[News] Sam Kerr (well someone had to)

[Cheggers]

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.

The process of law you refer to found Kerr not guilty. I thought that was the topic of discussion of this thread. As you say, it's incredibly clear. Unless laws can be interpreted differently, or may not encapsulate the array of opinions of a society?

 

[Da Man Clay]

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

Not really. She was arrested and charged. It was a jury of her peers that found her not guilty. Nothing to do with the justice system as such.

 

[jcdenton08]

The process of law you refer to found Kerr not guilty. I thought that was the topic of discussion of this thread. As you say, it's incredibly clear. Unless laws can be interpreted differently, or may not encapsulate the array of opinions of a society?

This is the opposite of the point you just made. You implied before it’s a “grey” area when it comes to racial abuse against white people because of 200 years of history. I explained to you when it comes to the law it isn’t grey at all, regardless of the outcome of this specific case.

 

[Da Man Clay]

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.

It was a hate crime and prosecuted as such. Can’t force a group of ordinary men and women to find her guilty of it.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just to put some context into the discussion, Kerr often refers to racism, perceived racism and being disadvantaged by racial background. She was born to an English mother, and a father whose parentage was half Indian, half English, making her one quarter Indian heritage. She was raised in Fremantle, Western Australia which is one of the most Anglo Saxon English populated conurbations in Australia. 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.

Perhaps she doth protest a little too much.

That's a strange post.

You start out by explaining how she has experienced racism and has mentioned this 'often'.
You then say that you think this is not an issue for her because she is an 'exceptional athlete' and can defend herself.
Consequently that she 'doth protest too much' (about what you don't say; being accused of making a racist comment?).

It is a long time since I have read such a baffling narrative.

She was charged with making a racist comment.
Do you think that because she is a tough athlete she should just have accepted the charge and not 'protested'?

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

. 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,

You missed out quite.a big chunk of the story here.

About a minute and a half before the car arrived at the police station, Kerr rang emergency services.

After the car parked up outside the police station, Kerr crawled through the broken window and opened the door from the outside to let Mewis out. They willingly approached a marked police car where two officers, including Lovell, spoke to them.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Sam Kerr found not guilty of racially aggravated harassment of police officer

Matildas and Chelsea star had denied charge and was cleared at Kingston crown court

www.theguardian.com

I'd recommend watch the 2min 30 video from the police station. Very weird interaction between the police and the two women. "Little missy" was a particularly odd.

For context she refers to his "white privilege" several times in this. This would no doubt have been used by defence as an explanation of the "stupid and white" comment. That comment came after the police officer said "do you think a taxi driver that's going to rape and kill you would drive you to a police station?"

Weird.

 

[Cheggers]

This is the opposite of the point you just made. You implied before it’s a “grey” area when it comes to racial abuse against white people because of 200 years of history. I explained to you when it comes to the law it isn’t grey at all, regardless of the outcome of this specific case.

That is the point I am making. I think racism is an incredibly grey area, that carries an enormous amount of historical baggage. A simple moral/ immoral or guilty/not guilty verdict, in this oarticular case, although performing a form of justice, may fail to do justice to the subject matter. I know, I know, a jury made the decision. But a verdict, either way, may add to a narrative of strictly opposing views. I don't that, as a society, that is helpful. However, Kerr might not care as she was found not guilty. She may care if she felt the PC was abusing his position on the basis if unconscious bias. I think, from what I have read, that that was her pisition. Apologies if that was not clear in my post.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

What if someone called you stupid and white because you had been dismissing everything they said for the last 30 minutes because they weren’t white (which I think is roughly speaking Sam Kerr’s defence)? Is it not then the case that being white is relevant (not the sole reason) to how you’ve been behaving?

If I disagree with a black person, and they accuse me of doing so because I am white, they are being racist.

35 years ago a student wrote a note and attached it to a box of marked coursework, complaining that he got a low mark unfairly.

He wrote that I favoured 'white females over superior ethic males'

Just because this non-white male 'felt' I was being racist and sexist does not mean I was being racists or sexist.
His accusation also came with an assertion that 'ethic' males are superior to white females.
The note, I am pleased to say, cause a great deal of hilarity among staff and students when I followed it up.

The mistake you have made is assuming that it is a fact that Kerr's 30 minute plea to the police was dismissed at the time because she is not white.

She has won her case arguing that she was not being racist.
She has NOT won a case that finds the police guilty of being racist.

 

[jcdenton08]

For context she refers to his "white privilege" several times in this. This would no doubt have been used by defence as an explanation of the "stupid and white" comment.

Alternatively, it could be argued by the prosecution that Kerr has a fixation with racial hatred of white people and didn’t simply mis-speak in anger.

 

[jcdenton08]

That is the point I am making. I think racism is an incredibly grey area, that carries an enormous amount of historical baggage. A simple moral/ immoral or guilty/not guilty verdict, in this oarticular case, although performing a form of justice, may fail to do justice to the subject matter. I know, I know, a jury made the decision. But a verdict, either way, may add to a narrative of strictly opposing views. I don't that, as a society, that is helpful. However, Kerr might not care as she was found not guilty. She may care if she felt the PC was abusing his position on the basis if unconscious bias. I think, from what I have read, that that was her pisition. Apologies if that was not clear in my post.

This is a better post.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Sam Kerr found not guilty of racially aggravated harassment of police officer

Matildas and Chelsea star had denied charge and was cleared at Kingston crown court

www.theguardian.com

I'd recommend watch the 2min 30 video from the police station. Very weird interaction between the police and the two women. "Little missy" was a rather weird one.

For context she refers to his "white privilege" several times in this. This would no doubt have been used by defence as an explanation of the "stupid and white" comment. Context innit.

I must say I have not seen a picture of Kerr before.
If I had heard her invoking other people's whiteness I would have thought she was mad.
I am minded of Ali G, and "is it cos I is a black man?"

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Alternatively, it could be argued by the prosecution that Kerr has a fixation with racial hatred of white people and didn’t simply mis-speak in anger.

I probably wouldn't run with that one whilst she is sat next to her white girlfriend. Quite a hard sell to a jury

 

[jcdenton08]

I probably wouldn't run with that one whilst she is sat next to her white girlfriend. Quite a hard sell to a jury

Which makes her racist comments all the more unacceptable. Regardless of the outcome, I hope she’s learned from this and can work towards becoming a better person.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

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.

Who knows, competing agendas maybe ie making an example of her but then to the contrary others will simply want this to quietly disappear based on the dynamics at hand?

 

[sydney]

The process of law you refer to found Kerr not guilty. I thought that was the topic of discussion of this thread. As you say, it's incredibly clear. Unless laws can be interpreted differently, or may not encapsulate the array of opinions of a society?

extremely well played by her brief......poc , lezzo , millionaire sports personality (role model) .....never gunna work was it....she's got out of it and the system let her by vilifying the Met.....70/30 split here in OZ in favour of a guilty verdict , not well liked , bad publicity for the country.

 

[Guinness Boy]

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

What absolute dribbling nonsense. Is that where the Trump / Reform alliance is heading? No trial by jury, simply put it to the court of Facebook opinion?

 

[LamieRobertson]

What absolute dribbling nonsense. Is that where the Trump / Reform alliance is heading? No trial by jury, simply put it to the court of Facebook opinion?

edited

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

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.

I think I can suggest a reason.

When they realized she is famous they probably perceived they risk being accused of letting off a famous person if they don't act.

They probably also considered that if the did act they would be accused of making a 'look at us' bid because she is famous.

At such a point, rational decision making goes out of the window.

An alternative explanation is common or garden fuckwittery.

The answer? We will never know.

 

[sydney]

If I disagree with a black person, and they accuse me of doing so because I am white, they are being racist.

35 years ago a student wrote a note and attached it to a box of marked coursework, complaining that he got a low mark unfairly.

He wrote that I favoured 'white females over superior ethic males'

Just because this non-white male 'felt' I was being racist and sexist does not mean I was being racists or sexist.
His accusation also came with an assertion that 'ethic' males are superior to white females.
The note, I am pleased to say, cause a great deal of hilarity among staff and students when I followed it up.

The mistake you have made is assuming that it is a fact that Kerr's 30 minute plea to the police was dismissed at the time because she is not white.

She has won her case arguing that she was not being racist.
She has NOT won a case that finds the police guilty of being racist.

sorry , didn't she call the copper stupid and white ? that is, in itself racist and given that people are being locked up for 3 and a half years for hurry words in England to me this is double standards