Comolli was not only caught out lying but went on to near enough call the ref a liar.
The referee recorded in his report that Mr Comolli spoke fluent Spanish. Mr Comolli
denied in evidence that he had told Mr Marriner that he spoke fluent Spanish, telling us
instead that he simply told Mr Marriner that he spoke Spanish. However, we do not think
that Mr Marriner would have recorded in his report that Mr Comolli speaks fluent
Spanish unless Mr Comolli had told Mr Marriner that he did. Mr Marriner did not know
who Mr Comolli was when he entered the referee's room, so it is unlikely that Mr
Marriner understood from any other source that Mr Marriner spoke fluent Spanish. Mr
Marriner says in his witness statement that Mr Comolli told him that he speaks fluent
Spanish, and Mr Marriner's witness statement was accepted by Mr Suarez. We accept Mr
Marriner's evidence that Mr Comolli told him that he spoke fluent Spanish. 73
288. In addition, the referee's report was made on the day of the match. It should, therefore, be
given some weight as a contemporaneous record of what people were told had happened
soon after the incident, rather than what they recalled at some later date.
289. With those matters in mind, we turn to consider what Mr Marriner was told. Mr Dalglish
told him that Mr Suarez had said "you are black". Mr Comolli told him that Mr Suarez
said "Tues negro". As Mr Dowd told us, Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd
noted it down. In cross-examination on this point, Mr Comolli agreed that he told Mr
Marriner that Mr Suarez had said "Porque tu es negro". But, he denied that he dictated all
the words. He said that he just said "negro", that Mr Dowd asked Mr Comolli to spell
"negro", and he did not remember dictating the full sentence. We were surprised by Mr
Comolli's evidence that he only dictated the word "negro" in view of the contents of Mr
Marriner's report, and his and Mr Dowd's witness statements. Mr Dowd stated that he
asked Mr Comolli to spell "Tues negro" and Mr Dowd then noted it down. Those words
appear in Mr Marriner's report. Mr Marriner's and Mr Dowd's witness statements were
accepted in full by Mr Suarez. We find that Mr Comolli told Mr Marriner that Mr Suarez
had said "Porque tu es negro" to Mr Evra, and that Mr Comolli spelt "Tues negro" for Mr
Dowd, who wrote it down.
290. The difficulty this presents for Mr Suarez is that it appears to be inconsistent with the case
that he advanced before us. He told us that all that he said to Mr Evra was "Por que,
negro", and not "Porque tu es negro" or "Porque tu eres negro". If Mr Suarez had said
"Porque tu es negro", then he would not be using "negro" as a noun to address Mr Evra,
but as an adjective, meaning "Because you are black". At the end of his cross-examination,
Mr Comolli agreed that he believed he was told by Mr Suarez that the words that he had
used translated as "Why, because you are black". Of course, it is Mr Evra's case that Mr
Suarez did say to him "Porque tu eres negro" meaning "Because you are black". It is,
however, right to point out that Mr Evra contends that Mr Suarez said this to him in
response to his question "Why did you kick me", whereas Mr Suarez maintains that he
said "Por que, negro" in response to Mr Evra's comment "Don't touch me, South
American". 74
291. By the time witness statements were served, Mr Suarez and the Liverpool management
had become aware of the apparent discrepancy between Mr Suarez's present case on his
use of the word “negro” on the one hand, and what Mr Comolli and Mr Dalglish had told
the referee on the other.
