Non-crime hate incidents

Wiltshire do you think it all went downhill when the police decided that people taking offence on twitter were included or treated at the same level as a female victim of male violence in the home or a victim of a racist attack? or have a misunderstood. In the HoL the minister explained it all started after Stephen Lawrence. I cannot get my head round how a TRA taking offence that someone doesn't share their philosophical belief came to be equated with the awful cases it was originally set out to tackle

@FindTheTruth yes they are still recorded. I recently had a case where the suspect was given a prison sentence. Part of the evidence was of his "bad character" in the numerous non-crime domestic incidents we'd attended over the past five years. It may not always be deemed admissable or relevant but in this case it certainly was. Plus, any domestic we attend now part of our policy is to review any previous incidents recorded on those involved to make sure we're not missing anything.

Are domestic violence reports stored as NCHI's though? I thought witness statements were kept and police notes are kept - but not the same as actually recording an NCHI which is what this amendment is about.

Felix, yes...- Lord Ponsonby pointed to DV - used evidence stored for years as a judge from police and social services.

How about perpetrators of domestic violence, who never actually commits any crimes, but have numerous incidents which are misogynistic?

I cant watch. Will have to read on hansard.

But I did see the ammendment linked here
mobile.twitter.com/bricksilk/status/1455103208112656389

It will make the subject & details personal data unde gdpr
To record a non crime hate incident they will have to consider the effect on freedom of expression.
They will have to inform you that they are recording it, how long it will be retained, and the appeal process.
It restricts their ability to disclose to 3rd parties eg in a disclose check. Nit sure if I means that won't be possible to disclose.

I hope the amendmemt passes.

Baroness Chakrabarti lecturing them gently on not using quotes by authors 😣

"to say tw are not w, is that a hate crime? - I don't believe I should be on such a list. contact the police college and end this'

Lord Forsyth - when I heard about this, I could not believe it! as an employer I do criminal checks and these people go in the bin. 119K+ incidents including children!

Baroness Noakes .. how have the police carved out these powers for themselves with no oversight?

Kathleen Stock example - 'cancer in our society'

hansard will be good

These Lords are brilliant and even Michael Cashman was unable to defend the indefensible

Baroness Fox on fire right now

I'd have thought it wouldn't be beyond the wit of humankind to distinguish between that and people taking offence at a tweet.

@MajesticWhine it would depend what the job was, and also what the incident recorded "against" you was. If it was a he said/she said non-crime "incident" where nothing has been investigated and it's simply been recorded then extremely unlikely.

Oh, and even better, you’re not informed about it. So you wouldn’t even be aware of their existence until the DBS check

Sarah Phillimore

Yes that’s the problem. No crime, but the hate incidents could come up on a DBS check, which is simply appalling.

An open invitation for individuals to harass/punish others for no crime at all. Sarah Phillore v good on this.

This kind of thing scares me because I need a DBS clearance for work. @Wiltshire90 would something like this come up on a DBS?

I'm a police officer and I (and everyone I work with) also think this is mental. In my force it's a civilian team called "crime auditors" who crime incidents. They are doing it at the dictation of the Home Office Counting Rules which sets out the guidance for what needs to be recorded as a crime. If they don't follow these rules then HMIC can penalise the force.

If an incident like this crosses my desk I make sure to remove the "suspect" status. Totally bonkers.

I was threatened with this by local police when I videoed men giving children alcohol and then taking them off in cars.

Link here:

www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0f6746fa-3805-478e-bd16-89d7f1d9a225

The Times article is by Ken Macdonald, Lord Macdonald, crossbench peer, QC and former Director of Public Prosecutions.

If the police have time to faff about with this they have time to attend bloody burglaries and assaults.

Locally an elderly guy, battered, left on the floor and bleeding by thugs trying to mug him for cash, waited five days before police managed to get around to attending. But apparently mentioning biology? Oh they have time and resources to manage that.

This is a truly stupid idea that should never have been part of their brief in the first place. One of many very, very stupid ideas, largely based on a fear of saying 'no' and standing up to toys being hurled out of the pram.

Any idea how we can listen to the debate? I couldn't find anything obvious on the timetable of debates abd committees today. The police and crime bill maybe?