| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment 15:12 - Feb 11 with 36842 views | Jimmy86 |
It would seem that calling a police officer stupid and white is acceptable in today's society..
Imagine the uproar if that particular slur had been used against someone of BAME origin.. think the sentence and certainly reaction to it would have been different |  | | |  |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:54 - Feb 12 with 1137 views | Kievthegreat |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:21 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
Ok, I'll reply to you...
If you read the posts I've made in this thread you'll see exactly what I'm annoyed about and that is the pure hypocrisy and double standards at play regarding this situation...
Sam Kerr and her girlfriend behaved appallingly in the back of the taxi.. threw up, refused to pay any sort of soiling charge, and then kicked and smashed the window.. the taxi driver took them to the police station, which is where Kerr launched her tirade..
There was NO need for Kerr to reference the police officers ethnicity... if she'd called him stupid and left it at that then there would have been no case to answer..
For me, the hypocrisy and double standards come in, because if the same slur had been used against an officer of BAME origin that would have been deemed racist.. but what's the difference? |
Problem is your presupposing that the reason Kerr was found not guilty was because the jury thought she wasn't racist.
The biggest flaw from what I see is that the CPS needs to prove she intentionally set out to, and caused the officer distress. However the officer was clearly not offended because he didn't remember any racial element or talk about being offended until 11 months after the fact. That gives defence a field day to point out that the officer seems to have changed his take on events after the fact to try and secure a prosecution after CPS weren't interested in any other charge.
Only the jurors know why they came to the decision they did, but on the information out in public, I'd have said not guilty because of the officer altering his statement after the fact and that alteration being a critical point in a charge even being possible. Doesn't mean she didn't behave absolutely terribly. Doesn't even stop her being racist, although others have added context to the statements so I don't think it's as simplistic as is being made out by some. |  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:55 - Feb 12 with 1137 views | BarcaBlue |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:50 - Feb 12 by waveneyblue |
I see a good night's sleep hasn't helped.
Still going strong......
Lucan summed it up last night.... surely you must be boring yourself now. |
Why just not address the question? I'm struggling to see where any hypocrisy lies so would be interested too. |  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:58 - Feb 12 with 1110 views | StokieBlue |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:50 - Feb 12 by waveneyblue |
I see a good night's sleep hasn't helped.
Still going strong......
Lucan summed it up last night.... surely you must be boring yourself now. |
You're still here as well so what does that say about you?
He posted in response to me, it's rude not to reply.
Not entirely sure what your post adds to the debate except being insulting. I do understand your argument was pulled to pieces but no need to resort to this type of posting.
SB |  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:02 - Feb 12 with 1097 views | Herbivore |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 22:57 - Feb 11 by waveneyblue |
Nah, I was just asking why you did it. Personally I think it makes you look an arse but each to their own.
I know why you ask people to explain themselves, it's plain as day.
You use your big words, clever phrases and act like the big I am. It's all rather sad.
Goodnight SB |
Just so you know, you aren't coming over well here with the repeated needless personal attacks. You don't look like someone interested in having a reasonable discussion. |  |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:11 - Feb 12 with 1070 views | NedPlimpton |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:50 - Feb 12 by waveneyblue |
I see a good night's sleep hasn't helped.
Still going strong......
Lucan summed it up last night.... surely you must be boring yourself now. |
When was your last useful contribution to this thread?
You've now just resorted to name calling. Prior to that you were avoiding questions. Why not try engaging with evidence to back up your point of view?? |  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:13 - Feb 12 with 1063 views | DJR |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 21:15 - Feb 11 by itfcjoe |
I wasn’t really being entirely serious with that post and was just a bit of a joke, although that’s not to say I’m backbreaking because I do agree with the unpopular point in this thread that I think it’s a double standard at play because she was in my opinion using his colour pejoratively and that’s not acceptable to me |
I try to avoid commenting on (or even reading) threads about jury decisions but I dipped into this one, came across your comment which was an early one, and thought it warranted a response.
The jury system may not be perfect but it is the best system we have, and is much better than the magistrate courts' system where a disproportionately high number of middle class white men dish out justice, and from my experience tend to treat their own kind more favourably.
Speaking as a lawyer, I don't think it is appropriate to comment on a jury decision unless you have heard all the evidence. But maybe, in the light of this case, someone ought to consider a remake of 12 Angry Men, the film about a jury starring Lee. J Cobb.
They could call it 12 Woke Men. [Post edited 12 Feb 8:17]
|  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:21 - Feb 12 with 1030 views | Jimmy86 |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 07:40 - Feb 12 by StokieBlue |
But where is the hypocrisy?
The police and the CPS both agreed with you and put the case forward to trial where a jury of peers decided the result.
So I am still waiting to see where the hypocrisy is. Is it your fellow members of the public where the hypocrisy lays? If so then I don't believe that was the insinuation of your original and subsequent posts so it would be good to clear it up.
SB |
Where the hypocrisy comes in is the fact there would be outrage, up and down the country if that particular slur had have been made to an officer of BAME origin.. it would have been deemed racist and we would have wall to wall coverage of it from the media..
Nothing to do with the jury.. they gave a verdict based on the evidence that was presented to them... Kerr should give her defence counsel a bonus | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:23 - Feb 12 with 1013 views | Herbivore |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:21 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
Where the hypocrisy comes in is the fact there would be outrage, up and down the country if that particular slur had have been made to an officer of BAME origin.. it would have been deemed racist and we would have wall to wall coverage of it from the media..
Nothing to do with the jury.. they gave a verdict based on the evidence that was presented to them... Kerr should give her defence counsel a bonus |
There has been wall to wall coverage of this trial though? I've seen news stories on it every single day. There also seems to be a lot of outrage on this thread, including from yourself. And as you say, having heard the evidence a jury concluded that it wasn't a racially aggravated offence. So where is the hypocrisy exactly? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:27 - Feb 12 with 989 views | Jimmy86 |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:23 - Feb 12 by Herbivore |
There has been wall to wall coverage of this trial though? I've seen news stories on it every single day. There also seems to be a lot of outrage on this thread, including from yourself. And as you say, having heard the evidence a jury concluded that it wasn't a racially aggravated offence. So where is the hypocrisy exactly? |
Because if the term "you're stupid and black" was used instead it would have been deemed racist and you know it.. that's the hypocrisy of it, that I and others seemingly hate.. | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:28 - Feb 12 with 993 views | ZapatasMoustache |
There’s no such thing as reverse racism. It can be rude, annoying, pointed etc but it doesn’t have the same dynamics at all. |  | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:29 - Feb 12 with 973 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 15:45 - Feb 11 by JakeITFC |
Don't think anybody comes out of it particularly great but I do think there is close to a zero percent chance that the police man was offended by being called (stupid and) white. |
Given that he didn’t feel the need to mention it until eleven months later, I think you are right | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:30 - Feb 12 with 970 views | Herbivore |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:27 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
Because if the term "you're stupid and black" was used instead it would have been deemed racist and you know it.. that's the hypocrisy of it, that I and others seemingly hate.. |
So it is the jury you have a problem with then, since they are the ones that, having listened to the evidence - some of which has been presented in this thread - deemed that it wasn't a racially aggravated offence? | |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:30 - Feb 12 with 967 views | DJR |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:23 - Feb 12 by Herbivore |
There has been wall to wall coverage of this trial though? I've seen news stories on it every single day. There also seems to be a lot of outrage on this thread, including from yourself. And as you say, having heard the evidence a jury concluded that it wasn't a racially aggravated offence. So where is the hypocrisy exactly? |
Certainly plenty of outrage on the comments section of the Mail online. | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:35 - Feb 12 with 936 views | NedPlimpton |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:30 - Feb 12 by DJR |
Certainly plenty of outrage on the comments section of the Mail online. |
And the BBC Instagram comments pages
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DF8zC4ttkT4/?igsh=MXF2eXg5Z3NqODJ3dQ==
To say it's hypocrisy because there's no outrage is just ridiculous
To say it's hypocrisy because a white person would have been found guilty is also ridiculous
But it still must be hypocrisy, right?? | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:38 - Feb 12 with 924 views | Jimmy86 |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:30 - Feb 12 by Herbivore |
So it is the jury you have a problem with then, since they are the ones that, having listened to the evidence - some of which has been presented in this thread - deemed that it wasn't a racially aggravated offence? |
What I have a problem with is the fact Kerr referenced the officers skin colour, which there was no need for her to do.. the Jury found her not guilty, based on the evidence put to them in court.. fine, no issue with that..
What I have an issue with is for all the talk of equality, seemingly it only suits a particular narrative.. if BAME origin was used as any sort of slur its racist, or allegedly racist.. if its against a white person then it's ok.. hypocrisy and double standards is what I hate | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:39 - Feb 12 with 916 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:30 - Feb 12 by DJR |
Certainly plenty of outrage on the comments section of the Mail online. |
Which seems to have migrated on here. It’s a surprise every day on here. Not being on social media, I’m out of touch with whatever things people are arguing over on a given day.
I’d have thought that the news about the officer winning his case against dismissal would have been bigger news, as I mentioned above. No way to remove officers deemed unreliable - seems like an accident waiting to happen to me. But not a mention on here.
Or the government outlawing a path towards citizenship for refugees granted a right to remain. I was sure that would crop up, but nope.
I’m looking forward to today’s surprise topic  |  |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:41 - Feb 12 with 904 views | Jimmy86 |
You're clearly missing the point entirely..
If that slur had have been used against a person of BAME origin it would have been described as racist.. so what's the difference exactly? | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:43 - Feb 12 with 885 views | NedPlimpton |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:41 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
You're clearly missing the point entirely..
If that slur had have been used against a person of BAME origin it would have been described as racist.. so what's the difference exactly? |
It is being described as racist. By tonnes and tonnes of people
Just not by the jury | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:44 - Feb 12 with 881 views | Herbivore |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:38 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
What I have a problem with is the fact Kerr referenced the officers skin colour, which there was no need for her to do.. the Jury found her not guilty, based on the evidence put to them in court.. fine, no issue with that..
What I have an issue with is for all the talk of equality, seemingly it only suits a particular narrative.. if BAME origin was used as any sort of slur its racist, or allegedly racist.. if its against a white person then it's ok.. hypocrisy and double standards is what I hate |
So you think the jury are hypocrites then? That's the only logical conclusion because they are the ones who found her not guilty so surely they are the ones who are displaying double standards and hypocrisy?
There have been lots of very reasonable posts on this thread about the historical context of racism and about the specific context of this incident that it's worth reading that might help you to understand why the situation isn't as black and white (if you'll pardon the pun) as you make out. | |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:52 - Feb 12 with 829 views | Jimmy86 |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:44 - Feb 12 by Herbivore |
So you think the jury are hypocrites then? That's the only logical conclusion because they are the ones who found her not guilty so surely they are the ones who are displaying double standards and hypocrisy?
There have been lots of very reasonable posts on this thread about the historical context of racism and about the specific context of this incident that it's worth reading that might help you to understand why the situation isn't as black and white (if you'll pardon the pun) as you make out. |
I've said I don't have an issue with the jury on multiple occasions.. their verdict is based on the evidence put to them.. clearly Kerr's defence counsel did their job in getting her off..
Whatever way you look at it, it's clear Kerr hasn't come out of this well.. think that's fair to say...
Still maintain the public reaction to this would have been entirely different if the slur was aimed at a BAME officer, but that's my opinion.. the reference to skin colour used in that context would have been deemed racist | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:55 - Feb 12 with 796 views | vapour_trail |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:52 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
I've said I don't have an issue with the jury on multiple occasions.. their verdict is based on the evidence put to them.. clearly Kerr's defence counsel did their job in getting her off..
Whatever way you look at it, it's clear Kerr hasn't come out of this well.. think that's fair to say...
Still maintain the public reaction to this would have been entirely different if the slur was aimed at a BAME officer, but that's my opinion.. the reference to skin colour used in that context would have been deemed racist |
If you take this thread that you started as some form of barometer of public opinion, it’s fair to say there is a significant amount of outrage amongst the community on this message board. Very few topics are likely to solicit complete outrage.
Does that help? |  |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:57 - Feb 12 with 778 views | bluelagos |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:41 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
You're clearly missing the point entirely..
If that slur had have been used against a person of BAME origin it would have been described as racist.. so what's the difference exactly? |
Not going to get dragged into a long debate, bit I will challenge one comment.
And I'll agree that if she had used a racial slur in a derogatory manner then she should face consequences just as a white person would.
But I don't believe that is what happened. Having watched the full exchange (is on YouTube...30+ mins) it is clear that she was exasperated at the police not accepting that they felt scared and for not properly investigating her allegations.
Rightly or wrongly, she was challenging the copper and the fact that he was siding with the cab driver (in her opinion)
She called him stupid and white, she didn't use it as a slur, rather as a way of pointing out (clumsily) his privilege.
Just using the words "stupid and white" is no more a crime than using the words "stupid and black". On their own they are fairly harmless, but there are scenarios where they are used as an insult or will cause alarm etc. where they could be seen as criminal.
Using them in a police station, as part of a disagreement with a copper, I just don't for a second buy the argument that she was racially abusing said copper or that he felt alarmed or distressed. And clearly neither did the jury.
My thoughts and I won't say any more as it's OK to disagree. If you feel said copper was alarmed/harassed then that's cool. But I certainly don't and doubt many would who have seen the full exchange.
She was drunk, boorush, unpleasant, repetitive but none of that in itself is criminal thankfully.
Just my thoughts on why there really isn't any double standards here. |  |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:59 - Feb 12 with 767 views | NedPlimpton |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:52 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
I've said I don't have an issue with the jury on multiple occasions.. their verdict is based on the evidence put to them.. clearly Kerr's defence counsel did their job in getting her off..
Whatever way you look at it, it's clear Kerr hasn't come out of this well.. think that's fair to say...
Still maintain the public reaction to this would have been entirely different if the slur was aimed at a BAME officer, but that's my opinion.. the reference to skin colour used in that context would have been deemed racist |
Remember when John Terry was found not guilty of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand?
Remember the public reaction to that? Hardly riots in the streets, was it | | | |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 09:00 - Feb 12 with 765 views | Mullet |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:52 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
I've said I don't have an issue with the jury on multiple occasions.. their verdict is based on the evidence put to them.. clearly Kerr's defence counsel did their job in getting her off..
Whatever way you look at it, it's clear Kerr hasn't come out of this well.. think that's fair to say...
Still maintain the public reaction to this would have been entirely different if the slur was aimed at a BAME officer, but that's my opinion.. the reference to skin colour used in that context would have been deemed racist |
I've read the whole thread and don't really understand how it's taken 8 pages to get to this point.
You seem a bit snowflakey on this issue and massively overreacting, luckily waveney has blown you out of the water with his weapons grade flouncing.
Doesn't the fact there is a different reaction to a non-white woman in this position just show the massive problems in society over time that doesn't affect us white blokes? Saying "well it'd be different" just underlines the historical imbalances doesn't it?
Given how worse incidents involving say Joey Barton or out own Lee Bowyer were covered, then largely forgotten about aren't you just blowing this all out of proportion? No one thinks she's right after all. |  |
| |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 09:03 - Feb 12 with 727 views | Herbivore |
| Sam Kerr found not guilty of racial aggravated harassment on 08:52 - Feb 12 by Jimmy86 |
I've said I don't have an issue with the jury on multiple occasions.. their verdict is based on the evidence put to them.. clearly Kerr's defence counsel did their job in getting her off..
Whatever way you look at it, it's clear Kerr hasn't come out of this well.. think that's fair to say...
Still maintain the public reaction to this would have been entirely different if the slur was aimed at a BAME officer, but that's my opinion.. the reference to skin colour used in that context would have been deemed racist |
Nobody disagrees that her behaviour was terrible. She acted like a complete tit, no argument here.
But I'm still not sure I see who is meant to be applying double standards and hypocrisy here if not the jury? They are the ones who found her not guilty after all. There also seems to be a fair bit of public outrage about this as well so I'm not sure I get that point either.
Black police officers are subject to racism all the time, often by their own colleagues and employers (see this, for example: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/05/black-police-officers-group-call We only hear about it every few years when something major happens and I don't think I've ever seen you start a thread about it. If anything I'd argue there's been more coverage and more of a public reaction to this than there would have been had it been a black officer. Black officers are racially abused frequently (see https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-23/70-of-bame-police-staff-say-they-have-been-r for example) but it very rarely makes the news. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
