Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The police should not record us as hateful in secret

231 replies

Spero · 06/11/2020 18:13

Dear all

At 2pm Tomorrow I will be launching something which I understand it is against the terms and conditions of this site to mention but i hope you will check out my Twitter page for more information - @SVPhillimore.

I know its a difficult time of the year to ask people to do more gardening but if you don't feel like actually hefting a spade I would be really grateful if you could amplify my information.

I seriously think we are currently facing the most significant threat to our fundamental civil liberties in my life time. My lawyers have written today to Wiltshire and the College of Policing to give them until November 20th to delete the recording made about me that I am 'hateful' and to withdraw the hate crimes guidance. If they won't - we go to court.

OP posts:
DeaconBoo · 22/11/2020 15:05

Pointless responding to jj until they are a bit clearer about the differences between crimes, allegations of crimes, information, hate incidents, the notion of allegations of hate incidents and whether this actually exists without being a hate incident.

They seem muddled from one post to the next - responding to questions about crimes as if an allegation of the crime is the same thing.

"If the report was felt to be malicious"
So it all boils down to feelings, again, rather than categorical evidence?

Escapeplanning · 22/11/2020 15:02

An example of the people doing the recording.

allpolicejobs.co.uk/jobs/662048

Police Staff Investigator - Level 1
Applications are invited for the post of Police Staff Investigator (PSI) (Level 1).
We are seeking conscientious, dedicated and inquiring individuals to work as part of a team to ensure a professional investigative and supportive service is delivered.

As a PSI you will obtain statements from witnesses, review third party material, produce reports, conduct telephone enquiries, assisting in the preparation of documentation for any court cases or hearings.

Having experience of investigation is required, and it would be advantageous if you have worked on complex cases.

You will have the ability to present materials both verbally and in writing demonstrating and adapting the style used to the target audience, as well as being able to make effective decisions, and work to competing deadlines.

Butterer · 22/11/2020 15:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Butterer · 22/11/2020 14:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

jj1968 · 22/11/2020 14:54

@Butterer

*ding I'm really pissed off that as an exploited vulnerable third party, I can't report fraud that involved use of my name in the application and approval for a loan, because I wasn't the defrauded party/I didn't part with any money .

But I could easily report a tweet as a perceived hate incident/crime, and have it recorded and investigated, as with the OP.

That's fucking ridiculous.

You could report it, and a record would almost certainly be held of your report. Whether it was investigated or taken seriously is another matter.
jj1968 · 22/11/2020 14:53

@Thelnebriati

What protection does OP and other women have against malicious reporting?
The protection happens when a decision is made whether to reveal information held on an enhanced DRB check. If the report was felt to be malicious then it shouldn't be included, and if it is there would be a good case of bringing successful court action against the police.

No-one has any protection beyond this against kind of malicious reporting except for potentially bringing counter charges of harassment.

This is all ultimately about safeguarding. As many people have pointed out, people should not take safeguarding measures personally. Yes sometimes people might feel unfairly swept up, yes sometimes reports might be malicious, but in this case the protections that exist to ensure police information to potential employers is only released on a proportionate basis would ensure that no-one will ever be told about the hate incident file presuming those tweets are all there is, and if they were there would be avenues for legal redress.

It seems that some people support stringent safeguarding measures until it affects them.

Butterer · 22/11/2020 14:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Escapeplanning · 22/11/2020 14:47

I don't think the police have clean hands either, my only point is that many jobs are not actually trained police officers but are civilian officers. The 101 service for example.

jj1968 · 22/11/2020 14:45

@Spero

Thanks for digging JJ1968.

Happy to benefit from anyone's spade work. I hope this does go to JR and I hope a lot of what we are discussing can be cleared up for you.

You will then I hope have the grace to dial down your comments about 'breath taking' entitlement.

Will you be answering this question?

So one last question, as a barrister yourself, do you, or any law firm or chambers you are associated with, intend to take payment of any kind from this crowdfunder?

jj1968 · 22/11/2020 14:44

No problem AT ALL with a parent or carer of a vulnerable and disabled person reporting potential crime on their behalf.

But anyone else is out then. So if I see a bunch of kids racially abusing a local shopkeeper and report it to police the police should just ignore me. They shouldn't even be allowed to write it down? This is absurd.

Thelnebriati · 22/11/2020 14:43

What protection does OP and other women have against malicious reporting?

jj1968 · 22/11/2020 14:41

@Spero

" exercise some fucking discretion about what you record as 'hate'. Remember I am also recorded by the South Yorkshire police for saying 'my cat is a Methodist'. Who on earth is any safer because this is done?

Isn't this exacty the kind of discretion that the police could not be trusted to have, which is why new guidelines were brought in post Macpherson? "

Then. The problem here IS THE POLICE. If our police really are this mind bogglingly stupid we need to GET RID OF THEM AND GET BETTER ONES.

But. I don't believe our police ARE that mind boggling stupid. But I am now strongly of the view that the College of Policing are.

Well what the Lawrence Inquiry found is that the police can be mind bogglingly racist which is why clearer guidelines were drawn up on the reporting of racist incidents. Of course this is not something that will ever apply to you as a white woman, so I can understand how flippantly you seek to overturn those protections.
Butterer · 22/11/2020 14:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Butterer · 22/11/2020 14:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 14:21

I was told that the report about me in December 2019 went to a 'Hate Crimes Specialist Officer' who mulled over it at length before recording it as a 'hate incident' in Feb 2020 and suggesting that to say my dog was Jewish was a 'partial public order offence'.

So I am not entirely sure the police have clean hands here.

OP posts:
Escapeplanning · 22/11/2020 14:11

The problem here IS THE POLICE. If our police really are this mind bogglingly stupid we need to GET RID OF THEM AND GET BETTER ONES.

It's actually civilians that operate the system.

Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 14:08

@Butterer

I forgot that I started working at the UKDPC the week they helped launch a disability hate crime reporting initiative - issues included cuckooing, vulnerable people being financially or sexually exploited but targeted or extra vulnerable because of their disability, that sort of stuff, as well as the more usual experiences of abuse. If I remember right, it was under the "stop hate" umbrella. I get mixed up between the stop hate crime stuff and reporting hate incidents. I also haven't had coffee or breakfast yet.
No problem AT ALL with a parent or carer of a vulnerable and disabled person reporting potential crime on their behalf.

I do however have a massive problem with someone at the other end of the country reporting my tweets from 2017 to Wiltshire police. Which are not 'hateful' towards anyone or anything whatsoever.

OP posts:
Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 14:06

Thanks for digging JJ1968.

Happy to benefit from anyone's spade work. I hope this does go to JR and I hope a lot of what we are discussing can be cleared up for you.

You will then I hope have the grace to dial down your comments about 'breath taking' entitlement.

OP posts:
Butterer · 22/11/2020 14:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 14:03

"It seems this and other demands go somewhat beyond the power of judicial review."

Then the guidance can simply be quashed. All of it. I'm very good with that.

OP posts:
Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 14:01

" exercise some fucking discretion about what you record as 'hate'. Remember I am also recorded by the South Yorkshire police for saying 'my cat is a Methodist'. Who on earth is any safer because this is done?

Isn't this exacty the kind of discretion that the police could not be trusted to have, which is why new guidelines were brought in post Macpherson? "

Then. The problem here IS THE POLICE. If our police really are this mind bogglingly stupid we need to GET RID OF THEM AND GET BETTER ONES.

But. I don't believe our police ARE that mind boggling stupid. But I am now strongly of the view that the College of Policing are.

OP posts:
Original poster
Spero · 22/11/2020 13:59

@testing987654321

How would this work? Do you mean any information? So someone would not be able to report a historic sexual offence for example?

Spero replied in good faith because she's very intelligent, calm, extremely clear and fair and open in her language.

She was talking recording information about "hate incidents". These are specifically not crimes, they are incidents which the person reporting says they believe were hateful.

I think most reasonable people would agree that these should be recent to be reported.

A bit like when you get divorced you need to use fairly recent examples of unreasonable behaviour, not events from years earlier.

And this is a reasonable suggestion for reporting non-crime incidents because otherwise there might be a temptation to trawl through someone's Twitter or online posting history to find anything slightly contentious and the report it in a malicious way.

But you knew all that didn't you, jj? So why did you reply as though spero was talking about police recording of any crimes?

It's almost as though you are simply trying to distract from the main point.

Thanks for this.

Now I know without a shadow of a doubt that you are a bad faith distraction merchant and I can safely ignore you entirely.

I was talking, of course, about reporting for 'hate incidents'.

But. You knew that.

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 22/11/2020 13:54

If 10 people report a rape does that mean 10 rapes took place?

Why does a hate incident become 10 incidents if there are 10 reports made?

Escapeplanning · 22/11/2020 13:54

Kind of posters here to contribute. Love the comments. Grin

Thelnebriati · 22/11/2020 13:53

There has been a clear difference between 'intelligence' and a crime report, right up until hate incidents became dependent on the feelings of the person making the report.