Library’s promotion of “hate crime”

What a world . Surely anyone asking for a non crime to be recorded should be escorted off the premises and advised to find something useful to do with their time; instead we have the police expressly requesting that they report this nonsense.
Then they cite under staffing as an excuse for taking yet more police off the streets

Thank you, WotchaTalkinBoutWillis, sorry for misunderstanding.

Gronky - The op and another poster said that the library would now feel more unsafe for them, I was just saying I don't see how people being able to report their harassment too whether it be due to their race, their sexuality, or being trans would make it feel more unsafe for me.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/south-yorkshire-police-relentlessly-mocked-after-urging-people-to-report-one-another-for-offensive-a3932131.html%3famp

Police are also asking for non crimes to be reported so those reporting may well be reporting anything and everything. Really needs more monitoring than surely a library can give

I just fail to see how making others feel safe too by being able to report their harassment makes it suddenly more unsafe for me.

Sorry, what is made suddenly more unsafe for you?

This may end up staying on his record as a "hate incident" which would be disclosed on any future DBS check

Thank you, it does say that they may show up on an enhanced DBS check if deemed relevant by the processing authority but that's still rather concerning. Personally, I'm in two minds about that issue, while I agree it would be wrong for it to be disclosed in every circumstance, it seems right (to me) if, for example, an antisemite who had managed to skirt just under the law were able to work for a Jewish rights organisation, obtaining personal details of Jewish members without any warning being given.

What training do library staff have to ensure they do not affect the gathering of evidence? For example by leading the person reporting the crime?

One would surely hope that should staffing be so dire that they need a library to take some of the slack that perhaps they took their officers off Twitter monitoring as a first port of call?

People (possibly including west midlands police) are confusing hate crimes with hate incidents. A hate crime is something like an assault where the victim was chosen because of their religion. Or vandalising a synagogue. There has to be a proven conventional crime first. if th's court decided the accused did not commit the crime then there can be no consideration of 'hate'.

What training do library staff have to ensure they do not affect the gathering of evidence? For example by leading the person reporting the crime?

I don't see why having a desk to report hate crime in the library would make you feel unsafe

Because it can be based on someones personal.opinion and ergo is certainly something that could well bring arguments or violence onto the premises which likely wont have security to deal with this kind of thing it might be best to not have it along side a bounce and rhyme session with toddlers etc

Exactly gronky, it'd still be a crime and I could report it as such.
I just fail to see how making others feel safe too by being able to report their harassment makes it suddenly more unsafe for me.
I could still report harassment too.

If there's a case of it impacting a security check (for example) could you please give some details on that too?

Look at the Harry The Owl case that has been all over media for ages now:
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/01/is-it-now-a-crime-to-like-a-poem-about-transgenderism/
www.crowdjustice.com/case/challenging-thought-crime/

He generically liked a limerick on twitter and this was reported as a "hate incident" by a complete stranger. He was then called by a Police Officer to "check his thinking", despite the Officer confirming there had been no crime. This may end up staying on his record as a "hate incident" which would be disclosed on any future DBS check: www.faircop.org.uk/press

Hate crimes and hate incidents aren't the same thing. The former has to include an actual crime and the latter does not.

Hate crime covers everything from this to complete non events.

I don't see why having a desk to report hate crime in the library would make you feel unsafe.

But a sex specific crime such as telling you to get your tits out you fucking slag is not a hate crime.

It is, however, a crime under the Equality Act 2010 (harassment).

You could tell staff. But a sex specific crime such as telling you to get your tits out you fucking slag is not a hate crime.

So it wont count for much

SarahTancredi, there have been 17 cases since 2017 where charges have been made based upon 'online hate crimes'. Based on my understanding of the law (which is, admittedly, not comprehensive), it's only possible to bring a prosecution based upon direct threats against a group or individual (e.g. all x's should be harmed) rather than saying nasty things about them (e.g. all x's smell funny and listen to silly music). If you're aware of a prosecution based upon the latter, could you please give some details?

As for reports that don't lead to prosecution being placed on your record, I believe this is for the purpose of establishing trends if future offences occur. If there's a case of it impacting a security check (for example) could you please give some details on that too? Provided it's not disclosed, I don't see an issue with police keeping records, I had an issue a few years ago with a man who kept entering my front garden (stepping over the fence) when I was away from home. It was reassuring that the police kept a record of the incidents in case something more serious happened.

If anyone is not concerned about the ramifications of this for free speech you should read up on Harry the Owl.

There doesn't need to be a victim or any evidence for this to happen

Eh? As a woman, why would I feel unsafe suddenly in a library because they say they're saying they won't tolerate abuse?
Surely I'd only suddenly feel unsafe if I felt I was being curtailed in my "right to free speech" ie not harassing others in the way of "telling it like it is?"
I presume if anyone was harassing me I'd still be able to go and tell staff.

Why the hell are police logging non crimes whilst simultaneously telling burglary / mugging victims that they have no change of their assault being investigated; just take a crime number for the insurance and get back to us if it happens again?
By definition a non crime is not something that needs any sort of police intervention.

But gronky

Tweets not aimed at Individuals are now considered hate speak/hate crime and should police decide to log it as a none crime it still can potentially be placed on your record

SarahTancredi, 74NewStreet, as Aesopfable correctly said, hate crimes are conventional crimes with an additional element of hostility towards certain protected characteristics. Victimless prosecution isn't unique to hate crimes. For example, a serial domestic abuser with an apologetic spouse may be deemed at risk of causing more serious harm to their partner or members of the public, which requires victimless prosecution to mitigate.

taken to court who should weigh the evidence to decide if an actual crime has taken place or not
If the police are unsure what constitutes “an actual crime” they shouldn’t be wasting manpower investigating. They’re not short of real live ones to be getting on with.

And sex Is conveniently left off the list. So everyone is free to call.you a fucking bitch in public

This is how the West Midlands PCC defines hate crimes:

How upside down is that, Sarah? The “victim” can be fine with some behaviour but any passing random can be offended on their behalf??