So John Terry is not guilty. Hurray? Not hurray?
It doesn't really matter one way or the other because he never should have been in court in the first place. The best case that they had against Terry was a "he said, she said" case and even that was asking for a lot. There just wasn't a lot in it. That isn't to say that Terry did or didn't do what he is accused of either, or even that you have to like or dislike him. It just lacked proof, and despite a long, public trial, Graham MacAree from We Ain't Got No History summarized it in his long recap of the entire saga pretty well -- we still just don't know.
We don't know what happened. If you think you know, you're lying to yourself. My opinion on John Terry's character makes no difference, and neither does yours. More importantly, our opinions carry absolutely no weight. Terry could have been defending himself on the pitch, or he could have been racially abusing Anton Ferdinand. I don't see any way that a reasonable person could be convinced one way or another, although believing one side versus the other is obviously entirely rational.
Like or dislike Terry. Think he abused Anton Ferdinand or not. It doesn't matter and you can't prove it. Nobody can. Only Terry actually knows what happened and nobody else was ever going to figure it out. Thankfully there was a trial and pubic money was spent so we could sort all of that out.