describe his own behaviour in that way was unsustainable and simply incredible given that the players were engaged in an acrimonious argument. That this was put forward by Mr Suárez was surprising and seriously undermined the reliability of his evidence on other matters," the report says.

http://quizzicaleyebrow.wordpress.co...-to-judgement/
The evidence from Marriner and Dowd was that both Dalglish and Comolli had said that Suarez had told them that he had said “[because] you are black” to Evra, although it was unclear in what context. This came across identically in the English (from Dalglish) and the Spanish (from Comolli), but importantly Dowd asked Comolli to spell out the Spanish “tues negro” for the report.
Comolli later denied spelling out “tues”, and said that he had only done so with the word “negro”, but the Commission decided that it was unlikely that Dowd and Marriner had made this up in a report written within hours of the event.

Even allowing for this decision, the Commission did make strenuous efforts to discover whether the phrase “why, black?” could, as Suarez claimed, have been a friendly attempt to calm things down. Two experts in Spanish language and culture in South America were asked to produce reports. They stated that, yes, in some contexts the word “negro” was used as a “matey” term, in the same way we might use “fatty”. But they also reported that some black residents of the area found this unwelcome and, more crucially, if anyone used it in an angry or confrontational way it would be understood to be racially offensive.
It was also noted that Suarez only began using the argument that he used the word “in a conciliatory manner” after he had seen the experts’ report which discussed this as a possibility.

Those paragraphs say it all. The defence put forward by Suarez and Liverpool is bordering on pathetic and hilarious. Pretty clear cut case. Sad how they all change their stories after finding new evidence.