The CPS and Sophie Cook's Appointment

Sorry for delay in responding. Below is the response from the head of CPS regarding the appointment of Sophia Cook.

The response is from Dawn Brodrick, and is typical pandering handmaiden I'm afraid.
Apparently this ex photographer(Their bio makes interesting reading and not in a good way )was the strongest candidate for this prestigious criminal justice role. ( I would loved to have the other candidates CV's just to compare)

I have omitted any personal information in regards to my MP.

Dear MP RE: CPS Speak Out Champion, concerns raised by anonymous constituent.
Thank you for your e-mail of 28th June 2022 that was transferred from the Attorney General’s Office, on behalf of an anonymous constituent.

The constituent had written to you with their concerns about the appointment of Sophie Cook to the role of Speak Out Champion in the CPS. In response to those concerns I would like to make the following points.
Firstly, I would like to provide some context regarding the role of Speak out Champion. The role was introduced as part of a range of changes and is aimed at making a step change in supporting our inclusive culture.
With this entirely internally facing role we are aiming to improve trust and confidence in employees in raising concerns about any inappropriate behaviours in the workplace or whistle–blowing issues and it provides only one of a number of routes for employees to raise concerns there are several other routes they may use should they prefer to do so.
The appointment has received positive feedback from employees within the CPS. In relation to the specific concerns raised regarding the new appointee maintaining a neutral and unbiased position moving forward, I can confirm the Speak Out Champion role is bound by the Seven Principles of Public Life (Nolan Principles) and as such, the post holder has been briefed about the
standards and expectations of how they should conduct themselves in the role.
The appointment followed a full, fair, and open selection process where the strongest candidate was appointed. In accordance with the Equality Act 2010,
the personal characteristics of the successful candidate played no part in the selection process and they were appointed to the role on merit.

I hope this provides you with sufficient information to address the concerns raised.

Sorry I don't have better news but it's still a good day with Allison Bailey winning her case.

Hi Theblondesoftheblonde

All I did, was email my serious concerns to my MP and she kindly did all the ground work for me.

My understanding from my MP, is that the Attorney General is in charge of the CPS. That person is listed as Suella Braverman QC. As well as being a Barrister she is also a serving Conservative MP.

Who do we write to about this? Our MP? Who is responsible for the CPS?

I see from the article that Cook has been appointed to make it possible for staff members who've felt they couldn't speak up to speak up. Of course all the GC employees, and the lesbians in particular, will now be silenced because they will be aware of Cook's clearly asserted anti-women views.

It's mind-boggling that when Miriam Cates has spoken out and called trans ideology for the misogynistic, homophobic nonsense it is, and the DfE has lest Stonewall, that anyone would think Cook is an appropriate appointment.

Put it together with the CPS's failure to prosecute rapists and one has to wonder what's going on there.

You are more than welcome, I admired many of you who post and have posted here along the years.
Some of the posts I have read on this forum over the years have been simply intellectually outstanding, yet get little recognition outside the board.

I have already thanked the MP for putting her neck out, on this one. I will say she is Tory, Midlands based and by all accounts close to Boris Johnson. What is interesting and hopeful about her response is, Is that she is loyal to Conservative party thinking. Even if it makes her unpopular with the constituents who contact her (me included)

I will update on the CPS response in due course but with the obvious internalized misogyny in the criminal justice system and the civil service in general. I am sadly not that hopeful of a good outcome for women.

Excellent news!

Well done! I hope you update with any further developments. ⚖️

Amazing well done! And well done your MP.

Could you say who it is, or fearful of identification?

FernlovingNodosaur

That is great news! Thank you Fern.

Well done!

Good Morning

I know this a fairly old thread now, but this travesty appointment, spurred me on, to contact my local MP.

Who was to my surprise, surprisingly supportive in that, not only did she agreed with my concerns about this person's background/suitability for such a position, but will actually raise my concerns and request a formal written response from the Attorney general, who is responsible overall for the CPS, and therefore technically the appointment of this unsuitable person to such a powerful and lucrative role in the Criminal Justice System.

Though, only a lurker(this is my first post) on the feminist board, I just want you to know that I do try wherever possible in real life to do my bit for women's rights and I am sure, I am not the only lurker to do this.

I agree, as a former CS I’ve been shocked how much the CS Code seems to be ignored by those in power.

If only there were say, a black, lesbian with a good knowledge of the legal world who was unafraid to tackle difficult issues. Wouldn't they be a great appointee?

It's fascinating. Maya Forstater's first ET had to go to appeal because Judge Tayler did not believe anyone capable of holding a belief and not manifesting a belief in an illegal and/or disruptive fashion.

In a blink of an eye in legal terms, we have somebody who holds and proclaims anti-woman attitudes alongside a strong belief in gender ideology, and that person is recruited as a Speak Up Champion for the CPS.

Where on earth is due diligence these days?
As a former civil servant I'd expect someone to investigate the backgrounds of any applicants.
So I'm left thinking the CPS did that and the leadership decided they just didn't care!

I suspect the point of the appointment is to ensure that women employees never get to speak out about safeguarding, VAWG and the dire reputation of the CPS for taking a hostile approach to women.

“The Speak Out Champion will gather and use this intelligence to help improve the employee experience at CPS. As a visible champion for employee's
concerns, the Speak Out Champion represents an important part of the CPS' continued cultural drive to embed EDI within every tier of management across the organisation.”

The job advert is about EDI, how is Sophie planning to Speak Out about the other 8 protected characteristics that make up EDI?

Glinner has quite a long article about this geezer.

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/sophie-cook-the-cps-and-speaking?s=r

Aargh sorry wrong article.

CPS appoints trans activist who was critical of women

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/9ff5aaf6-df87-11ec-8bdd-c253e043f5f0?shareToken=8445ad90ef25f5e4dabba65b9e15a346

CPS appoints trans activist who was critical of women

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cps-appoints-trans-activist-who-was-critical-of-women-q5r50bdtb?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#

Why is hostility towards women still OK? If this appointee had expressed tweets which showed hostility towards other characteristics presumably that would have meant (quite rightly) that they were considered inappropriate for the role.

Hostility towards women though, seems a positive point in ones favour when applying for all sorts of posts.

@MrsOvertonsWindow You have laid this out so clearly that it's chilling to see it summarised like that.

Thank you Words.
I presume this is display of the leadership of CPS's open hostility towards women and girls.
After their historical failure to prosecute the grooming gangs, presiding over the apparent decriminalisation of rape (looking at the statistics as evidence), enabling adult trans extremists to target children in schools with their (now withdrawn) trans guidelines for schools that gaslit children into forced undressing in front of the opposite sex and threatened them with a hate crime if they didn't befriend every child confused about their sex, appointing someone who has expressed hostility towards women makes perfect sense.

I wonder who else was interviewed and what their credentials are.

The CPS is organisationally independent, reporting ultimately to the Attorney General. The DPP leads.