This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
'It takes ordinary people to stand up and say no'(41 Posts)
There is an excellent interview with Harry Miller in the Telegraph. He talks about how the police are operating on behalf of a political lobby group and how the recording of non crime incidents has accelerated. The Telegraph cites that these have been used against 120,000 people. It is fantastic to see this getting such prominent media coverage. This is a threat to freedom of speech, it is intended to stifle debate and Harry Miller has catapulted these issues to the front page. Great stuff.
^“As a former officer, I have a sense of what the law is and for the life of me I could not see what law I was breaking - and more to the point, neither could the police,” Mr Miller told The Telegraph. “They just had this vague idea that if you continue doing what you are doing then you will become a criminal. I asked how, and they couldn’t tell me.
“That’s not how the law works. We have to know where the line in the sand is and if the police don’t know where that line is, then don’t turn up at my workplace, don’t ring me up, don’t start using coercive control and tell me to ‘check my thinking’ - because that is not the job of the police.”^
The Telegraph also has a separate article reporting on the recording of non crime incidents and how these can hamper people's employment prospects.
Police have recorded nearly 120,000 “non-crime” hate incidents and may have stopped those accused from getting jobs, the Telegraph can disclose. A High Court judge ruled on Friday the Hate Crime Operational Guidelines, which informs police work nationally, had been unlawfully used to interfere with a man’s freedom of speech
R4 Interviewed him briefly yesterday afternoon. Interviewer was terrible. He hardly let him speak or make his point. He came on to be interviewed about where the line is with freedom of speech but the interviewer used it as an opportunity to call him anti-trans and wouldn't let him defend himself.
Well that reflects very poorly on Radio 4. The coverage in the Telegraph gives a clear outline of the case and why this should concern everyone who cares about freedom of speech. There is also another Telegraph article reporting that confidence in the police is at an all time low
Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.
Todayissunny that was Evan Davis on PM.
Evan doesn't like women and loves "gender"
I remember getting those vibes from him when he had women executives on the Bottom Line. But in his interview with Harry yesterday he made his misogyny and complete disdain for women obvious.
My brother is a senior change manager for a large and well-known company btw.
And my sister has lots of connections in the House of Lords and I'm working on her too.
Police have recorded nearly 120,000 “non-crime” hate incidents and may have stopped those accused from getting jobs
Wow.. there needs to be a formal inquiry into what these "non-crime" incidents are, and whether there was any evidence and justification for such records. If any person has such incidents on their personal record without a valid reason then they should be able to sue the Police.
Wow.. there needs to be a formal inquiry into what these "non-crime" incidents are, and whether there was any evidence and justification for such records. If any person has such incidents on their personal record without a valid reason then they should be able to sue the Police
Well said Nonny There is also a Telegraph article reporting that public confidence in the police is at an all time low. It is superb this is getting such prominent coverage. The threat to freedom of speech, the use of the police to support a lobby group's antics, the collapse of confidence in the police to investigate real crimes It's all there. Exposed to public scrutiny
Even if there were valid reasons for recording such incidents against someone, no way should they be used as part of any public or employment background checks. People have a right to a fair trial and only if found guilty, should such incidents be formally recorded against them.
R4 Interviewed him briefly yesterday afternoon.
Following that interview there was an interview with a policewoman who said that they wanted to encourage people to report non crime hate incidents because they were underreported and they often lead to people committing crimes later.
So, after the ruling yesterday......can anyone with a non-crime incident on their files now insist that they are amended to reflect the fact they have committed no crime? Is that basically what will happen to Harry Millers file??
I applaud everyone who is fighting this assault on our most basic human rights.
Beyond the Genderist agenda, which is regressive beyond belief, in itself, my nagging fear is that this issue is just a test run for a full-blown police state and the collapse of democracy.
Ruffle I'm actually a member of the Conservative party, so I'll do my best.
My thoughts recently keep coming back to the power of the individual. It's really difficult to divorce one's privilege from life and think about my basic tenet which keeps coming back to empowering people, individuals. It always has.
Thanks to Harry and all the other ordinary people who are standing up and saying "no".
Victories like this give me hope, especially when I look at what Maya and Kate experienced. But still, they continue to fight and I have hope they will be successful.
I'm doing my bit, but I can do more.
We just have to keep on keeping on because at some point this hideous regime will eat itself.
The Daily Mail is also reporting the Telegraph's statistics that 120,000 people have a non crime record which could potentially hamper their employment opportunities
Superb, and very quotable judgement. It's appalling to realise the scale of these "non-crime" incidences.
Message deleted by MNHQ as it quotes a deleted post. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.
It’s absolutely brilliant how much Harry’s case is bringing all of this to the fore.
catting unfortunately it does not mean the non crime incident will be removed. I think the judge said a note would be added to Harry's that it should not have happened. But the record is still there. So everyone else would have to sue to get similar. Which is why (we hope,) Harry will appeal to challenge the recording part.
Please login first.