An MSP (Murdo Fraser) threatening legal action against Police Scotland after his twitter/x post was logged as a hate incident

Yes. Chilling effect. You would not know if you'd had a NHCI filed against you, and yes, it may come up on a DBS check and affect you at an interview.

Because a dysfunctional male objected to you stating reality or wanting rights. We see them daily on FWR.

Well it’s working isn’t it. Women are already expressing concerns about possible legal repercussions from discussing their (legally held) GC views on an anonymous forum.

The Daily Mail article quote a police spokesman as saying:

"The incident was recorded as a non-crime hate incident. Hate incidents are not recorded against alleged perpetrators."

In other words, hate incidents are not recorded against alleged perpetrators but their names appear in the files for the complainant.

So would it show up in a PVG?

What happens if, say, your facebook account is hacked and hateful stuff published in your name, then you are reported anonymously?

I'm apprehensive that this may finally be the end of the road for FWR. There's got to be a limit to Justine's budget for this. Not just FWR but also parts of AIBU.

MNHQ might have to take on extra staff just to deal with vexatious complaints and police enquiries. I'm so ignorant I don't even know if the Scots system would be the one issuing warrants to be executed here if it that admin burden will be offloaded here as an act of reciprocity.

Reading the information Arabella has kindly collated in detail on the other thread, my understanding is that Scotland's finest will be investigating any non crime wrongthink committed in any country, with extradition being discussed.

If it was read in Scotland, then yes, it's considered as having been published in Scotland.

Maybe we need a thread in site stuff?

The lack of a 2nd chamber certainly doesn't help, maltravers.

I wonder whether this law is a product of Scotland’s lack of a second chamber, which in Westminster helps formulate good law and weed out bad law where MPs have voted for something for political reasons or to virtue signal. I imagine MSPs were whipped to support this bill and didn’t trouble their tiny minds too much about the consequences of supporting it.

I have no doubt that MN towers will be hit very swiftly from April 1st by police demands for the personal data held on FWR posters.

Does MNHQ need to make an announcement? Does everyone need to delete an account and register again with (unmanageable) precautions?

Can NCHI be registered against overseas posters?

So many questions.

I've just checked:

1 Tory MSP voted in favour.
All Libdems voted in favour.
All SNP voted in favour, bar 2 absentions.
All Labour voted in favour, bar 3 against and 1 abstention.
All Greens to the surprise of nobody, in favour.

This was a Bill approved by members of all political parties. Of course the SNP wrote the damn thing, but there has been fuck all opposition, apart from the Tories.

SNP are a cult. There are no checks and balances- unless you count Patrick Harvie 🤣. They can do anything they want and people will keep voting for them

McDermid also fears the clause in the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 relating to performances could result in real hate crime being trivialised.
“It’s a very serious issue that’s causing people very serious fear in their lives,” she said.
“[The comedian] Janey Godley has finally left Twitter after being scunnered by the level of abuse and horrendous insults she gets on a daily basis on the platform. That’s the kind of hate speech, frankly, I would like to see the back of.”

Agreed on what women on TwiX endure and yet 'doesn't count' but interested to see this from McDermid given her perspective and seeming lack of ability to foresee the consequences.

“My view of gender politics is you bring people into the tent. Womanhood is a big tent. It embraces me and Kim Kardashian. There’s certainly room in that tent for the trans women I know.”

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/4607716-what-does-val-mcdermid-mean

But if you submit a SAR to find out if you've been targeted, doesn't that just mean you give the polis a heads-up that you might be a person of interest to them? If, for example, you are a member of SEEN, or support FWS, or the Women's Rights Network, or KPSS, or the LGB Alliance?

Because the law this all rests on is incredibly poor

It harms women and children and the only way to stop people saying that is to use stronger laws. Aggressively so.

I want to reiterate that this Bill was voted for with cross party support, other than the Scottish Conservatives and three very brave Labour MSPs.

I also wish you were exaggerating.

In the event of a Non Crime Hate Incident you may never be told you've been accused. This only arose because Fraser was also reported to Parliamentary Standards at the same time.

The question has to be asked why. Why would any sane, normal person see this as a desirable, positive thing? Why would they destroy justice and trust in the police in this way? Why would it be a good thing to punish a person without their chance of justice or making a case for themselves with a lifetime consequence, when the chances are very high they did nothing wrong, or what they were accused of never happened?

The only thing I can think of is a wish for a population that is afraid and victimised by the least functional and most aggressive activist members of their society.

I don't know, I've wondered this too.

What I very much hope is not the case is that politicians elsewhere are watching with interest to see how far this kind of law can be pushed, and that's why they remain silent on the issue.

As we've said many times, 'gender' is a Macguffin.

It's a vague identity, embedded in a vague law, that effectively means anyone can identify as protected and report anyone else, with no requirement for evidence or threshold. So we have a threat that can be aimed at anyone, and used to threaten or punish as required.

While this seems ridiculous to most people, there will be some who see this as a very useful political tool.

Archive version of the Times article.
https://archive.is/N8IBg

We’re in big trouble. I’m not in Scotland but can get that from here

Yes

I thought that you had to be told who accused you when the plod come calling. Is this not the case here?

Its the end of trust or faith in the law. It's an uprecedented attack on justice and society in the UK in modern history.

You can be accused of a crime, with no opportunity for justice, to defend yourself, to plead your case, to do anything at all, even to be informed that someone has informed upon you for their own reasons or due to their own dysfunctionality and difficulties with reality, and carry that penalty in a way that will harm all of your career and working life.

It's appalling. It's in the realms of Germany in the early 30s and I wish I was exaggerating. It's abhorrent. There will be nothing to do but avoid speaking to anyone you do not know well or trust, to avoid committing yourself in writing, and to avoid groups entirely with a reputation of being easy to offend. I have no doubt that MN towers will be hit very swiftly from April 1st by police demands for the personal data held on FWR posters.