Scottish police defy Nicola Sturgeon over trans self-ID law

Both can be true @Tallisker

I read the Times link posted by ResisterRex which has this line:

UK ministers said the draft law would conflict with equality protections that apply across Great Britain.

I read it as 'daft law'

Scottish Police Federation say they were not consulted on the GRR:

Scottish Police Federation said force was not consulted on gender recognition act

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d6fede12-a7cf-11ed-a7e8-7a5fed5c43c4?shareToken=48165e1366807adea4ee61edd03bfa20

"David Hamilton, the chairman of the Scottish Police Federation, said the force was not consulted on these new responsibilities and raised concerns over the practical and cost implications.

He told 1919 magazine: “It was utterly irresponsible of the Scottish parliament to foist this additional workload on Police Scotland at such a late stage in proceedings.

“I don’t know what magic money tree they think we have, because these additional responsibilities will come with a costly price tag.”"

Will the police be reporting themselves to themselves for misgendering and deadnaming hate crimes?

I'm in Scotland and this is the main topic in all my many WhatsApps. People not talking about it before but now aghast and what is happening.

If this is the hill Sturgeon wants to die on, she's doing a grand job of ending her career.

Total disaster

"Changed his name", or "calls himself"?

One infers a formal process, the other doesn't.

The last thing Sturgeon would want in the current climate is for this man to be held in a women's facility. Hence the eagerness to describe him as a man and hope no one would notice.

Gaslighty bastarding gaslighters.

Soz Nicola, the wheels have all fallen off the bus and everyone is pointing at the naked emperor's willy.

That was in response to

Hmmm ... does this mean, under Scotland's Hate Crime Bill that the police have committed a hate crime by misgendering 'the individual?

It means that gender-based law is prejudiced, unclear, asinine, bad law.

Isla/Adam doesn't. Yet was referred to as "she"

Will this guy be remanded in a women’s or men’s prison if they are charged?

Is it misgendering if they don't have a GRC?

Hmmm ... does this mean, under Scotland's Hate Crime Bill that the police have committed a hate crime by misgendering 'the individual?

The bbc are still truly captured. They are only doing this because they really are looking obviously partial because of other media.

The BBC article now says "Andrew Miller, also known as Amy George".

Which is more than it said earlier.

I think the occupation of the suspect is problematic for reporting. If only the individual was something boring like a shop assistant or librarian. But some people (who haven't properly read the details of the offence) might interpret butcher as referring to the crime rather than the occupation.
As a pp said, they often list occupation or refer to a person by occupation. But butcher who (allegedly) abducted a child is very poor optics and possibly a problem with respect to a fair trial. So it's back to man/woman then.
I suppose they could have stuck with woman, I don't think we know if there is a GRC but it sounds as if the person was "living as a woman" and accepted as such for quite a long time as noted upthread.
So it does seem odd that the police and then various media outlets have gone with man.
Possibly anticipating problems in the future should the person be convicted and a decision re ultimate prison destination was a factor?

I guess there's a few options really

1. police defying Scottish Govt as they don't want to look fucking ridiculous
2. police trying to hide the fact the suspect is trans for some reason
3. Scottish Govt putting pressure on police to report it this way to keep things quiet
4. rogue GC or other form of non-believer in the police who decided to just tell the truth
5. the suspect identified themselves to the police as male

Was this intentional by the police to force her into a position? Because it seems really odd that they'd say 'man' for someone who has lived as a woman for six years ... that's a LOT longer than the required GRR timeframe and it's three times as long as the current so-called ineffectual GRC 2004 time frame? It's a lot longer than Isla Bryson did.

It's possible that the police took the temperature of public opinion and realised they risked making themselves look even more ridiculous if they referred to this particular man as a woman. Then again, it could be for the reason you say - anyone's guess at this stage.

I'd love to know how far up in Police Scotland the statement went before it was released.

The more I think about this, the more significant it seems. 'Amy' lived as a women for the last six years (I'm not sure if constant); his neighbours all knew he lived as a woman; his Facebook profiles list him as a woman etc, but the police have referred to him as a man...?

How is Sturgeon going to balance the books on this one? Is she going to rebuke the police for being transphobic? Is she going to go along with them? Is she going to contradict them and use 'the individual' instead?

Was this intentional by the police to force her into a position? Because it seems really odd that they'd say 'man' for someone who has lived as a woman for six years ... that's a LOT longer than the required GRR timeframe and it's three times as long as the current so-called ineffectual GRC 2004 time frame? It's a lot longer than Isla Bryson did.

Yes, exactly. As these issues repeatedly come to the surface, trust is increasingly eroded.

@Beowulfa 😆

We inferior grade women definitely need to learn to be more stunning and brave.

I'd love to know how far up in Police Scotland the statement went before it was released.

Unfortunately, I am already there.

I do not trust the police to be honest. How can I when they have protected dozens of rapists and predators in their ranks?

I do not trust the judiciary to be impartial. How can I when they force rape victims to call their rapist she and her?

I do not trust the media to report accurately. How can I when journalists like Hadley Freeman have told us that she was explicitly told women were not allowed to write on sex/gender issues while at the Guardian? While the BBC frequently displays pro-trans, anti-woman bias (recent example, Evan Davies on PM allowing two guests to tell his audience that JKR is transphobic and making zero attempt to refute the veracity of that accusation), apologizes for doing so when really caught out, but then does it again and again and again?

I want to be able to trust that the people who are supposed to be policing, governing and reporting are doing their jobs. But they aren't - we know they aren't - so how can I trust them?