The police

ScreamingMeMe
If you disagree with anything, then discuss it

Agree with @ScreamingMeMe and would rather take advice on law from the likes of @DennisNoelKavanaghOffTwitter who can prove he is who he says he is than some random, goady person who says they know it all.

And the reason why i won't post which force I am in is because i don't know any of you on here. It's not difficult for someone to be able to trace me if they know what force i work for. This will include contact phone numbers for me.

My wife and family are sick of the death threats and the number of times I am followed home by unscrupulous people that i have prosecuted over the years - phone calls from jails in the middles of the night etc etc.

So - I'm not risking it.

Please, I beg of you all, just ignore the me-railer from now on. He's just going to keep on posting paragraphs of shite and ruining threads.

BernardBlacksMolluscs
Does it fucking occur to you, you insensitive fucking twerp, that the time for ‘explainy, me feel good like big man’ wasn’t that thread.
So what was that thread about then...?

And where have I made it all about 'me' and asked personal and inappropriate questions?

HatThatWearsYou
I am answering the questions - where am i talking over people? People that raise a point I will answer that point. That's the whole point of a discussion

What would you rather me do - just agree with everything that is being posted - even when I can see its not true?

The 'walls of words' is the explanation - unless you want just one word answers, but its not explaining anything.

So, if someone posts something on here which is wrong - like R v Roberts case law & police don't investigate defence alibis - do I just ignore it - or do i say its wrong and give the reasons why?

Imnobody4
Where have i demanded anything?

I am asking questions which are relevant to the thread. Most people on here are saying that we should ignore the person making the complaint against KJK - but we don't know what the actual complaint is. Why can't i ask what it is before we jump to conclusions? And that's a rhetorical question by the way.

Yes that was as transparent as glass.

We've all encountered these types before, we know how to deal with it.

So, it's not just me whose eyes glaze over. Statement, not a question!

Oh and the surprise new poster who thinks he’s doing a great job and would definitely like him to carry on. Don’t forget that

what a saddo

Felix125 You have a very distorted idea of the meaning and processes of 'discussion'. Demanding everyone on this board jumps to your tune by answering the 'largely irrelevant' questions you pose is not discussion.
You take a didactic stance claiming from what I can see a totally spurious authority. 20 years experience - so what rank are you? An experienced officer would not be behaving in the way you have. Why won't you disclose which force you work for? The police have quite rightly lost the respect and trust of women and all you can do is confirm their worst suspicions.
Please do not ask me a question - you are wasting my time.

It's the talk over the women with walls of words tactic.

Yes I think it does. I think the inappropriateness is the point, I think he enjoys upsetting women.

He's been told numerous times, he understands perfectly and still comes back with word salad tennis return demanding now we answer his pointless navel gazey questions.

God, I’ve just fully read your performance on that thread. Making it all about you, asking personal and inappropriate questions, zero sympathy

if you are a police officer, what a terrible one you must be

Does it fucking occur to you, you insensitive fucking twerp, that the time for ‘explainy, me feel good like big man’ wasn’t that thread

Believerinbiology
If this is a discussion forum, then questions need to be asked - sometimes hard questions - if you are wanting different outcomes then discuss the hard questions and the answers that go with it

The first re-posted thread "Waiting for police to attend after being assaulted by my ex...." concerns how police prioritise jobs and emergencies which are coming in. I have suggested in that thread (and in this) how they are graded with respect to threat, harm & risk. Its a tough call and i wish there was enough of us to get to all the jobs straight away - but there isn't. Demand outstrips resources all the time

Do you have any other ways to to do this - as I am all ears.

The second thread "A list of seemingly unbelievable not-rapes (according to the CPS and juries)" - discussed this for quite a few pages and discussed about the final decision process
What i am saying there, is that as the investigation goes on, you are always going to get the issues around consent. Now the police & CPS can authorise a charge, but the cases often fail at court. I'm suggesting do we remove the jury from the equation in the final decision making aspect?

Do you have a view on this?

What is tone deaf & insensitive about those questions?

And if its going to be discussed, then the questions need to be asked. And if you don't understand or agree then just ask - there might not be a right or wrong answer. But discuss it, as this is a discussion forum.

Unless you want me to come onto the discussions and just reply to everything with "Yes, I agree with you all and the police are really terrible at everything"

But that doesn't achieve anything.

IcakethereforeIam
Perhaps they should read back their own posts, God knows someone should (just not me), then try answering their own questions.
Its good if people could answer the questions I am posing, then perhaps we can move the discusion on.

HatThatWearsYou
I think you just enjoy winding women up and like the sound of your own "voice".
Not at all - these posts are asking questions - which I am trying to answer. And since I have been in the police for 20+ years I can give you an insight.

You may think we have thousands of emergency response cops just sitting around waiting for the next call - but this is not true.

You will be surprised that we run out of cops to even answer the emergency jobs coming in.

You will be surprised how many suicidal missing from homes & mental health concerns we have to deal with and how long they take

You will be surprised how many on-going inquiries each emergency cop has to carry with them day in day out - and has to fit these in among the emergency calls, missing from homes, mental health concerns etc etc

Mix all this into the pot, then you would understand why victims have to wait for a cop to attend. Why cops will look to vol interview people because its quicker and may prevent the person from going to court and negate having to put a case file together.

I have given advice to people in here about making a complaint about harassment. They suggested that their particular force could not investigate their harassment complaint whilst the first was being investigated. This is not true and a new investigation can run alongside it.

I suggested to complain. They then said they do not want to speak with that police force. I suggested to contact a solicitor in that case who would speak on your behalf.

Their reply to that was - "Felix, go fuck yourself you sanctimonious prick."

And I'm the one being insensitive, tone deaf and here to goad women...?

What part of the advice I gave there reflects that as being an approporate reponse?

Felix has been told over and over how tone deaf and insensitive his posts are. He does not care and definitely does not wish to engage constructively.

Screaming I wish it was only that thread...the same behaviour plays out again and again in thread after thread. It's sickening.

BTW that thread is really hard reading and I can imagine only more so if you have been affected by its subject matter.

This was the worst one. Brave women sharing horrific stories.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism/4648441-a-list-of-seemingly-unbelievable-not-rapes-according-to-the-cps-and-juries
Felix has stated that he will post prolifically on any thread about the police so in order to have a Felix free discussion you'll have to resort to code words so he can't just search for a police thread to jump on

@Felix125 If you aren't deliberately here to goad women, I wish you'd be able to understand that you are entirely tone deaf.

I think you just enjoy winding women up and like the sound of your own "voice".

Is it this one? Man alive the defensiveness and insensitivity.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism/4660589-waiting-for-police-to-attend-after-being-assaulted-by-my-ex

Agree with all of this.

Could you please link the thread you mean?

Oh look at that. Welcome to Mumsnet @OldJeans

that’s myself welcoming yourself

Perhaps they should read back their own posts, God knows someone should (just not me), then try answering their own questions.

But stopping people saying the police are shit doesn’t prevent the police from actually being shit

in fact stopping people from talking about problems with an institution reduce the likelihood of those problems being sorted to zero

I guess the point is not to improve the police in any way, and not even to make people think better of the police. Simply to make it hard to talk about them

I would say they seem to have achieved their aim of preventing women having a conversation about their concerns with the police and judiciary. If anybody is in any doubt about this person's aims and their complete disregard for women as living/feeling humans have a look at the rape thread in feminist chat.