> I wouldn't take the jury's decision here as a 'fact' about racism. 1) the legal definition of racism is a small subset of the colloquial definition and the ac

> I wouldn't take the jury's decision here as a 'fact' about racism. 1) the legal definition of racism is a small subset of the colloquial definition and the academic definition. I would be very surprised if the legal definition of racism in this context is anything but the colloquial one. In English or Commonwealth law that would be the “reasonable man” test. The attempt to elide the difference between the sociological concept of structural racism and a person being racist as a description has not had enough success to be able to pass the reasonable man test.