Sam Kerr | Found not guilty of racially aggravated harassment

ryansgirl

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2001
Messages
2,948
Location
where the sun rises
As an Australian, it was interesting to read in various newspapers that apparently Australians `agree` that nothing wrong was said if the allegation is true that she abused a white Police Officer by calling him `A stupid white bastard`. While there has been an infantile rejoicing from some back home, there are plenty of us who are thinking of the double standard on display.

For a start, not everybody is impressed with Sam`s supporters twisting themselves into knots to justify her words if they are true. One numpty who apparently is a `journalist` even wrote an article in a so called serious newspaper opining that if Sam had been a `straight white housewife`then this would have been fine among the public. It`s embarassing what lengths are being gone to in pretending Sam Kerr is the victim here.

For a start, she was allegedly displaying some unvarnished drunken arsehole behaviour - throwing up in a taxi and then getting high and mighty because the taxi driver rightly wanted a cleaning fee included in the taxi fare.
Not hard to see the dynamic at work here - Don`t you know who I am? - and a real touch of classism in a millionaire footballer pulling rank over a taxi driver so much that the driver had to call the police. Who has every right to do this kind of job in aiding a taxi driver without being abused because of their appearance - apparently white.

The justifications being made for her are especially crass and illogical - if true her bogan outburst is even more worthy of criticism given that many Indigenous people in Australia for example actually look white rather than traditionally Aboriginal. It would be interesting if all the people in Australia running to her defence find out that the Police Officer concerned is actually not as white as they look but then again, they`re missing the point. Allegedly Sam Kerr abused a police officer doing their job and included their skin colour. Says a lot about her, drunk or sober if it`s true.
 
Personally I wouldn't try to justify it if that is what she said, note that she denies it so it's just allegations at the moment.

But there are serious questions about whether it's worth the time and resources to take this matter to court - I don't think it is.

Give her a fine and a warning, move on.
 
Last edited:
While there is a clear difference in the dynamics between calling an officer a white bastard instead of a brown/black etc. one, I wouldn't say its of no note at all. Any reference to race is odd and not needed.
 
Dunno about strict legal definitions but it seems a bit mad to use legislation intended to protect persecuted minorities to protect someone from a majority that has never had to deal with any sort of systemic persecution because of their ethnicity.

Doesn’t mean Sam Kerr isn’t a bad person, behaving badly, of course.
 
ryansgirl said:
As an Australian, it was interesting to read in various newspapers that apparently Australians `agree` that nothing wrong was said if the allegation is true that she abused a white Police Officer by calling him `A stupid white bastard`. While there has been an infantile rejoicing from some back home, there are plenty of us who are thinking of the double standard on display.

For a start, not everybody is impressed with Sam`s supporters twisting themselves into knots to justify her words if they are true. One numpty who apparently is a `journalist` even wrote an article in a so called serious newspaper opining that if Sam had been a `straight white housewife`then this would have been fine among the public. It`s embarassing what lengths are being gone to in pretending Sam Kerr is the victim here.

For a start, she was allegedly displaying some unvarnished drunken arsehole behaviour - throwing up in a taxi and then getting high and mighty because the taxi driver rightly wanted a cleaning fee included in the taxi fare.
Not hard to see the dynamic at work here - Don`t you know who I am? - and a real touch of classism in a millionaire footballer pulling rank over a taxi driver so much that the driver had to call the police. Who has every right to do this kind of job in aiding a taxi driver without being abused because of their appearance - apparently white.

The justifications being made for her are especially crass and illogical - if true her bogan outburst is even more worthy of criticism given that many Indigenous people in Australia for example actually look white rather than traditionally Aboriginal. It would be interesting if all the people in Australia running to her defence find out that the Police Officer concerned is actually not as white as they look but then again, they`re missing the point. Allegedly Sam Kerr abused a police officer doing their job and included their skin colour. Says a lot about her, drunk or sober if it`s true.
Click to expand...

I could not agree with this post more. The double standards from people seeing no wrong in what Sam Kerr’s is alleged to have said while also thinking it is perfectly ok to abuse a police officer while they are doing their job - well, it’s staggering really.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Dunno about strict legal definitions but it seems a bit mad to use legislation intended to protect persecuted minorities to protect someone from a majority that has never had to deal with any sort of systemic persecution because of their ethnicity.

Doesn’t mean Sam Kerr isn’t a bad person, behaving badly, of course.
Click to expand...
I get what you wrote about the legal side of it. There is a difference but I think the attempts from Sam`s supporters in the media who also are very quick to be all over people from the opposite political spectrum - not talking any extremists here - about perceived racism are peddling the argument that insulting people based on their skin colour is of no consequence.

You can`t oppose abuse/harassment based on people`s ethnicity/racial origin but add the proviso `But it`s fine if the person is white`. This is where it goes down a slippery slope. If it happened the way we are hearing, I think it says a lot about the arrogance of millionaire footballers/sports people - hard cheese about the taxi driver who already is doing a job that is underpaid and difficult but providing an essential service. The numpties in Oz cheering on this alleged behaviour are also contradictory there as most of them are convinced they lack any `isms` but fail to see the class aspect here.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Dunno about strict legal definitions but it seems a bit mad to use legislation intended to protect persecuted minorities to protect someone from a majority that has never had to deal with any sort of systemic persecution because of their ethnicity.

Doesn’t mean Sam Kerr isn’t a bad person, behaving badly, of course.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure I can agree with this.

What I’m going to say is very simplistic, and I understand that but legislation is legislation. It very specifically indicates that you can’t do something based on their race or religion and it is there to protect all races and all religions.

Saying that it shouldn’t be enforced because the victim is white and therefore the ‘majority’ opens a whole other issue.

N.B. I have written this from a UK viewpoint as opposed to Australia where the alleged crime has actually taken place and their legislation might be different, although I still have the same opinion
 
Rood said:
Personally I wouldn't try to justify it if that is what she said, note that she denies it so it's just allegations at the moment.

But there are serious questions about whether it's worth the time and resources to take this matter to court - I don't think it is.

Give her a fine and a warning, move on.
Click to expand...
Essentially I agree with you but I think Sam`s position makes it more of an issue about privileged people who are involved in various campaigns against racism etc behaving in ways that are similar to those they tell others not to do. If she did say anything along those lines.

She is a role model and she does know it so she will be held to the standards she and her team mates and professional football clubs like Chelsea promote and say they keep to.
 
ryansgirl said:
You can`t oppose abuse/harassment based on people`s ethnicity/racial origin but add the proviso `But it`s fine if the person is white`.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this - as a matter of principle. People should just stay away from using race/colour/ethnicity as a derogatory term full stop, otherwise face the consequences. It makes no difference what colour a persons skin is.
 
Bringing up race when irrelevant is pathetic regardless. She is unlikeable like many current women's players. Not a good look for their game.

Also this whole thing started over a taxi cab fare? She makes in the millions, she's cheap.
 
K Stand Knut said:
I’m not sure I can agree with this.

What I’m going to say is very simplistic, and I understand that but legislation is legislation. It very specifically indicates that you can’t do something based on their race or religion and it is there to protect all races and all religions.

Saying that it shouldn’t be enforced because the victim is white and therefore the ‘majority’ opens a whole other issue.

N.B. I have written this from a UK viewpoint as opposed to Australia where the alleged crime has actually taken place and their legislation might be different, although I still have the same opinion
Click to expand...

Nah it took place in London and she's due in court for racial harassment which seems a waste of time and resources for me
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68471815

I have no issue with her being fined and warned if she has done that - we dont know the details but Im assuming it would fit 'drunk & disorderly' or something like that
 
JogaBonitoRooney said:
Bringing up race when irrelevant is pathetic regardless. She is unlikeable like many current women's players. Not a good look for their game.

Also this whole thing started over a taxi cab fare? She makes in the millions, she's cheap.
Click to expand...
Who are the many unlikeable players?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Dunno about strict legal definitions but it seems a bit mad to use legislation intended to protect persecuted minorities to protect someone from a majority that has never had to deal with any sort of systemic persecution because of their ethnicity.

Doesn’t mean Sam Kerr isn’t a bad person, behaving badly, of course.
Click to expand...

I get why people will largely disagree with you but you are not wrong. The focus on white is maybe misguided, the same would be true for black or brown even if somewhat more "accepted". The insult is that the lad is a bastard not that he is white, if he was particularly short or tall there is a fair chance that it could have been used as a descriptor. The mention of a physical trait isn't actually that meaningful in that context, it's a common way to personalize the insult.

I think that people have their heart in the right place but they sometimes make a bit too much about something that is fairly mild. Do we really judge her differently if she call him "a freckled bastard", do we focus on freckled or bastard?
 
JogaBonitoRooney said:
Bringing up race when irrelevant is pathetic regardless. She is unlikeable like many current women's players. Not a good look for their game.

Also this whole thing started over a taxi cab fare? She makes in the millions, she's cheap.
Click to expand...

I’m curious, could you give me examples of these numerous unlikeable female players?

At least the men’s game doesn’t have these issues, you rarely hear of players conducting themselves in a controversial manner.
 
Last edited:
Rood said:
Nah it took place in London and she's due in court for racial harassment which seems a waste of time and resources for me
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68471815

I have no issue with her being fined and warned if she has done that - we dont know the details but Im assuming it would fit 'drunk & disorderly' or something like that
Click to expand...

Probably should have read the article.

Again, I think you’re right about time and money etc. but if this is a white footballer racially abusing a non-white officer, the country goes mental and rightly so.
 
top1whoisman said:
I’m curious, could you give me examples of these several unlikeable female players?

At least the men’s game doesn’t have these issues, you rarely hear of players conducting themselves in a controversial manner.
Click to expand...

I would not generalize on all of women's football, but there were a few who behaved so badly that you really want to use the c-word on them. Hope Solo is the most notorious of all.
 
K Stand Knut said:
Probably should have read the article.

Again, I think you’re right about time and money etc. but if this is a white footballer racially abusing a non-white officer, the country goes mental and rightly so.
Click to expand...

Of course, as there’s a long history of oppression and discrimination towards non-whites.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
I would not generalize on all of women's football, but there were a few who behaved so badly that you really want to use the c-word on them. Hope Solo is the most notorious of all.
Click to expand...

I’d say there are so few that claiming there are plenty sounds like one has an agenda.
 
JPRouve said:
I think that people have their heart in the right place but they sometimes make a bit too much about something that is fairly mild. Do we really judge her differently if she call him "a freckled bastard", do we focus on freckled or bastard?
Click to expand...

And what would be the judgement if she was white and the cab driver black... this would be an absolute shit show in comparison.

The reason targeting racial characteristics is treated differently is because there are plenty of people who clearly do dislike or think negatively of people just based on their race or colour of their skin. I don't know of anyone who discriminates against people with freckles. When people are drunk, their true feelings often come out. Racists will be openly racist.

The more we entertain any sort of racism the longer it will linger and the more division will come. There are plenty of people who will dislike black people more or think that discrimination against them is OK if they feel that people can get away with abusing white people in a way that would be completely unacceptable the other way around. Telling people its OK to be racist as long as its against the local majority is just bizarre at its core as well.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Dunno about strict legal definitions but it seems a bit mad to use legislation intended to protect persecuted minorities to protect someone from a majority that has never had to deal with any sort of systemic persecution because of their ethnicity.

Doesn’t mean Sam Kerr isn’t a bad person, behaving badly, of course.
Click to expand...
What?

We also have laws stating you cannot commit murder. It’s not contextual - oh you can murder that fella if he hurts animals, but not that one because he’s a nice guy.

Laws prohibit certain behaviours. How dangerous if we started applying laws only to certain demographics.
 
Rood said:
Nah it took place in London and she's due in court for racial harassment which seems a waste of time and resources for me
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68471815
Click to expand...

We should just process this to the full extent of the law, give Ms. Kerr a chance to espouse her version of events rather than simply 'move on', as you suggest.

If Ms. Kerr is to be charged, she has every right to defend herself.

willing to absolve Mason Greenwood, despite hard evidence, now seem to want Kerr punished and done away with?

It's quite a telling oversight.


top1whoisman said:
I’d say there are so few that claiming there are plenty sounds like one has an agenda.
Click to expand...

Oh, come on, they gave you an example in bold.

What more do we need?
 
Last edited:
jungledrums said:
What?

We also have laws stating you cannot commit murder. It’s not contextual - oh you can murder that fella if he hurts animals, but not that one because he’s a nice guy.

Laws prohibit certain behaviours. How dangerous if we started applying laws only to certain demographics.
Click to expand...

Sounds like discrimination to me.
 
brontelicious said:
If it fits 'drunk and disorderly', we'd have to discuss effects of alcohol and how it is harming the police etc.

We should just process this to the full extent of the law, give Ms. Kerr a chance to espouse her version of events rather than simply 'move on', as you suggest.

With respect, you are willing to give Mason Greenwood the right to 'move on' but want Kerr processed guilty asap.

It's quite a telling oversight.




Quite.



Laws apply to circumstances rather than demographics.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true. They also apply to demographics - there are age based laws, for example. The difference in that scenario is that it’s something fixed, like age, rather than something nebulous like sex or race.
 
Racism in any form is unacceptable and should be punished accordingly. I think you go down a dangerous road if you consider some forms less than others just because of the race of the victim, although I understand why this is the case due to the historical context; but History moves. If we say it's OK now, will it be OK in 50 years or will people look back and say that was wrong?
 
JogaBonitoRooney said:
Megan Rapinie, Hope Solo, Jill Scott, Sam Kerr... that's all the players I know
Click to expand...

All the players you know in general or all the players you know who are unlikeable?

Out of curiosity, what have Rapinoe or Scott done to make them unlikeable in your eyes?
 
SuperiorXI said:
Racism in any form is unacceptable and should be punished accordingly. I think you go down a dangerous road if you consider some forms less than others just because of the race of the victim, although I understand why this is the case due to the historical context; but History moves. If we say it's OK now, will it be OK in 50 years or will people look back and say that was wrong?
Click to expand...

If it was for me, Kerr should be punished in the same way that if it was a white person making a derogatory comment about one's race. If you believe in equality, it should also mean equality in punishment. Historical context cannot and should not be used as a factor upon the level of punishment if you want equality before the law.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
If it was for me, Kerr should be punished in the same way that if it was a white person making a derogatory comment about one's race. If you believe in equality, it should also mean equality in punishment. Historical context cannot and should not be used as a factor upon the level of punishment if you want equality before the law.
Click to expand...
I agree but I will also say I understand people that bring the historical and social contexts into it, I just think it's a dangerous road to go down, much clearer if we have equality across the board.
 
mctrials23 said:
And what would be the judgement if she was white and the cab driver black... this would be an absolute shit show in comparison.

The reason targeting racial characteristics is treated differently is because there are plenty of people who clearly do dislike or think negatively of people just based on their race or colour of their skin. I don't know of anyone who discriminates against people with freckles. When people are drunk, their true feelings often come out. Racists will be openly racist.

The more we entertain any sort of racism the longer it will linger and the more division will come. There are plenty of people who will dislike black people more or think that discrimination against them is OK if they feel that people can get away with abusing white people in a way that would be completely unacceptable the other way around. Telling people its OK to be racist as long as its against the local majority is just bizarre at its core as well.
Click to expand...

Who said that it was okay to be racist? The point is that what she allegedly said isn't in my opinion a racist slur, we may disagree on that and I'll accept your interpretation but the point I made isn't that it's racist and okay.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Racism in any form is unacceptable and should be punished accordingly. I think you go down a dangerous road if you consider some forms less than others just because of the race of the victim, although I understand why this is the case due to the historical context; but History moves. If we say it's OK now, will it be OK in 50 years or will people look back and say that was wrong?
Click to expand...


RedDevilQuebecois said:
If it was for me, Kerr should be punished in the same way that if it was a white person making a derogatory comment about one's race. If you believe in equality, it should also mean equality in punishment. Historical context cannot and should not be used as a factor upon the level of punishment if you want equality before the law.
Click to expand...

We have to ensure Kerr is actually guilty before punishing her, or establishing certain 'if you really believe in equality' narratives.

I agree, she should be punished if guilty, but we should not dismiss 'historical context' outright as it may have informed the officer's conduct to her, not to mention, her outburst.
 
brontelicious said:
We should just process this to the full extent of the law, give Ms. Kerr a chance to espouse her version of events rather than simply 'move on', as you suggest.

If Ms. Kerr is to be charged, she has every right to defend herself.

willing to absolve Mason Greenwood, despite hard evidence, now seem to want Kerr punished and done away with?

It's quite a telling oversight.




Oh, come on, they gave you an example in bold.

What more do we need?
Click to expand...

Don't make things up that I haven't said and if you want to discuss Greenwood then do it in the appropriate thread, the two cases are completely unconnected

When there is a huge backlog in the legal system then it's waste of police time and resources to take something like this to court, that's the point.
 
JogaBonitoRooney said:
Megan Rapinie, Hope Solo, Jill Scott, Sam Kerr... that's all the players I know
Click to expand...
That's only 4 though, it's hardly many, if you don't know that many it probably means they are keeping themselves to themselves and aren't being annoying in the public eye. I don't like Rapinie, Solo I never hear from hear but Jill Scott seems OK on Stick to Football.
 
JogaBonitoRooney said:
Megan Rapinie, Hope Solo, Jill Scott, Sam Kerr... that's all the players I know
Click to expand...
Jill Scott to my mind is one of the kindest, most unassuming and likeable players in the women’s game. Very strange take.

Rapinoe and Solo are famously outspoken by not necessarily unlikeable.

It also says how much you pay attention that you can only name 4 players and 3 of them are retired.
 
jungledrums said:
What?

We also have laws stating you cannot commit murder. It’s not contextual - oh you can murder that fella if he hurts animals, but not that one because he’s a nice guy.

Laws prohibit certain behaviours. How dangerous if we started applying laws only to certain demographics.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Plant0x84 said:
Jill Scott to my mind is one of the kindest, most unassuming and likeable players in the women’s game. Very strange take.

Rapinoe and Solo are famously outspoken by not necessarily unlikeable.

It also says how much you pay attention that you can only name 4 players and 3 of them are retired.
Click to expand...
Solo is a domestic abuser.
 
Am I racist for thinking Sam Kerr was white?

I think maybe a little.

Regardless, referring to anyone's skin colour in this way is typically brain-dead behaviour.
 
Plant0x84 said:
Jill Scott to my mind is one of the kindest, most unassuming and likeable players in the women’s game. Very strange take.

Rapinoe and Solo are famously outspoken by not necessarily unlikeable.

It also says how much you pay attention that you can only name 4 players and 3 of them are retired.
Click to expand...

Hope Solo has had a lot of charges against her though. From domestic violence, DUI and a misdemeanor in child abuse.

She also has been a bit of a prick to opponents, especially when the US have lost, for example against Sweden in the Olympics where she referred to them as cowards
 
top1whoisman said:
Of course, as there’s a long history of oppression and discrimination towards non-whites.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It was terrible wasn’t it??

Great idea here. Let’s ignore any law and legislation if the alleged ‘victim’ has suffered the atrocities of the people who it supposed to protect.

I assume that men shouldn’t be protected by domestic violence laws either because they’ve (as a collective) not faced the horrendous crimes that the female population have.

makes sense
 
Rood said:
Don't make things up that I haven't said and if you want to discuss Greenwood then do it in the appropriate thread, the two cases are completely unconnected

When there is a huge backlog in the legal system then it's waste of police time and resources to take something like this to court, that's the point.
Click to expand...

It's a 'waste of police time and resources' allowing Kerr to defend herself, or the officer present suitable (scrutinised) evidence of the charge?

It's not in Kerr's interests to capitulate, nor for the case to fall apart, but to exonerate herself, only. She should take the appropriate action to defend herself and if this includes taking it all the way to court, so be it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.