Susie O’Brien: Sam Kerr didn’t deserve global court spectacle

The Sam Kerr acquittal was a just outcome and a big relief, but the charge of aggravated racial harassment should never have been laid against the Matildas skipper.

If a white English policeman can’t handle being called “white” and “f*cking stupid”, then what’s he doing on the tough London beat?

The Sam Kerr acquittal was a just outcome and a big relief.

The charge of aggravated racial harassment should never have been laid against the soccer player, let alone led to an eight-day trial. It was ludicrous and alarming.

Judge Peter Lodder pointed out that the whole situation was caused by Kerr’s own behaviour, but what happened next – the escalation of the issue into court and onto the global stage – was not her fault.

The fact that the allegedly offended officer, PC Stephen Lovell, took 12 months to decide he was “upset” by her words is very telling.

If he was so harmed by Kerr’s words, why didn’t he put it in his original statement?

Kerr leaves Kingston Crown Court after being found not guilty of causing racially aggravated harassment. Picture: Peter Nicholls

And if he was so traumatised by her description of him as white, why did the conversation – in which Kerr repeated the taunt a number of times – go on for more than half an hour?

It’s the role of police officers to de-escalate situations and ensure those taken to police stations aren’t harming themselves or anyone else.

However, in this case the young cop admitted he was “determined to pursue the case to the criminal courts”. He was aided in this dubious goal by The Crown Prosecution Service, which authorised the baseless charge.

As the legal process gained momentum, it became clear that Kerr was the victim, not the police officer she was alleged to have racially harassed.

It would have been different if Kerr had been physically aggressive and tried to strike PC Lovell, or had been on a foul-mouthed tirade inciting racial violence against all white people.

But she was inside the controlled environment of a police station. She was sitting down for most of the 35-minute exchange captured on camera, arguing her case with three male police officers standing around her.

Kerr called the cop “f*cking stupid and white”. Picture: Peter Nicholls

As her lawyer explained to the court, Kerr calling the cop “f*cking stupid and white” was not a racist insult, but “an attempt to convey complex issues of power and privilege” that led to Kerr and her partner Kristie Mewis not being believed by the police officers about a cab ride they’d taken earlier in the night.

There is some merit in Kerr’s claims. Not only did the three officers not appear to believe that Kerr and Mewis were scared and thought the cabbie was taking them hostage, but they denied they had called police for help when they actually did so.

Kerr is a complex figure: she’s an international sporting figure earning millions in salaries and top-drawer endorsements. But she’s also a mixed-race gay woman who’s experienced sexism, racism and homophobia in her life.

She no doubt had good reason to believe her race and gender were part of the reason why she and Mewis’ version of the cab ride was not being accepted by the police.

The case turned on the legal definition of aggravated racial harassment, with police lawyers failing to prove her words were intended to harass and were motivated by malice and ill-will towards PC Lovell because he is white.

The legislation was designed to protect minority groups from hate speech and abuse, so it was galling to see it used by a privileged member of England’s dominant race – a white male cop.

The Matildas skipper says she wants to put the challenging period behind her. Picture: Phil Hillyard

Crown Prosecutor Bill Emlyn Jones made the key point that calling a white man “white” is not the same as calling a black man “black” because of the centuries of prejudice and discrimination experienced by black people.

The only good thing about the trial was the public airing of the footage from the police station. It shows Kerr to be drunk and upset, but it also shows she wasn’t menacing or aggressive.

The judge was right to caution Kerr about her behaviour, which was more befitting an inebriated schoolie than an international sporting figure.

Kerr should be ashamed and embarrassed, but she has already paid a very high price for verbally abusing a cop after a celebratory date night turned sour.

Kerr deserves to be reminded by Football Australia of the need to uphold their “behavioural standards” and to be offered “learnings” from the sorry episode.

But her apology for “expressing myself poorly on what was a traumatic evening” should now put an end to this whole sorry episode.

She did not deserve to be the centre of a global court spectacle for two long years and does not deserve to be stripped of her captaincy.

I will proudly cheer on Kerr the next time she wears a Matildas jersey. Let’s hope the next time she’s in the headlines it’s because she’s kicked a goal in a world cup match – against England of course.