[News] Sam Kerr (well someone had to)

[BadFish]

It’s fair game for discussion.

i am not suggesting otherwise, i am here discussing it with interest.

 

[jcdenton08]

i am not suggesting otherwise, i am here discussing it with interest.

And incidentally, while we’re discussing this, those who are squeamish about such subjects (like the above post I quoted) would rather invent imaginary bogeymen in their minds that actually discuss the matter at hand.

Quite literally imagining comments which nobody has said.

 

[BadFish]

And incidentally, while we’re discussing this, those who are squeamish about such subjects (like the above post I quoted) would rather invent imaginary bogeymen in their minds that actually discuss the matter at hand.

Quite literally imagining comments which nobody has said.

I think it was a joke.

 

[BadFish]

What came out from reading about this was that this could easily of been deecalated by some empathy and communication.

Sam and her wife could have simply apologised and offeres to pay to clean the cab.

The cabbie could have explaibed where he was taking them and why.

The whole thing was totally unnecessary from what i can see.

 

[Milano]

I haven’t read all the details but I have seen the video and I’d make the following observations:
- she was sitting and not being physically aggressive
- ‘stupid and white’ is the comment. It is not the same as calling someone ‘stupid and black / brown etc’. Why? White people don’t go through life being discriminated against because of their colour. I’d also be tempted to believe that the reference to being white is more about ‘you don’t understand what I’m explaining because you’re white and don’t experience what I do’ - I’m not saying that she’s correct in that statement.
- I can’t believe the police officer experienced any distress over the comments - if he did then maybe being in the police force is not for him.
- when racist events using worse language and in a worse context happen in football matches (John Terry, Jay Rodriguez) I’d recall people suggesting the police should become involved - an FA charge is seen as appropriate
- she was a bit of a drunk idiot, but if that’s a criminal offence a lot of the country are in trouble

It's racist. Stop desperately trying to be an 'ally' to this shit. It makes racism subjective and it isn't, it is abhorrent and binary.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

As for the criminal damage situation there’s a number of factors at play here that more often than not are setltled at the police station without further action

Firstly you have a foul charge £50 for being sick, then refusing to pay, some people think it’s a civil matter but it is covered under the fraud act on means to pay etc.

Then, by refusing to pay the driver had opted to drive them to a police station for help and intervention, however you have to be careful as it could also be considered entrapment at the point you hold them in a locked taxi and deviate from the normal intended route.
Finally you have the criminal damage element which they will argue was out of fear and getting away from the driver at whatever cost.

These disputes are often settled with the fare being paid and no further action being taken once the police are involved and everyone had calmed down. It’s less hassle for everyone involved, the police included particularly if no one was hurt or injured

I wouldn’t be surprised if her employer has paid for the damage and fare to settle that part of the claim (not saying it as a statement of fact to be clear)

 

[BadFish]

As for the criminal damage situation there’s a number of factors at play here that more often than not are setltled at the police station without further action

Firstly you have a foul charge £50 for being sick, then refusing to pay, some people think it’s a civil matter but it is covered under the fraud act on means to pay etc.

Then, by refusing to pay the driver had opted to drive them to a police station for help and intervention, however you have to be careful as it could also be considered entrapment at the point you hold them in a locked taxi and deviate from the normal intended route.
Finally you have the criminal damage element which they will argue was out of fear and getting away from the driver at whatever cost.

These disputes are often settled with the fare being paid and no further action being taken once the police are involved and everyone had calmed down. It’s less hassle for everyone involved, the police included particularly if none was hurt or injured

I wouldn’t be surprised if her employer has paid for the damage and fare to settle that part of the claim (not saying it as a statement of fact to be clear)

this is good info and very pertinent. I cant help wonder why the police and/or police officer decided to change their statement to allow for prosecution.

 

[Algernon]

Bless her, the lovely racist shit-head.

 

[RandyWanger]

Shows we do indeed have a 2-tier justice system.

 

[Cheggers]

‘Positionality’

Says so much about the kind of people who are defending Kerr.

And your response may say so much about 'the kind of people' deciiding Kerr is guilty of a blunt immorality they have concocted. Have a good day.

 

[Cheggers]

White male, yeah. Can't say if my perspective would be different, just saying that a white person calling someone stupid and black, a person of colour calling someone stupid and white, irrespective of whether they are male, female, or had experienced racism or sexism before is still a racism right?

I think hundreds of years of history mean the subject matter is more nuanced than that. Seeing it (which you may not be) only from 2025 may not capture all that history. It's not black and white (apologies for the pun).

 

[jcdenton08]

I think hundreds of years of history mean the subject matter is more nuanced than that. Seeing it (which you may not be) only from 2025 may not capture all that history. It's not black and white (apologies for the pun).

Yes it is, in law. It’s incredibly clear. Nowhere in law does it say only a POC can be racially abused. You’re wrong.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

As an exceptional athlete one would imagine that she would have been more than capable of defending herself against any bullying at school and the like..

What does that even mean

 

[Pevenseagull]

Shows we do indeed have a 2-tier justice system.

How? And in what way?


Edit. Changed from 'no it doesn't '
Reason for edit. Looking for clarification.

 

[Gabbiano]

Not followed this in detail. Did they have to pay for damages to the taxi?

Yes it's true that racism is far more impactful upon other demographics than white men. No that doesn't mean that we should pretend it doesn't matter and that we should have a two tier response. The principle is that we are all equal in the eyes of the law, and that means treating racism as racism no matter which group is being discriminated against. Having said that, there are different levels of discrimination and saying "stupid and white" when trying to explain the difference in their experiences, really its very timid, this is a storm in a teacup.

I say this as a general thing, as I said, I haven't followed the case closely and won't pretend to know all the details.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

In which case she should have just said 'you don’t understand because you’re stupid' (a perfectly fine insult). She brought race into it, in a derogatory manor, which is racist.

While I don't disagree (she obviously has worded it appallingly), if she was making the point that the officer dealing with her did not understand her situation (that she believes she faces because of her race) then she would make that point by referring to race.

Obviously, she should have communicated that in a far far better way. "I feel you don't understand me because you are being stupid and you are not black". I guess if she said that then nothing would have happened but it's so easy to view someone else's situation and, calmly, looking from a distance say "I would have done it like that"

That isn't what happened so a can of worms was opened. I can understand that.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So depressingly predictable, some of these replies... why bother with facts when its so much fun being an ignorant bigot.

In a nutshell for those that havent bothered finding out before commenting, her and her girlfriend called a cab after a big? night out. Worse for wear, Kerr then puked out of the cab window while on their way home and it kicked off with the driver. What was said who knows (why no footage from the cab cam?) but the result was at some point he locked all the doors and started driving them away from their destination while refusing to tell them where they were going. (He was actually taking them to the cop shop but they didnt know that). Surprises surprise they freaked out thinking they were being abducted. After calling 999 and reporting what was happening they broke a side window to escape. When the car stopped they climbed out and ran to a parked police car and told the cops they'd just escaped being kidnapped (funnily enough no bodycam footage -nice one old bill). So once in the station the cops refuse to engage with their side of the story and tell them if they want to leave they have to pay up for the ride, the cleanup and a new window. Kerr says they will pay for all of it but not the window. This goes on for hours and only after having their story repeatedly dismissed and ignored does Kerr start to lose it and give them the 'stupid white" line. CPS weren't going near it as a case until the one of the cops revised his statement months later to say he was suffering from the racial abuse! IMO the only people who should have been on trial here are the Met police and possibly the taxi driver. Not saying Kerr is lilly white but FFS!

Remember how we all laughed when Chris Sutton did the 'don't you know who I am' after being arrested for being drunk and a dick in a taxi?

As you say, who knows what happened here.

You are correct that Kerr isn't lilly (or lily) white, though.
(Which appears to have been her point).

 

[jcdenton08]

Not followed this in detail. Did they have to pay for damages to the taxi?

The accepted facts of the case on both sides are her girlfriend threw up out of the window, with some vomit getting into the cab. The cabbie stopped the vehicle and told them they’d have to pay a fine for clean up costs. They didn’t like this and tried to flee the vehicle. He didn’t let them go without paying. They then claim they felt threatened and he drove a short distance to the police station. During this time, they smashed the rear passenger window.

When they arrived at the police station, they felt the officer wasn’t listening to them, and Sam Kerr called the officer “stupid and white”. When the officer wrote up his report of the incident, he didn’t include this phrase or that he took offence.

When the case was reviewed by the CPS, they asked for clarification on whether a racially motivated crime had taken place, and the officer wrote a new statement supporting the evidence of the body cam footage, now saying he was racially abused.

The defence’s strategy was to paint this is a malicious prosecution, because if the officer had truly been offended he would’ve mentioned it in the original report. If the officer had mentioned his racial abuse in the original police report, they wouldn’t have had much of a defence.

Other defence was offered in that Kerr claimed she wasn’t being listened to by the police (arguably supported by body cam footage) but this in itself wouldn’t be a valid defence for racially aggravated abuse.

In short, she got off because the prosecution couldn’t overcome the defence’s question of why the accusation of abuse didn’t appear until the second statement.

 

[RandyWanger]

How? And in what way?


Edit. Changed from 'no it doesn't '
Reason for edit. Looking for clarification.

Met police officer in the family said if I were to call a black police officer, black and stupid it would be a hate crime. So this shows it is 2 tier.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

From what I am reading this boils down to the jury not seeing what Kerr said as causing "harassment, alarm or distress".

This appears to be partly because the police officer who claims to have been caused "harassment, alarm or distress" did not mention it in his first statement and only added it 11 months later. To me, the video doesn't prove that she was trying to cause this but rather making a point about feeling unfairly treated.

So people must be seeing other evidence that suggests she caused or intended to cause "harassment, alarm or distress" with her words. Surely we can assume that the jury also saw said evidence so one wonders what they got wrong?

Were their medical records from the policeman that showed psychology or DR visits, time off work or something like that? Surely if such things existed they would have gone in the original report?

Good points.

I am still inclined to feel that she got off because she can afford a decent lawyer and were it AN Other person they would have been done.
That said, were it not that she is someone famous one imagines the police officer would not have invoked the racism charge in the first place.

So overall it looks like a fair outcome.