The police

God, you’ve got to wonder at this point what this person thinks this is achieving

Feels, just stop it.

OldJeans
Exactly - due process, the back bone of all legal processes we have. Either criminal or civil.

IcakethereforeIam
Its alright - I just take it you can't answer the points raised in the argument.

Tut, still can't read you Feels! Stopped trying tbh.

Snortlaugh

Still, can tell you're not a sock because yourself writes differently.

Thank you Felix125 for continuing in this thread- it is being very informative with regards to police processes and considerations. Clearly you can’t comment on cases for which you are not party to all the information and equally you are not responsible for individual failings within the force.
Clearly some police forces are not beyond criticism, and things are not always fair but due process must be followed to negate the risk of trials collapsing/ things being missed etc

keep it up

Bearyhumcrack
Felix, go fuck yourself you sanctimonious prick.

Ah, the old 'ad hominem' argument

Well, complain or don't complain. Go through a solicitor or don't. I have said how it should be being dealt with and how your harassment investigation can run alongside the other. Its up to you really.

IcakethereforeIam
But, wah, wah, wah, what if we ignore him and a fairy dies?
It depends what we are ignoring - what is his actual complaint?
No one on here seems to know - so how can we judge?

But, wah, wah, wah, what if we ignore him and a fairy dies?

Why do they always say "myself" and not "me". Anyway, that's an uncharacteristically informative message for this bunch of clowns.

Agree. Action now.

Take heart, maybe things are starting to change. Bit surprised it's NYP.
Louise Moody's Twitter:

twitter.com/drlouisejmoody/status/1599135562564177920?t=ZTHD9TxHpp1i6j3_WfkVag&s=19

1. More seriously, I now believe that action needs to be taken against a man who has sued approx 40 ppl., gotten four ppl. (that I know of) arrested, made 16 complaints to my friend's Inn, complained about my counsel, bought my wife's Grant of Probate ...

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

I would say they do - that's why they need investigating and all of it taking into consideration

So why do you keep doing the "But what about [completely different scenario]" then????!!!!

👍

Felix, go fuck yourself you sanctimonious prick.

ScreamingMeMe
So context and individual facts of a case don't mean anything?
I would say they do - that's why they need investigating and all of it taking into consideration. So the reporting person's report against KJK needs to be investigated, which would include KJK's account. But we can't just ignore the initial report from the reporting person because he has made previous similar reports. The whole thing needs to be investigated - if its to be done properly. And if it turns out that there is no supporting evidence, just his statement - do we ignore the complaint?

But since we don't know what the initial report is, we can't comment.

Bearyhumcrack
Ty for your suggestion. I will think about it... currently any communication with that organisation triggers severe anxiety which I thought I had under control.

Go through a solicitor then.

Yes, best to ignore.

Ty for your suggestion. I will think about it... currently any communication with that organisation triggers severe anxiety which I thought I had under control.

/s is the sarcasm tag. Strewth.

they suggested a judge has said to a reporting person not to look at things in a public forum if he finds them harassing. So this could be used for the misogynistic whatssap groups could it? And for posts like the 'No TERFS on our Turf ' mentioned by a poster earlier on?

So context and individual facts of a case don't mean anything?

You know, forget it. I don't want you to reply to me any more Felix.

Bearyhumcrack
You complained that it was first come first served, in that the first investigation will need to be completed before yours can begin.

This is false.

That's what you need to complain about. A new investigation can commence with a different OIC whist the first one is ongoing.

If your call was given to me - I would investigate it from the off. I would also be able to find your phone within seconds if its in police property.

ScreamingMeMe
So you literally just go with what the complainant says then? You don't apply any discretion, judgement or weighting at all, you don't have any guidelines - is that what you're saying?
Of course we do - we gather evidence to support or negate the offence. This will include the other person's account. This is the investigation part.

But what if there is no other evidence available apart from the reporting persons statement? And the accused person refuses to give an account? Its one word against nothing - where do we go from there?

The judge was mentioned by SnapeAlways - they suggested a judge has said to a reporting person not to look at things in a public forum if he finds them harassing. So this could be used for the misogynistic whatssap groups could it? And for posts like the 'No TERFS on our Turf ' mentioned by a poster earlier on?

FOJN
Yes, you can give your evidence at court - but the point is, there might not be a need to go to court if you could give an account prior. If you give an account at court, the trial will be adjourned so the alibi can be examined.

Its just wasting your own time, when you could have given your account in the police interview earlier. If it checks out you could be NFA'd there and then.

Its a vol interview - if the police are going to arrest you, they need a necessity to arrest. If you haven't attended for the vol interview and they have a necessity to arrest - they may elect to do so. They may not. It depends what the necessity is. We don't know what the actual report is against KJK, so we don't know what the necessity could be - do they need certain acts within PACE which you can only do whilst under arrest for example?

This is an historical case - the complaint against KJK has gone home and made the report after the event - therefore its classed as an historic event. Prompt & effective arrest necessity will only really apply to ongoing offences - emergency calls to police where fights are still on going, burglars caught in the act etc etc. Just because you have a current ongoing investigation - you don't have a necessity to arrest under 'prompt & effective'.

So this is an historical case which has ended up on an event queue and probably sat there for days/weeks before the OIC has had a chance to look at it.

So if this case is just about 'hurty words' - what were they?
You must know if you have suggested this - so what has the reporting person said?

ScreamingMeMe
Have you tried saying you're grossly offended, @Bearyhumcrack ?
Strewth! - being grossly offended is for mal comms, not S2 harassment.
So what are the mal comms aspects of it?

Have you tried saying you're grossly offended, @Bearyhumcrack ?

/s

I love how Felix keeps coming back to explain to us like we're two year olds. - I wonder why that is......?

FWIW I don't rate your intelligence much either, mainly because you keep missing the point.

Yes you can take cases to court based on evidence from a complainant - their statement which they will give under oath at court . With no evidence to stand against it what do you expect? Do you think that if a suspect refuses to be interviewed the case will be NFA'd if its one word against another?

FFS what do you mean "no evidence to stand against it". Presumably evidence can be given in court, it's hardly as if you lose the opportunity to defend yourself if you decline to be bullied into a voluntary interview by the police. Apparently "come for a voluntary interview or we'll arrest you", is just the plod being friendly. And yet weirdly they can threaten to arrest you whilst simultaneously not arresting you because they don't have the necessity to arrest you but it's OK because the case can go to court without all that kerfuffle anyway.

Are you even reading what you have written?

Yes - a case can be sent to CPS and a court without the need for an arrest - where in PACE does in require an arrest to be made? If its an historic report of a crime - how can it ever be classed as 'prompt' for prompt & effective?

I appreciate you need to frame this as if we are discussing historical cases because otherwise you look a fool but no one else here is discussing historical cases, we're talking about a current case. I would have thought that "prompt and effective investigation" was desirable for every CURRENT and ONGOING case. The police have threatened to arrest KJK so they clearly think the cause of the hurty feelings warrants an prompt and effective investigation.

And yes it's hurty feelings, we've been dealing with this shit for years and it never makes it as far as court because the process is the punishment.

All day every day.

It's not me who's saying there are no distinctions between different scenarios. That has been my point all along!

So you literally just go with what the complainant says then? You don't apply any discretion, judgement or weighting at all, you don't have any guidelines - is that what you're saying?

Is 'No TERFS on our TURF' just mean words that should be ignored. If you don't like it then don't look at it as the judge said.

No woman has ever complained to the police about a sign or tweet saying that.

And I don't understand: what judge?

100% agree
The police are the patriarchy enforcers.
They are white dudes who have authority fetishes protecting property and make authority.
The reviews of behaviour have been categorical
The police are racist and sexist.

Their ability to operate without the courts makes them a danger to women and girls.
Their make up and personal record of violence against women make them dangerous
Their willingness to shield each other from the law make them a danger to women and girls.

That they fully embraced illegal anti female ethos for or points is completely on brand for them.

They are not "our" protectors, the law is not wielded equally. Because it is wielded by men. Sexist racist men.

If you read what I posted (I know your ilk struggle to actually listen to/read what we say). Of course I have fucking complained.

Problem is, you are all so utterly shit at your jobs that in both forces I have made complaints about, I've been told there will be at least a 4 month wait for investigation.

Id rather be investigated by Greengrass from fucking Heartbeat than you lot of balloon knots. I've never ever experienced such incompetence.

I will never, ever find it in me to support the police in future. You get what you deserve.

Brefugee
So what is the actual complaint made against KJK here then, so we can judge?
Otherwise we are just amusing. And we can't just assume basing it on his past reports not being successfully prosecuted. 25 pages in, and you still haven't told me.

FOJN
I love how Felix keeps coming back to explain to us like we're two year olds. - I wonder why that is......?

Yes you can take cases to court based on evidence from a complainant - their statement which they will give under oath at court . With no evidence to stand against it what do you expect? Do you think that if a suspect refuses to be interviewed the case will be NFA'd if its one word against another?

Yes - a case can be sent to CPS and a court without the need for an arrest - where in PACE does in require an arrest to be made? If its an historic report of a crime - how can it ever be classed as 'prompt' for prompt & effective?

Bearyhumcrack
But you seem happy with the status quo as you don't want to complain. I have said what i would do if I had the case.

ScreamingMeMe
Because a lot of domestic cases are ones of harassment, mal comms - 'mean words' as you put it - do we start to ignore these if the complainant has made several reports which have not resulted in a prosecution?

So (AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE) - what are 'mean words' to one - might be offensive or grossly offensive to another.

Is 'No TERFS on our TURF' just mean words that should be ignored. If you don't like it then don't look at it as the judge said.
The misogynistic Whatsapp groups that Couzens cronies were using - were these just 'hurty words' as you put it?