Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9 (Read 20537 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #105 –
Kid?
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #108 –
Quote from: madbluboy – on
https://www.theage.com.au/world/europe/i-was-a-london-judge-sam-kerr-s-case-should-never-have-gone-to-trial-20250210-p5lb1e.html
So Robertson agrees, childish behaviour, do you agree now as well, you've quoted him?
(btw., Robertson likes to always discuss this type of issue in the 3rd person, that way he can repeat claims but excuse himself as a source.)

If I'm an adult and in a tantrum I petulantly kick a stranger in the leg, I suffer an adult fate for assault. Geoffrey Robertson knows that but he's conveniently omitted it from his debate of the issue! If the assault was verbal or physical assault makes no difference, an adult acting childishly is judged as an adult.

I think a lot of people are going to be disappointed with this case in either outcome, because of the precedent it sets. If Kerr wins the biggest group to take advantage of it will be the racists, she is setting a new threshold for what qualifies as racist. If she is guilty it's really another brick in the great wall of societal madness. All this just to save what was probably petty change for her. In this regard Robertson is correct, it should never have got this far, and the participants have now only made things worse!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #109 –
I agree with the whole article.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #110 –
Sam Kerr earns $600,000 per season, her partner is similarly a high earner, the equivalent of tens years of wages for the average Aussie. She / they, whoever, tried to get out of a pissy little fee and the cab driver not star struck or influenced by celebrity called it out.

The cab driver is the hero, he is the little guy we should all be barracking for not the millionaire sportswoman.

The rest of the case as it developed is an exhibit in stupidity, that Kerr, the police and the court has brought upon themselves, but that cannot be used as an excuse for an adults dodgy childish behaviour.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #111 –
Kate Halfpenny's opinion piece in the Age is far more balanced and analytical than Robinson's typical rambling array of semi-truths and what-ifs.

She writes, "The “Sam was drunk and paranoid” narrative misses how legitimate it is for women to fear being taken off course in a cab. And the “Sam was protecting herself, this is a storm in a teacup” crowd ignores there are ways to handle fear that don’t involve abuse and showing off your stonking bank balance to further belittle."

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/soccer/i-get-sam-kerr-s-fear-all-women-do-but-that-doesn-t-give-you-a-free-pass-20250206-p5la6i.html
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #112 –
Quote from: DJC – on
Kate Halfpenny's opinion piece in the Age is far more balanced and analytical than Robinson's typical rambling array of semi-truths and what-ifs.
Agreed, to some degree Halfpenny explains the reason for the various behaviours, but she isn't trying to excuse it like Robertson, just that she understands how it comes about.

The only issue I have with Halfpenny' s perspective of the behaviour is that Kerr and Mewis aren't young, were not alone in a cab, and between them have wealth well into the 8th digit. Mewis as a US Soccer star quite probably has greater nett worth than Kerr and this started over an amount that is probably less than the cost of the drinks they were sculling!

Interesting, if this had happened in the USA how would police from Mewis' home state deal with it?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #113 –
Without reading it, Lydia Thorpe has jumped in.

While I can never be in Kerr's shoes, surely a court case going into the days is OTT.

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #114 –
Quote from: dodge – on
Without reading it, Lydia Thorpe has jumped in.

While I can never be in Kerr's shoes, surely a court case going into the days is OTT.

I think I’ll pass on Thorpe’s contribution.  Her previously stated opinion is that a person of colour cannot be racist towards white folks.  That is true to some extent under Australian legislation but it’s not the case in the UK.

Kerr said that she should have just gone home and sorted it out the next day when she was sober … it’s often easy to be wiser after the event, particularly if you’ve had a skin full.
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #115 –
Theres a shock, an article in the age defending Kerr to try wash it all away.

Fevola got worse treatment for standing around with a dildo in public.

yes stupid, but no where near as ridiculous as labelling a police officer dumb and white.

As always, these stars think they are above the law and beyond reproach.  Rather than just dealing with the matter at hand, they elect to exacerbate scenarios by giving people a piece of their mind.  Sit down, and shut up.  Be gracious and continue on your way.  No thats not racism and implementing learned helplessness, there is a difference between owning a stuff up, and being maid to pay the piper.

You dont end up in these positions completely innocent.  No one does. You could argue the cabby was looking for a pay day against people he knows, but thats where you cant blame someone else for baiting you into behaving like a neanderthal.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #116 –
After four hours of deliberations, the jury delivered a not guilty verdict.

Despite that finding, Kerr’s standing in the UK has taken a significant hit.  It will be interesting to see if she is reinstated as Matildas’ skipper 🤔
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #117 –
Hopefully the poor cop recovers from the trauma he suffered.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #118 –
Kerr's behaviour isn't even under debate, she's basically become a moron in the eyes of the public.

Feminists are now trying to spin the whole case as misogyny, but I think Kerr has been treated lightly, if it was someone like Fev slandering a female officer in the same manor he'd be keelhauled.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: Djokovic v TJ / Ch9

Reply #119 –
The straight up hypocrisy and abuse of privilege on show is repulsive.
DrE is no more... you ok with that harmonica man?