Lesbian interviewed under caution for tweets

[Justme56]

Link to https://x.com/wearefaircop/status/1723241217536758023?s=46&t=ZX_bLozRqm8etdGICMcAvA

Attached the transcript from the interview- not sure if posted in order.

That’s horrifying

It's the logical outcome of what apathy and inertia permits.

And, yes, still shocked to see the interview and the trajectory of the questioning.

Handy tutorial on how to behave when I am arrested. Which will be any day now as I won’t lie that people can change sex

Jeez. That's difficult to believe. There are thousands of people on Twitter saying exactly that and tweeting things which would be considered far more 'offensive'. All perfectly legal.

those are the most innocuous tweets imaginable. What the fucks going on.

And what did the officer mean by 'the Miller ruling gave them no choice'.

Her solicitor's comments are terrifying.

The duty solicitors statement at the end is also chilling. So the suspect has been advised to just stfu in the future? Grim.

Can we complain to the police about our alarm and distress caused by men saying they are women? Men saying they are lesbians, which is pretty bloody alarming if you are a lesbian.

Will they interview those men? if not why not?

Bottom line of this crap: No comment, and I'll see you in court.

Because it won't go to court, because CPS are captured but not yet that stupid, and the best answer to this would be to get this absolute bullshit into a court room and all over the press.

This is what it's like to be an oppressed class. ACTUALLY oppressed, as opposed to a nice, fantasy LARP of 'oh gosh I'm so oppressed'.

To be arrested, disproportionately, because of the group you belong to.
To be questioned and harassed when you have done nothing wrong, purely because the powerful group feel entitled and know you have less protection and power and voice than other groups they wouldn't dare play this game with
To be bullied by law without breaking the law and held to higher standards than other groups
To not have the powerful rich tax payer funded charities braced and ready, and a press dying to scream on your behalf and flap flags and symbols of political support.

I was shocked by the solicitor’s statement too.

Although perhaps he/she felt they needed to say on record that they’d given the person advice, as it could be seen as a failure on their part of they hadn’t.

“And what did the officer mean by 'the Miller ruling gave them no choice'.”

Where does it say that Datun? Is it in a different tweet?

It's in the transcript

Oops, not in transcripts,.in tweet

Thanks, I could only see the first tweet because I’m not in Xtwitter.

@pickledandpuzzled, what you say, above all else, is what I find so horrifying.

This clearly should go both ways. Women may find it offensive that men are saying they are women. Such men may find it offensive that women are saying they're not. There are strong arguments on both sides (obviously, I find the former much stronger, but to attempt to show the balance & objectivity I'm about to accuse others of lacking...) because I don't understand...:

Why is the latter the valid view, to the terrifying extent that the former has become bigotry?

To me, it's exposed the utter, desperate misogyny of our society. Women's views are secondary to men's. Women's self-perception is secondary to men's. Women's identity, ditto. Their voices, ditto.

If there'd been some debate (hah!) leading to the current conclusion, I'd honestly feel somewhat differently - but the absolute, unquestioning dismissal of women as a group with their own hearts, minds & sense of self, & the active, state-sanctioned suppression of them in this respect, terrifies me.

Is the Miller in question Harry? Or Maria 🙄

Whatever, it's horrifying. And it's reminded me of my promise to join the Free Speech Union.

Maybe Owen Jones will be backing this woman's freedom of speech? 😂

But this isn't about "actual" freedom of speech, @Rightsraptor.

It's the... er... hm... ...

...other kind?!?

Actually.

Who is training these forces? FOI?

It will be Harry Miller, the high court ruling that the non crime hate incidents he was given due to the College of Policing guidelines were unlawful.

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Miller-v-College-of-Policing-summary-201221.pdf

So they are blaming the need to interview this woman on that judgment, for whatever reason.

I agree with all of this. But. Looking at those screenshots, my guess is that the aspect of those tweets where the tweeter was potentially on thin ice was those where she said “you’re a man” to a specific individual rather than tweeting “TW are men” or “TW are male” which is more general.

But I entirely agree that men telling women (and indeed society telling women) that it’s men who get to define what a woman is, is offensive. And not only offensive - it’s the absolute incarnation of misogyny. Which is doubtless why so many men are so very enthusiastic about it.

I agree. What a ramble! I read the interview and was thinking the solicitor should shoot this down in a couple of sentences, and then I saw that waffle!. WTF?

The cop seemed better briefed on what to say than the lawyer.

The whole thing is a disgrace. Poor woman, arrested and interviewed under caution for that. I wonder if Little Owen Jones will be fighting her corner for Free Speech?

I assume someone complained. Someone collected these and went to the police in tears, weeping about not feeling safe etc etc etc. wonder who?

I think the Miller reference may be a reference to the fact that the police can't just pop this in their big police book of 'non crime hate incidents', so therefore they've decided they must do something else?

To me, that 'something else' would sensibly and reasonably be 'fuck all'. Perhaps tell the offended one to leave Twitter/X alone for a bit. But the police seem to think it means going out and arresting women. Odd, that ...

Yes, sounds about right.