Sam Kerr’s trial started uncomfortable conversations about anti-white racism and forced the world to consider the complexities of power, celebrity and discrimination.
On January 30, 2023, two individuals claimed to have been racially discriminated against: a white British police officer and a famous, brown-skinned sportswoman.
One of these claims would be prosecuted, forming the subject of a criminal charge and court trial, the other would be ignored by authorities.
Kerr, the world-renowned footballer would be charged with racially aggravated harassment for calling Constable Stephen Lovell a “f**king stupid and white” cop.
The claim by Kerr that police were treating her differently because of the colour of her skin when they refused to investigate her accusations against a taxi driver was ignored.
The initial news that the Matildas captain had been charged for using a racial slur prompted criticism and negative news coverage when the story broke in early 2024.
Through the court trial details of that fateful night have been blasted around the world.
A jury heard about Kerr’s boozy night out in central London, a drunken taxi ride, a heated fight with the driver and the combative exchange with officers at the police station.
But as details emerged about the case, public opinion towards Kerr softened as people began to make their own value judgements about the harm caused by her words.
Loading…
Claims of ‘anti-white racism’
There has been debate about the validity of terms like “reverse racism” or “anti-white” racism, with some academics and experts arguing it ignores the systems that entrench disadvantage in certain communities.
The English legal system makes it unlawful to harass or harm anyone because of their racial identity, including those of a white background.
In 1998, amendments to English law allowed courts to sentence more heavily for crimes motivated by racial hatred.
This was implemented after the high-profile murder of Stephen Lawrence, a black British man who was violently killed in a race hate crime.
But in a London courtroom this week, a jury was forced to determine how harmful a four-word anti-white slur can be.
Racism describes discrimination or prejudice against someone’s racial or ethnic background, often from a minority or marginalised group.
Sam Kerr was questioned by Judge Peter Lodder (centre), her lawyer Grace Forbes (right) and William Emlyn Jones KC (left of Forbes). (Priscilla Coleman/MB Media)
The UK is a country with a majority white population, and its within this group that positions of power and privilege are concentrated.
In that police station on January 30 a complex array of social hierarchies where at play.
Police over the public, white over brown, the famous over the fameless, the wealthy over the worker.
The court heard the interactions between Kerr and the police and saw all of these at play.
It heard that Kerr described the police officer as “irrelevant”, threatened to get the Chelsea Football Club lawyers involved, and lectured them on “white privilege”.
Ultimately, the jury had to consider three things when forming their verdict: the intent and impact of Kerr’s words “stupid and white” and whether they were racially motivated.
Loading
Kerr’s previous experiences of racism
The trial would dig into the Chelsea forward’s experience of racism throughout her life, where she described painful instances where she felt discriminated against.
Kerr described herself as “Anglo-Indian”, and said while at school and in the community, hurtful assumptions were made about her because of her background.
Her defence lawyer argued that it was these experiences that partly led the 31-year-old to behave the ways she did that night, as Kerr felt the white police could never understand the discrimination she faced.
Meanwhile, the prosecution had to convince the jury that Kerr’s words cut deep.
In Constable Lovell’s first witness statement shortly after the incident he made no mention of the impact of being called “stupid and white”.
The Criminal Prosecution Service initially declined to prosecute Kerr, saying it did not meet the threshold of harm, alarm and distress.
It was in a second statement made almost 11 months later where he said it made him feel “upset”, “belittled” and “shocked”, adding that he felt that “they went too far and I took great offence to them”.
This came after the football player had received great international attention for the Matilda’s performance in the Women’s World Cup.
Under questioning the Constable admitted he was determined to pursue a criminal prosecution against the sports star.
When Lovell eventually took to the stand in court, he was asked how the insult of “stupid and white” made him feel, he offered a short explanation: “Upset.”
Ultimately, the jury wasn’t convinced, and Sam Kerr was found not guilty.
Loading…
But the case was not flattering to either the defence or prosecution.
The Metropolitain Police were criticised for their conduct, with the exchange between Kerr and officers labelled as “childish”.
For Kerr, being a woman of colour charged with racially aggravated harassment would no doubt have caused deep turmoil.
She has been cleared by the courts but there’s been damage to her public image, and questions swirling around her suitability to represent her country.
For Kerr it will be the court of public opinion that may determine her future.
