Sam Kerr allegations - supporters twist themselves into knots

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
It's obviously not OK to say this (any part of what she is supposed to have said), but it's also insane to say there is no difference in a white-majority place between a white person saying 'you black bastard' and a non-white person saying 'you white bastard'. With 'black bastard', there is a long history of white people acting from a position of dominance and perceived superiority, and then pushing down against racialized populations. With 'white bastard', that same history works the other way round, and it's more commonly a reaction to perceived oppression.

Neither is always actually like that and neither comment would be OK (well, responding to opporession is not wrong when it's really that) - but again, assuming it's the exact same sentiment at work is simply wrong.
Im not sure who you are arguing against here or who has said they don’t understand the history and root of discrimination.

I think rightly people are taking issue with certain posters suggesting that because they don’t find something offensive everyone else should be of the same opinion and if they aren’t it’s because they don’t understand or are insensitive.

The whole thing could have been avoided if Kerr didn’t use someone’s ethnicity as a precursor to insulting them. That’s the crux of it really and certainly something I would struggle to defend her over in such circumstances.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,454
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
I find it strange that so many on here seem to think that racism against white people is acceptable or less racist because white people are less likely to experience discrimination. I personally have experienced racism myself as an Asian woman, but it's never affected me. Doesn't mean another Asian person won't be offended by the same treatment, and they have every right to be.
That's just how I feel about and others do clearly feel differently.

I can understand the feeling of 'otherness' being a minority somewhere. I'm the only white guy at work and am regularly so at industry events I go to and quite a lot of areas where I live. That and not connecting is very different than that weight of historic oppression to me.

From what little I've read of this case, a D&D charge sounds fine.
 

Plant0x84

Shame we’re aren’t more like Brighton
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
13,201
Location
Carpark and snack area adjacent to the abyss
I find it strange that so many on here seem to think that racism against white people is acceptable or less racist because white people are less likely to experience discrimination.
It’s a weird one. I think many are thinking too deeply about it trying to apply historical context to a situation that doesn’t need it, or are that unfamiliar with a white person being discriminated against that it can’t possibly be real.
The real shocker in this thread though is how you get off posting such sensible and well reasoned comments being an Arsenal fan! :lol:
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
268
Location
Sri Lanka
I find it very strange that any white person would be offended by being called a 'white wanker/cnut' or whatever. I'd definitely hate being a 'stupid old wanker/cnut' more, as my age grinds upwards and I get ever more conscious of it.
How you react to this kind of thing is subjective though, this particular cop probably felt like he was unfairly having insults regarding his race thrown at him, the news says he was a younger officer as well (I don't believe that's speculation). We do live in an age where it's just easy to offend people now, so just avoiding any references to race/ethnicity/religion when you insult someone seems like it should be common sense. I do agree it's a bit petty from the cop but it still qualifies as a racial slur as per the law. If the roles were reversed the cop in question would be suspended immediately and there would be knives out for the cop - laws should technically protect everyone, not just minorities. She'd probably have no problem if she just called him a wanker/cnut.

Being of a race that would be considered a minority in the UK, I wouldn't be too fussed if someone on a London street threw a racial slur at me, it's just words at the end of the day, and I'd probably insult them back till they got back into their little shell (Probably not worth it, but I don't like to back down from a fight) - but that's just me, someone else could have their anxieties exacerbated, underlying mental health conditions further affected etc.

What's interesting is how the media seems to be reacting to it, there's a lot of stories out there saying it's not racist etc. - I think it's a bit racist personally, maybe not as damaging as a racial slur against a disadvantaged person from a minority. If I had a kid and they berated a white person for being white, being a coloniser etc. I'd tell them off. Minorities should not take this growing understanding around institutional racism, conversations around the impacts of slavery/colonialism for granted imo and use that as an excuse to then throw insults referring to race/ethnicity or religion at the other side - in most cases, the best way to overcome prejudices against you and to change those perceptions is by being the bigger person.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
How you react to this kind of thing is subjective though, this particular cop probably felt like he was unfairly having insults regarding his race thrown at him, the news says he was a younger officer as well (I don't believe that's speculation). We do live in an age where it's just easy to offend people now, so just avoiding any references to race/ethnicity/religion when you insult someone seems like it should be common sense. I do agree it's a bit petty from the cop but it still qualifies as a racial slur as per the law. If the roles were reversed the cop in question would be suspended immediately and there would be knives out for the cop - laws should technically protect everyone, not just minorities. She'd probably have no problem if she just called him a wanker/cnut.

Being of a race that would be considered a minority in the UK, I wouldn't be too fussed if someone on a London street threw a racial slur at me, it's just words at the end of the day, and I'd probably insult them back till they got back into their little shell (Probably not worth it, but I don't like to back down from a fight) - but that's just me, someone else could have their anxieties exacerbated, underlying mental health conditions further affected etc.

What's interesting is how the media seems to be reacting to it, there's a lot of stories out there saying it's not racist etc. - I think it's a bit racist personally, maybe not as damaging as a racial slur against a disadvantaged person from a minority. If I had a kid and they berated a white person for being white, being a coloniser etc. I'd tell them off. Minorities should not take this growing understanding around institutional racism, conversations around the impacts of slavery/colonialism for granted imo and use that as an excuse to then throw insults referring to race/ethnicity or religion at the other side - in most cases, the best way to overcome prejudices against you and to change those perceptions is by being the bigger person.
Would it make you feel better if the media crucified her?
 

GoonerGirly

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
1,034
Supports
Arsenal
It’s a weird one. I think many are thinking too deeply about it trying to apply historical context to a situation that doesn’t need it, or are that unfamiliar with a white person being discriminated against that it can’t possibly be real.
The real shocker in this thread though is how you get off posting such sensible and well reasoned comments being an Arsenal fan! :lol:
Mate I grew up with mostly Manchester United fans around me so I've had to eat a lot of humble pie over the years. :D

How you react to this kind of thing is subjective though, this particular cop probably felt like he was unfairly having insults regarding his race thrown at him, the news says he was a younger officer as well (I don't believe that's speculation). We do live in an age where it's just easy to offend people now, so just avoiding any references to race/ethnicity/religion when you insult someone seems like it should be common sense. I do agree it's a bit petty from the cop but it still qualifies as a racial slur as per the law. If the roles were reversed the cop in question would be suspended immediately and there would be knives out for the cop - laws should technically protect everyone, not just minorities. She'd probably have no problem if she just called him a wanker/cnut.

Being of a race that would be considered a minority in the UK, I wouldn't be too fussed if someone on a London street threw a racial slur at me, it's just words at the end of the day, and I'd probably insult them back till they got back into their little shell (Probably not worth it, but I don't like to back down from a fight) - but that's just me, someone else could have their anxieties exacerbated, underlying mental health conditions further affected etc.

What's interesting is how the media seems to be reacting to it, there's a lot of stories out there saying it's not racist etc. - I think it's a bit racist personally, maybe not as damaging as a racial slur against a disadvantaged person from a minority. If I had a kid and they berated a white person for being white, being a coloniser etc. I'd tell them off. Minorities should not take this growing understanding around institutional racism, conversations around the impacts of slavery/colonialism for granted imo and use that as an excuse to then throw insults referring to race/ethnicity or religion at the other side - in most cases, the best way to overcome prejudices against you and to change those perceptions is by being the bigger person.
Completely agree that how people react to racism (or any type of treatment, for that matter) is completely subjective and depends on the individual. But just because some people won't be offended, it doesn't mean it isn't racist. It's just weird that some people seem to be completely accepting of a specific type of racism. That if I wanted to racially abuse a white woman, I could. But if she gave me the same treatment back (as an Asian woman), she'd be in the wrong. :houllier:
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
Ah I see. Not the same impact to who? The white cop? I think you'd be wrong to assume white people aren't personally impacted by racial abuse. At the end of the day we're talking about individuals and a specific situation. I'm not sure why the entire history of colonialism, systemic racism or whatever else needs to be brought into the mix. Could I just go up to any Spanish or Japanese person and racially abuse them because their ancestors likely raped and killed my ancestors in the Philippines? No, I love visiting both Spain and Japan. :D
I'm curious if you had friends or family who did have their ancestors raped and killed, and they harbored resentment for the japanese, and if one day you caught them arguing with japanese people and calling them stupid, would you actually step in and ask your friend to be the better person?
 

GoonerGirly

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
1,034
Supports
Arsenal
I'm curious if you had friends or family who did have their ancestors raped and killed, and they harbored resentment for the japanese, and if one day you caught them arguing with japanese people and calling them stupid, would you actually step in and ask your friend to be the better person?
Well it would depend on what they're actually fighting about and who was in the wrong. Can you give more details about your hypothetical scenario? Or did they just start randomly start fighting about Japanese and Filipino history? If that's the case, I'd try to get my friend to just leave it alone. If he/she doesn't, I'd leave them to it and wouldn't get involved.

For the record, when I have an argument with a person, I would only focus on that person and how they've wronged me (or whatever it is we're arguing about). I don't tend to bring in the whole history of the universe into the argument. I only do that with my husband as it only works with him. :lol:
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
Well it would depend on what they're actually fighting about and who was in the wrong. Can you give more details about your hypothetical scenario? Or did they just start randomly start fighting about Japanese and Filipino history? If that's the case, I wouldn't step in and I'd leave them to it. I don't think that's an argument either one of them will win.
Nah just something petty, because people tend to say stupid shit when they're angry. The reason I'm asking is because you stated your opinion, and how you would act, but would you also try to impose that on others? Or even just trying to convince them. Because I do think that a lot of people cannot just forget history like you do, or get over it as easily.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
I'm curious if you had friends or family who did have their ancestors raped and killed, and they harbored resentment for the japanese, and if one day you caught them arguing with japanese people and calling them stupid, would you actually step in and ask your friend to be the better person?
Are we implying a pissed up Sam Kerr was abusing a taxi driver, throwing up in their taxi and then when challenged by the police regarding her behaviour suddenly released some deep rooted resentment towards white people based on colonialism and historical discrimination dating back centuries?
 

GoonerGirly

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
1,034
Supports
Arsenal
Nah just something petty, because people tend to say stupid shit when they're angry. The reason I'm asking is because you stated your opinion, and how you would act, but would you also try to impose that on others? Or even just trying to convince them. Because I do think that a lot of people cannot just forget history like you do, or get over it as easily.
Completely understand. I'd try to get my friend to stop as I think it's not worth wasting their breath over. But if they persist, I can't stop them but would not get involved.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
Are we implying a pissed up Sam Kerr was abusing a taxi driver, throwing up in their taxi and then when challenged by the police regarding her behaviour suddenly released some deep rooted resentment towards white people based on colonialism and historical discrimination dating back centuries?
Absolutely. Especially when you consider the target was a person in a position of power and authority, that's exactly why colonialism was my first thought. That doesn't excuse her behavior obviously, I'm sure she was being a menace that night.
 

BenitoSTARR

One Minute Man
Scout
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
13,609
No we can't and in fact there are at least 3 different versions of what's she's alleged to have said that I've seen so far and she pleaded 'not guilty' so at the moment it's just allegations

Plus why on earth has it taken over a year to charge her?

Lots of questions and grey areas
I’d just hate to make any kind of assumption here. Shouldn’t even really be a police matter maybe her club could just do an internal investigation instead?
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
Absolutely. Especially when you consider the target was a person in a position of power and authority, that's exactly why colonialism was my first thought. That doesn't excuse her behavior obviously, I'm sure she was being a menace that night.
You’d make a cracking defence barrister
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
I’d just hate to make any kind of assumption here. Shouldn’t even really be a police matter maybe her club could just do an internal investigation instead?
I think it’s definitely a police matter. She’s abused a taxi driver, threw up in his taxi and then racially abused one of the cops. Sounds like she was pretty wild at the time and likely hammered.
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
268
Location
Sri Lanka
Would it make you feel better if the media crucified her?
No because I have no personal agenda against Sam Kerr. If the allegations are true and proven, I just don’t believe she should get away with that kind of behaviour just because the cop was white in this instance.

The media talks a lot about racism towards minorities, and it’s funny how they cover this now when it’s the other way around - it is racist at the end of the day, and if she in fact made that statement, qualifies as a racist insult under UK law.

The media could just report the news, but there’s so many puff pieces popping up on how x person deems it not to be racism etc - with no reference to what UK’s laws state. There’s no need to vilify her, and there’s no need to put out articles that normalises her behaviour either.

The media’s job shouldn’t be to create narratives - their job is to report facts. This doesn’t just happen with Kerr of course, it happens with pretty much everything in the form of opinions/analysis.
 
Last edited:

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,336
Location
@United_Hour
I’d just hate to make any kind of assumption here. Shouldn’t even really be a police matter maybe her club could just do an internal investigation instead?
I know you are trying to be funny but Id actually be fine with that as I think it's a total waste of police time and public money to pursue this case
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,336
Location
@United_Hour
I think it’s definitely a police matter. She’s abused a taxi driver, threw up in his taxi and then racially abused one of the cops. Sounds like she was pretty wild at the time and likely hammered.
Haven't seen anything about her abusing the taxi driver - if she was drunk & disorderly though then some kind of punishment is appropriate
 
Last edited:

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,454
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
How you react to this kind of thing is subjective though, this particular cop probably felt like he was unfairly having insults regarding his race thrown at him, the news says he was a younger officer as well (I don't believe that's speculation). We do live in an age where it's just easy to offend people now, so just avoiding any references to race/ethnicity/religion when you insult someone seems like it should be common sense. I do agree it's a bit petty from the cop but it still qualifies as a racial slur as per the law. If the roles were reversed the cop in question would be suspended immediately and there would be knives out for the cop - laws should technically protect everyone, not just minorities. She'd probably have no problem if she just called him a wanker/cnut.

Being of a race that would be considered a minority in the UK, I wouldn't be too fussed if someone on a London street threw a racial slur at me, it's just words at the end of the day, and I'd probably insult them back till they got back into their little shell (Probably not worth it, but I don't like to back down from a fight) - but that's just me, someone else could have their anxieties exacerbated, underlying mental health conditions further affected etc.

What's interesting is how the media seems to be reacting to it, there's a lot of stories out there saying it's not racist etc. - I think it's a bit racist personally, maybe not as damaging as a racial slur against a disadvantaged person from a minority. If I had a kid and they berated a white person for being white, being a coloniser etc. I'd tell them off. Minorities should not take this growing understanding around institutional racism, conversations around the impacts of slavery/colonialism for granted imo and use that as an excuse to then throw insults referring to race/ethnicity or religion at the other side - in most cases, the best way to overcome prejudices against you and to change those perceptions is by being the bigger person.
It probably is racist and certainly inappropriate. How individuals react is down to multiple factors no doubt.

The press being twats doesn't surprise me. You can imagine how the Mail or Telegraph would react to this story if the protagonist was say Alex Scott.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
No because I have no personal agenda against Sam Kerr. If the allegations are true and proven, I just don’t believe she should get away with that kind of behaviour just because the cop was white in this instance.

The media talks a lot about racism towards minorities, and it’s funny how they cover this now when it’s the other way around - it is racist at the end of the day, and if she in fact made that statement, qualifies as a racist insult under UK law.

The media could just report the news, but there’s so many puff pieces popping up on how x person deems it not to be racism etc - with no reference to what UK’s laws state. There’s no need to vilify her, and there’s no need to put out articles that normalises her behaviour either.

The media’s job shouldn’t be to create narratives - their job is to report facts. This doesn’t just happen with Kerr of course, it happens with pretty much everything in the form of opinions/analysis.
Hmm, from what I've seen, most of the big media are simply reporting what Football Australia thinks, what her manager thinks, and the general public. The support for her and claims about it being not racist is mostly from the latter, and the media is just reporting that. Personally I think it generates a good discussion. Here's an article with quotes from a legal expert from University of NSW

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article...t-slur-this-is-what-the-experts-say/d2d974bi8

To sum it up, "can white people experience racism?" he says yes, they can be discriminated against. "could what she said be considered racist if in Australia?" he then talks about how a white person could feel offended or discriminated against based on their legislature, but makes a point about how it would deviate from the purpose of the legislature. If you found the media's reporting on this incident interesting, I thought you might like to give that a read, for an Australian perspective, and based on their laws and interpretation.
 

BenitoSTARR

One Minute Man
Scout
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
13,609
I think it’s definitely a police matter. She’s abused a taxi driver, threw up in his taxi and then racially abused one of the cops. Sounds like she was pretty wild at the time and likely hammered.
Allegedly. I’m not sure we should be throwing around those kind of accusations if unproven.
I know you are trying to be funny but Id actually be fine with that as I think it's a total waste of police time and public money to pursue this case
I mean she’s a talented footballer so why waste that talent too?

This is a textbook case of trial by social media.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
Haven't seen anything about her abusing the taxi driver - if she was drunk & disorderly though then some kind of punishment is appropriate
Well she’s been charged with a public order offence which was racially aggravated.

That is the most appropriate offence and charge based on what we know.

D&D is a non imprisonable offence so anyone found guilty can only be given a fine.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,336
Location
@United_Hour
Well she’s been charged with a public order offence which was racially aggravated.

That is the most appropriate offence and charge based on what we know.

D&D is a non imprisonable offence so anyone found guilty can only be given a fine.
What is the likely sentence if she was found guilty of that charge?

Based on the reports, a fine seems appropriate to me
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
268
Location
Sri Lanka
Hmm, from what I've seen, most of the big media are simply reporting what Football Australia thinks, what her manager thinks, and the general public. The support for her and claims about it being not racist is mostly from the latter, and the media is just reporting that. Personally I think it generates a good discussion. Here's an article with quotes from a legal expert from University of NSW

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article...t-slur-this-is-what-the-experts-say/d2d974bi8

To sum it up, "can white people experience racism?" he says yes, they can be discriminated against. "could what she said be considered racist if in Australia?" he then talks about how a white person could feel offended or discriminated against based on their legislature, but makes a point about how it would deviate from the purpose of the legislature. If you found the media's reporting on this incident interesting, I thought you might like to give that a read, for an Australian perspective, and based on their laws and interpretation.
Yeah so I read this one by SBS which I found to be the most impartial.

There’s a few more that I don’t find to be as impartial:

https://amp.theguardian.com/footbal...a-fair-cop-were-sam-kerrs-words-really-racist

https://theconversation.com/sam-ker...acial-element-but-they-were-not-racist-225267

https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...erstanding-of-a-world-still-divided-by-colour

Another issue for me is also where they quote these so called ‘experts’ from these universities around Australia and present their opinions and their interpretations of what anti-racism laws should be as facts. As a graduate of Uni of NSW myself which is supposed to be one of the best in Australia, and a top 50 university in the world - I can’t say I have a lot of faith in our teaching staff after going through their system. I’m sure prof Lucas is well meaning in that SBS article - he believes the comments could meet the grounds for racism under UK law, and that the law doesn’t specifically cover only minorities. But then he also says this case shouldn’t be pursued because racism laws were brought in to correct historic patterns of oppression based on race. That seems a bit paradoxical to me. I’d argue the opposite, and say racism laws should be there to protect all races from discrimination being faced currently, regardless of historical injustices being committed against their particular race.

Just my opinion of course but I think the media should just stay out of this sort of stuff and just report just the facts in an unbiased manner, which they don’t always do.
 

GoonerGirly

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
1,034
Supports
Arsenal
Absolutely. Especially when you consider the target was a person in a position of power and authority, that's exactly why colonialism was my first thought. That doesn't excuse her behavior obviously, I'm sure she was being a menace that night.
You see this is what I kind of don't get re: bringing colonialism etc into it. Sam Kerr, as a woman of colour, has been able to rise above any systemic or historical discrimination she may have experienced. She is one of the most affluent people in the world and is a role model. While I can maybe understand that she has some personal/emotional feelings regarding that, I don't think there's a very strong case that she has been a victim of it in general. If she was truly a victim of systemic discrimination, she would not be living the life she is, where she can feel so entitled as to get drunk, throw up in a cab and abuse a police officer with no fear of consequences for her appalling behaviour. And she was being the racist here, not the cop, which is why I can't get my head around how some people are so willing to easily excuse her actions, or claim that it's not racist if the victim is white.

Another issue for me is also where they quote these so called ‘experts’ from these universities around Australia and present their opinions and their interpretations of what anti-racism laws should be as facts. As a graduate of Uni of NSW myself which is supposed to be one of the best in Australia, and a top 50 university in the world - I can’t say I have a lot of faith in our teaching staff after going through their system. I’m sure prof Lucas is well meaning in that SBS article - he believes the comments could meet the grounds for racism under UK law, and that the law doesn’t specifically cover only minorities. But then he also says this case shouldn’t be pursued because racism laws were brought in to correct historic patterns of oppression based on race. That seems a bit paradoxical to me. I’d argue the opposite, and say racism laws should be there to protect all races from discrimination being faced currently, regardless of historical injustices being committed against their particular race.
This baffles me too - it seems like some people want to have separate laws for separate groups of people. So ethnic people can racially abuse white people but not the other way around. Sounds a lot like we're going down the road of segregation all over again...
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
What is the likely sentence if she was found guilty of that charge?

Based on the reports, a fine seems appropriate to me
S4a is a summary only offence which means it is heard at the magistrates court and the maximum sentence is 6 months in custody.

When it becomes racially aggravated, however, it becomes an either way offence which could heard at Crown Court, and a maximum sentence of 2 years in custody.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,880
Yeah so I read this one by SBS which I found to be the most impartial.

There’s a few more that I don’t find to be as impartial:

https://amp.theguardian.com/footbal...a-fair-cop-were-sam-kerrs-words-really-racist

https://theconversation.com/sam-ker...acial-element-but-they-were-not-racist-225267

https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...erstanding-of-a-world-still-divided-by-colour

Another issue for me is also where they quote these so called ‘experts’ from these universities around Australia and present their opinions and their interpretations of what anti-racism laws should be as facts. As a graduate of Uni of NSW myself which is supposed to be one of the best in Australia, and a top 50 university in the world - I can’t say I have a lot of faith in our teaching staff after going through their system. I’m sure prof Lucas is well meaning in that SBS article - he believes the comments could meet the grounds for racism under UK law, and that the law doesn’t specifically cover only minorities. But then he also says this case shouldn’t be pursued because racism laws were brought in to correct historic patterns of oppression based on race. That seems a bit paradoxical to me. I’d argue the opposite, and say racism laws should be there to protect all races from discrimination being faced currently, regardless of historical injustices being committed against their particular race.

Just my opinion of course but I think the media should just stay out of this sort of stuff and just report just the facts in an unbiased manner, which they don’t always do.
He seems to be suggesting that it would be difficult to convince the court or the judge to secure a conviction. Maybe not if you were sitting on the bench, or Judge Dredd.

You see this is what I kind of don't get re: bringing colonialism etc into it. Sam Kerr, as a woman of colour, has been able to rise above any systemic or historical discrimination she may have experienced. She is one of the most affluent people in the world and is a role model. While I can maybe understand that she has some personal/emotional feelings regarding that, I don't think there's a very strong case that she has been a victim of it in general. If she was truly a victim of systemic discrimination, she would not be living the life she is, where she can feel so entitled as to get drunk, throw up in a cab and abuse a police officer with no fear of consequences for her appalling behaviour. And she was being the racist here, not the cop, which is why I can't get my head around how some people are so willing to easily excuse her actions, or claim that it's not racist if the victim is white.


This baffles me too - it seems like some people want to have separate laws for separate groups of people. So ethnic people can racially abuse white people but not the other way around. Sounds a lot like we're going down the road of segregation all over again...
It's quite common for minorities or visible minorities, which is what I consider Kerr to be, to feel like they are being oppressed when being arrested by police officers. Plus she was probably too hammered to be thinking clearly about all that.
 

Plant0x84

Shame we’re aren’t more like Brighton
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
13,201
Location
Carpark and snack area adjacent to the abyss
S4a is a summary only offence which means it is heard at the magistrates court and the maximum sentence is 6 months in custody.

When it becomes racially aggravated, however, it becomes an either way offence which could heard at Crown Court, and a maximum sentence of 2 years in custody.
I’d be very surprised if she ends up in custody. Most likely community service or similar and a huge fine.
 

Rood

nostradamus like gloater
Scout
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
21,336
Location
@United_Hour
S4a is a summary only offence which means it is heard at the magistrates court and the maximum sentence is 6 months in custody.

When it becomes racially aggravated, however, it becomes an either way offence which could heard at Crown Court, and a maximum sentence of 2 years in custody.
Ye buts that's maximums which are only dished out in extreme cases - do you know what is more standard for this kind of thing?

I'm assuming there is no one in this thread who thinks Sam Kerr should go to prison for even 6 months, nevermind 2 years
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
268
Location
Sri Lanka
Allegedly. I’m not sure we should be throwing around those kind of accusations if unproven.

I mean she’s a talented footballer so why waste that talent too?

This is a textbook case of trial by social media.
True of course she’s innocent until proven guilty, and she’s pleaded not guilty at this stage - the racism bit is especially unproven right now, but she’s definitely called the cop a ‘stupid white PC/Cop/Bastard’ (not really sure which one she used at this point, but she’s said the ‘stupid white’ part for sure)

A lot of the debate in the thread atm is around whether or not the alleged comments directed at a white police officer should still be considered racist.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,465
Location
Manchester
Ye buts that's maximums which are only dished out in extreme cases - do you know what is more standard for this kind of thing?
Not really if I’m honest. I’d guess with no previous convictions a heavy fine and suspended sentence perhaps.
 

GoonerGirly

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
1,034
Supports
Arsenal
He seems to be suggesting that it would be difficult to convince the court or the judge to secure a conviction. Maybe not if you were sitting on the bench, or Judge Dredd.


It's quite common for minorities or visible minorities, which is what I consider Kerr to be, to feel like they are being oppressed when being arrested by police officers. Plus she was probably too hammered to be thinking clearly about all that.
I agree it would be hard to secure a conviction, and I have said previously I don't think she should go to jail for something she said (I don't agree with the law in this case, but respect and abide by it). I just don't understand how some people argue she wasn't being racist, or that racism was OK in this case because she is a minority enflicting racism on a white person. It's further strange to me that some white people have gotten themselves into such a tailspin and think that they're personally responsible for all the atrocities that their racial group have enflicted in the past on minorities, or feel that they should be carrying the historical burden of that, to the point that if someone from that minorty group abused them they should just accept it or feel it's deserved. And the argument that she was too drunk to think clearly isn't much of a defense I'm afraid.
 
Last edited:

jungledrums

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
2,674
That’s a terrible example. The punishment for killing another person is completely contextual. From justifiable self defence, to manslaughter, to murder. Identical act but very different punishments, depending on the context.

So, obviously, context also matters when it comes to more minor offences.
What a shit retort. I clearly said the punishment for murder is not contextual. You’ve responded to a point I did not make by highlighting examples of something entirely different - like accidental killings, or manslaughter. In what world do they constitute murder?
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
3,016
I'm curious if you had friends or family who did have their ancestors raped and killed, and they harbored resentment for the japanese, and if one day you caught them arguing with japanese people and calling them stupid, would you actually step in and ask your friend to be the better person?
You do understand that judging someone purely based on their nationality or colour is the very essence of racism right? That’s going to be even more the case if, as you seem to be suggesting here, it’s based on something someone from their country did before anyone involved was even born.

So, to answer your question. Yes, if someone was picking a fight with someone purely because they didn’t like where they were from, any sane person would obviously step in to tell them they were in the wrong. They would also (rightly) be charged with a racially aggravated offence if they committed a crime against that person purely because of their ethnicity.
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
268
Location
Sri Lanka
He seems to be suggesting that it would be difficult to convince the court or the judge to secure a conviction. Maybe not if you were sitting on the bench, or Judge Dredd.


It's quite common for minorities or visible minorities, which is what I consider Kerr to be, to feel like they are being oppressed when being arrested by police officers. Plus she was probably too hammered to be thinking clearly about all that.
Haha maybe yes, if I had to be a judge I’d channel a bit of Dredd :lol: Maybe it is difficult to convince a judge given he’s a white police officer - but what Kerr allegedly said sort of fits the bill as per the law. The question for me is then, what does that say about the justice system if a law isn’t applied equally?

Yeah maybe it is common for visible minorities to feel a bit cautious when they encounter a cop that is part of a police force known for being racist at times - but for the most part if you comply with their requests and treat them politely, they treat you fine. I’ve spent time in these Australia as a minority, and have never experienced this with cops even on a night out. With Kerr, she became abusive towards the cop when he was trying to do his job and of course being drunk doesn’t excuse that - why not just comply with the cop, settle the dispute with the cabbie, get another Uber to get home and call it a night? I can do all those things no matter how hammered I am, I’m sure Sam Kerr is capable of doing that too.
 
Last edited: