"Stupid and white" is not a racial attack.

[MNW67]

You've actually asked two different questions:

It's not illegal to be racist or make racist remarks, in her case she was making a statement prejudiced by her racist views. That's not unlawful.

I think you are being pedantic. I don't know why. My question wasn't a trap! The whole thrust of the defence is encapsulated in the phrasing I gave. And I am simply asking, if Sam Kerr had actually said something along those lines, would posters find that racist.

(The phrasing I posted was "I think you are a stupid man who is treating me less favourably because of my skin colour and is displaying white privilege")

 

[MNW67]

The prosecution was actually for aggravated racial harassment.

The prosecution, as far as I can tell were going for Section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. IME It was a stretch and it seemed the Jury agreed:

4 Fear or provocation of violence.​

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a)uses towards another person threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or

(b)distributes or displays to another person any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,

with intent to cause that person to believe that immediate unlawful violence will be used against him or another by any person, or to provoke the immediate use of unlawful violence by that person or another, or whereby that person is likely to believe that such violence will be used or it is likely that such violence will be provoked.

 

[Odds]

I think you are being pedantic. I don't know why. My question wasn't a trap! The whole thrust of the defence is encapsulated in the phrasing I gave. And I am asking, if Sam Kerr had actually said something along those lines, would posters find that racist.

Y'all ought to hear what his brother Wayne has to say about it. Slanderous sod, he is.

 

[motorbiking]

The prosecution was actually for aggravated racial harassment.

In the video he arrested her for public order, so they must have switched to Harassment.

That is a better fit, but a single comment would be difficult.

 

[motorbiking]

I think you are being pedantic. I don't know why. My question wasn't a trap! The whole thrust of the defence is encapsulated in the phrasing I gave. And I am simply asking, if Sam Kerr had actually said something along those lines, would posters find that racist.

(The phrasing I posted was "I think you are a stupid man who is treating me less favourably because of my skin colour and is displaying white privilege")

It was necessary to point out they were different questions. One related to an opinion of being racist, the other asked if an offence had been committed.

Was she being racist - yes IMO "white privilege" is a concept to oppress white people with. I know plenty would disagree.
Was she harassing him. We need more of the video. He appeared to be trying to help her and it was her stupidity that resulted in her not being able to get through.

It was right and proper for him to arrest her on suspicion of criminal damage. There was an allegation of criminal damage and one person confessing does not mean it's an honest confession.

 

[ellal]

Reading what you write on the forums i would say that it is you that is clearly the racist!!!

PMSL...

Another member of the Klan dumbly steps up...

You really should have learnt how to hide your true colours much better by now

 

[MNW67]

In the video he arrested her for public order, so they must have switched to Harassment.

That is a better fit, but a single comment would be difficult.

What do you think of this. It seems a strange thing for a judge to say. Surely the only reason anyone is prosecuted is because of their behaviour. Is this judge speak for "the jury got it wrong". (Kerr's lawyers have said they aren't asking for costs btw)

After the verdict, Judge Peter Lodder KC said: "I take the view her own behaviour contributed significantly to the bringing of this allegation.

"I don't go behind the jury's verdict but that has a significant bearing on the question of costs."

 

[transam]

Don’t quite see why they brought a prosecution

Although I take the point if some one had said
Black and stupid all hell may well have broken loose

There would have been a guilty verdict
Compensation would have to have been paid

The black person would have been traumatised

There would have been a task force set up who’s mission would have been to root out the cause of the remark

The mission would have been turbo charged

 

[ellal]

Was she being racist - yes IMO "white privilege" is a concept to oppress white people with. I know plenty would disagree.

'Oppress white people'?

Could you point out where 'white people' have been oppressed?

And could you tell us exactly how 'non white people' do not suffer discrimination?

 

[motorbiking]

What do you think of this. It seems a strange thing for a judge to say. Surely the only reason anyone is prosecuted is because of their behaviour. Is this judge speak for "the jury got it wrong". (Kerr's lawyers have said they aren't asking for costs btw)

Yep - I would say so.

But there is more to it. The abuse of process claim was valid IMO. They did bring the charges out of time and they did "encourage" plod to amend his statement to make it a better fit. I suspect your avg. Juror would feel that was a stitch up and give a perverse finding.

The KC prosecuting was quite clever. Arguing that Black and White are not the same - would trigger most people to think "no they should be".

 

[blup]

They didn't ask for costs because of the judge's hint. She tried to get out of the rap for throwing up in the car by claiming the driver had kidnapped her, but that didn't work because she was driven to the police station. So, quick thinking but dishonest and unnecessarily insulting to the cop. Not a racist offence, for reasons MBK has given, but certainly judging someone on the basis of his skin colour. Copper waited 10 months to complain, why? They must get much worse abuse than that everyday. As for white privilege, that is best exemplified by kneeling on a black man's neck for 15 minutes until he's dead, feeling safe in the knowledge you will get away with it.

 

[MNW67]

Yep - I would say so.

But there is more to it. The abuse of process claim was valid IMO. They did bring the charges out of time and they did "encourage" plod to amend his statement to make it a better fit. I suspect your avg. Juror would feel that was a stitch up and give a perverse finding.

The KC prosecuting was quite clever. Arguing that Black and White are not the same - would trigger most people to think "no they should be".

I was actually surprised how sympathetic the coverage yesterday in the Mail and Telegraph was. They seemed to go out of their way to explain Kerr's defence and as part of their reports they both included comments by other barristers that this was a waste of CPS resources and was doomed to fail.

 

[motorbiking]

Could you point out where 'white people' have been oppressed?

I already did: graduate employment and Internships with Positive Discrimination/Action in recruitment. Here is an example of some more https://findajob.dwp.gov.uk/search?q=BAME&w=UK

And could you tell us exactly how 'non white people' do not suffer discrimination?

Why would it be necessary to show that non white people hadn't been discriminated against, in order to make an argument that "white" oppression exists.

 

[motorbiking]

I was actually surprised how sympathetic the coverage yesterday in the Mail and Telegraph was. They seemed to go out of their way to explain Kerr's defence and as part of their reports they both included comments by other barristers that this was a waste of CPS resources and was doomed to fail.

Its easy to label them with a racism tag, when in fact we are left with a gobby p*** head, abusing a copper who was doing his job.

 

[Notch7]

Y'all ought to hear what his brother Wayne has to say about it. Slanderous sod, he is.

Wayne Kerr

he is on this forum under more than one user name...........