The three things the jury considered before finding Sam Kerr not guilty of racially harassing a policeman

Undoubtedly, Sam Kerr called a London police officer "stupid and white," a statement captured by police body cameras. However, why did it take a week-long trial for a jury to ultimately find her not guilty of racially aggravated harassment of Metropolitan Police officer Stephen Lovell?

The jury primarily considered three key points before reaching a verdict. The first was Sam Kerr's intent. Judge Peter Lodder KC instructed the jury to assess the evidence to determine whether Kerr's words were intended to cause Officer Lovell "harassment, alarm, or distress."

Prosecutor William Emlyn Jones KC questioned Kerr for hours on this issue, arguing that she was venting her anger at the officer. Kerr admitted that saying those words was intended to offend and that she would be upset if she were on the receiving end. However, she denied wanting to hurt Officer Lovell and said her expression at the time was "awful," feeling embarrassed by her behavior in the police video.

Kerr argued that she spoke that way because she felt the police were treating her differently, not believing her, and assuming she was in the wrong because they held the power. She believed the police were discriminating against her because of her skin color, disbelieving her account of the taxi incident. Kerr and her partner, Kristie Mewis, told the police in the 34-minute body camera video that they believed the taxi driver was "kidnapping" them.

The court heard that the taxi driver called the police out of concern for their behavior and was told to drive to the nearest police station. Kerr and Mewis both denied that the driver had informed them of this. Mewis eventually admitted to kicking out a window of the taxi, but said it was because she felt her life was in danger. Most of the conversation in the video involved the police trying to get the two to pay for the window damage, the taxi fare, and the cleaning fee for Kerr vomiting in the car. Although Mewis told the police she had kicked the window, Kerr was arrested for criminal damage, but the charges were dropped after the two paid £900 (approximately $1,796) in compensation.

Kerr repeatedly pleaded with the police to "listen to the taxi's recording," but the police never searched the taxi for a camera, instead believing the driver's claim that there was no camera. Kerr testified that she felt the police were "against" her during her time at the police station. She said: "Firstly, (the police) didn't believe us, told us things I knew didn't happen, even though they had no evidence, made me feel like a liar, made me doubt myself, called me a 'cow'. Lots of things." Kerr's lawyer, Grace Forbes, argued that the stress and fear her client felt in the taxi were related to what she said. "You may think that the fear they felt, whether real or unfounded, is highly relevant to what happened that night," she told the jury in her closing argument.

For the jury to convict Kerr, it was not enough to be sure that she intended to harm Officer Lovell with the words "stupid and white." The jury also needed to be sure that the words actually caused Officer Lovell "harassment, alarm, or distress." The defense pointed out that Officer Lovell's first statement, written shortly after the January 30, 2023 incident, did not mention how he felt after being called "stupid and white." He first formally mentioned it in a second statement nearly 11 months after the incident. The second statement was issued after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) initially declined to prosecute Kerr, arguing that the threshold of "harassment, alarm, or distress" had not been met. The police subsequently appealed, after which the CPS requested more evidence of "harassment, alarm, or distress."

In his second statement, Officer Lovell said the words "stupid and white" made him feel "frustrated," "demeaned," and "shocked," adding that he felt "they were over the top and I took great offense to them." During cross-examination, Forbes suggested this was to ensure a deliberate act for a criminal charge. "The CPS didn't think there was evidence of harassment, alarm, or distress, you knew that was the hurdle," Forbes said. Officer Lovell denied the claim, saying he did not fabricate anything to "get it over the line." Emlyn Jones told the jury in his closing argument that Officer Lovell was not "exaggerating" his second statement, calling his words "perfectly reasonable." But Forbes said the timeline between his first and second statements "completely undermines" his credibility. "If he felt the impact he now asserts, he would have said it in his statement that night," she told the jury.

The final element the jury had to determine was whether the words "stupid and white" were racially discriminatory. The prosecution argued that the answer was obvious. "You said he was 'f***ing stupid and white,'" Emlyn Jones said. "What does his race have to do with anything?" Kerr replied that she felt he was using his power and privilege against her because he thought she was the kind of person she shouldn't be. Emlyn Jones reminded Kerr that she said in her testimony that she felt Officer Lovell could not understand what it was like as a woman to be driven to a destination by a stranger and feel scared. Emlyn Jones said this was a matter of a man not putting himself in a woman's shoes. "(It) has nothing to do with race, does it?" Emlyn Jones asked. "Not entirely," Kerr replied. "What you said to him was, 'You're stupid because you're white,'" Emlyn Jones said. "No," Kerr replied. "Can you see that you combined the two into an insult?" Emlyn Jones asked. "Yes," Kerr replied. "So, at the moment you expressed hostility towards him because of what you thought was his stupidity," Emlyn Jones asked. "Yes," Kerr replied. "You also... chose to express your hostility towards his whiteness at that moment? Yes?" Emlyn Jones asked. "That's not what I meant," Kerr replied. "That's what you did, wasn't it?" Emlyn Jones asked. "That's what I did, yes," Kerr replied.

"What were you trying to convey when you made the comment 'you're stupid and white'?" Kerr's lawyer, Grace Forbes, asked her client. "They will never experience what we just experienced, and our fear for our lives, because of their power and privilege," she replied. The jury heard that Kerr had repeatedly experienced being treated differently because of her skin color. "At school, I've experienced teachers assuming I'm a troublemaker or the instigator of trouble when we're obviously in a large group of people," she said. "And in shopping centers, I'm often followed by security guards or staff if I'm not dressed appropriately." The defense argued that she felt scared and stressed at the police station, and although she ultimately did not express herself well, Kerr did not intend to racially harass Officer Lovell. Forbes also told the court that the police response to Kerr's claims was "completely unacceptable" and argued that the police never investigated her allegations against the taxi driver. She said that Kerr's state of mind and the police's actions had to be taken into account when considering the "stupid and white" comment. The jury was instructed to deal with the three issues in order. They were told to only move on to the next question once they were satisfied with the first. The 12-member jury delivered a not-guilty verdict on Tuesday afternoon after about four hours of deliberation at Kingston Crown Court in London.