John Terry’s Father Spared Jail Time

Chris Wright

1st, June 2010


By Chris Wright

The father of Chelsea and England defender John Terry has been spared a jail sentence following his arrest for directly supplying cocaine to a journalist posing as a chauffeur.

Edward Terry of Chafford Hundred, Essex, admitted supplying 3.5 grammes of Colombian marching powder to the undercover hack who set up the sting last November on behalf of The News Of The World.

Judge Christopher Mitchell said;

“It is a very, very clear case of entrapment solely to create a newspaper story.”

Terry, 56, was sentenced to a suspended prison term of six months at Basildon Crown Court and he has also ordered to do 100 hours of community service and pay £95 costs.

What a lovely bunch the Terrys are.

Posted in FAIL

Share this article: Email


  1. Ben says:

    Hope John is next

  2. JustHonour says:

    Really? What on earth for? Have you met the man and have a personal reason for the dislike? (perhaps he fucked your wife!) Or is it simply media fuelled flannel that helps create your simpleton opinions?

  3. mizman says:

    yeah, lets all like the guy who was shagging one of his best mates wives, who nearly brakes an england team mates legs weeks before the world cup finals (milner), has a drug dealing father, a thief for a mother and a brother who thinks its also great fun to fuck team-mates wives.

    what a great chap! not.

  4. Ben says:

    Of course, Terry did nothing wrong.It`s just media.Really he is a great man, other just envy, and lie about what a cunt is he.

  5. JustHonour says:

    Who’s talking about “liking the man”? And what does the conduct of his family have to do with his ability on the pitch… Jeez, I must have missed the meeting detailing the angel like qualities of other professional players (not just footballers) and their relatives.

  6. spectator says:

    wives? EX-GIRLFRIEND! EX! and this is in wagland, where said relationship is unlikely to have actually been substantial. although bridge appears to have been under the illusion it was (an illusion not shared by his ex-girlfriend…EX!) the only truly dodgy thing is the adultery aspect, but that’s between terry and his mrs. if this was truly a subject for public discussion i’d like to think it could he handled more intelligently than it will by shite tabloids read exclusively by the stupid.
    my point is let’s not want a man to go to prison until he actually does something criminal. i hate chelsea and terry is annoying but i’m not going to get morally outraged about his behavior until he sets fire to someone or the like.

    and his dad also looks a knob but there’s a difference between watching something happen and making it happen which is why he’s not in prison, and the only thing dumber than selling coke to a chauffuer is creating a situation just so you can get outraged about it.

  7. Zedie says:

    Spectator – The man gave an undercover reporter 3.5 grams of coke for money. That is what English law would describe as a drug deal!!!

    So your basically saying that if your the dad of a PL winner, you have a licence to sell drugs?

    Entrapment? When asked by the reporter if he could get him some sniff, why didnt he just say “no i cant, bugger off”? Because he wanted to play Billy Big balls….

    If you got a kid with the girl, your relationship is substantial. If one of your best mates / work mates of 5 years porked your missus, you’d be understandably pissed.

    Christ almighty.

  8. spectator says:

    they’re certainly both dickheads, but their dickheadish behavior is between them and the people it actually affects.

    are you saying it’s ok to solicit criminal behavior just because someone’s son happens to be PL winner? are you saying the hack would have done to just anyone? i’m saying english law distinguished between regular and irregular circumstances and why shouldn’t it? entrapment is illegal too, and isn’t made ok just because you encouraged something slightly more illegal. in fact it makes it worse. it was after all the judge who said it was entrapment, who probably knows more about english law than you do.

    the point is people get up to this all the time but you don’t know about it. to manufacture someone’s fame and then hold them to higher standards by virtue of that fame is illogical, and trashy journalism that wouldn’t exist if people could come up with something better to be concerned about. or do you pick through the bins of strangers to find out if they’re cheating? unless you do i don’t understand how you can claim consistency, and if you’re not consistent then neither are you credible.

Leave a Reply