The Chelsea captain is due before the independent panel on Monday after being cleared of a racially-aggravated public order offence by Westminster Magistrates' Court in JulyChelsea captain John Terry will answer a Football Association charge over his alleged racial abuse of QPR defender Anton Ferdinand in October last year at a personal hearing on Monday, just hours after calling time on his career with the England national team.
Terry retired from international football on Sunday evening after claiming that the FA had made his position with the team "untenable" and denies the allegations.
He was found not guilty by Westminster Magistrates' Court of a racially-aggravated public order offence in July but will now face an independent FA panel.
|JOHN TERRY RETIRES FROM ENGLAND
|The Chelsea defender says the FA has made his position with his country "untenable"
The accusations relate to an incident in the match between the two west London clubs at Loftus Road on October 23 2011. Terry is charged by the FA of "using abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour, which included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race" of Ferdinand.
If found guilty, the 31-year-old is likely to face a suspension. Liverpool striker Luis Suarez was banned for eight matches last season after being found guilty of racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra.
During his court case, Terry admitted to using the words "f****** black c***" on the field of play but claimed that he was issuing a denial after he believed that Ferdinand had accused him of using those words.
Reports indicate that the delegation led by George Carter-Stephenson QC, who successfully defended Terry in the court of law, will argue that Terry's criminal acquittal means that the FA case cannot ensue. FA rule 6.8 dictates that commissions formed by the body must presume relevant civil and criminal proceedings to be correct.
The FA are likely to argue in response that their charge is different to the racially-aggravated public order offence Terry faced in court and was cleared of.
Whereas Westminster Magistrates' Court was required to prove that Terry had used the words in an insulting manner beyond reasonable doubt, the burden of proof in an FA hearing is lower. The commission can make a judgment based on "the balance of probabilities".