Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Murderer's criminal record wiped due to 'trans' identity

105 replies

ArabellaScott · 16/06/2025 08:00

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/trans-killer-criminal-record-wiped-35397482

Only came to light because of the court case involving him claiming a woman in prison had been 'transphobic'(he lost). Presumably this man remains in the women's estate.

Trans killer has record 'wiped clean' after thug self-identified as woman

Campaigners have urged for answers to know if other trans prisoners also have clean PC records for the new names they gave themselves.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/trans-killer-criminal-record-wiped-35397482

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Thread gallery
7
Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/06/2025 11:46

ArabellaScott · 17/06/2025 21:16

https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-june-17-2025?clip_start=14:14:36&clip_end=14:24:53

several questions in ScotParl on this story today. (Link clipped to correct times, I hope)

Cab Sec repeatedly says this was a 'failure to disclose' - by this, I assume she means that the criminal involved didn't tell them about his crimes?

By gosh, good thing they make it clear that criminals should jolly well fess up when asked about their past, eh?!

Ash Regan asks for a full audit of data re corruption. Tess White asks for the SPS to get a fucking shift on and get rid of all men in women's prisons. (I paraphrase).

Cab Sec starts to whimper and insists that work is going on the length and breadth of gov to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.

Just as soon as the EHRC confirms that yes, the Scotgov have stupendously, absurdly, ridiculously and unforgivably fucked up for years and years. Even though the SC have already made that very clear.

She’s confusing the EHRC with the European Court of Human Rights. No, we don’t need to wait for anything from Europe.

Arran2024 · 18/06/2025 11:34

storminabuttercup · 16/06/2025 17:39

Thank you for explaining
I am actually dumbfounded

They have to fill in the same form. The only difference is that the unit handles the info confidentially. Anyone using this service is basically OK- they ARE revealing their old name but they dont want eg an employer seeing it. The problem is the ones who dont use the unit, and who dont put their old names on the form - they know they won't get caught as there is no connection between the new and old ID. It's a criminal offence but chances are they won't get caught and they have bigger stuff to worry about, like the old criminal record.

rebmacesrevda · 17/06/2025 21:50

How bad does it have to get before they actually do something about it? It would not surprise me if there’s a convicted nonce in a dress studying a PGCE right now, and applying for teaching jobs with a clean DBS.

EdithStourton · 17/06/2025 21:50

WhatterySquash · 17/06/2025 13:13

I know what you mean, it also reminds me of the original purity spiral article about people on a (I think?) knitting forum berating each other for “cultural appropriation “ for daring to refer to a “kimono” while being white, and suchlike.

But I still get so amazed by how people allow themselves to both ignore obvious facts and logic fails, and also refuse to see that situations are nuanced. It is almost certainly not true that every member of any demographic is an adorable, saintly victim but least of all a demographic that lets anyone opt into it AND offers considerable rewards for doing so, especially to men and even more so to criminal men. I mean duh. Other examples are also stunning in the blinkeredness and stupidity they involve, but when it’s about keeping people safe from offenders and even that goes down the toilet without a second’s thought… it’s incredible, imagine if you could change the minds of institutions and authorities so easily on something actually positive and helpful to society instead of something that increases risk and enables dangerous men.

the other thing about the tinfoil hat effect is that these things make you so angry and frustrated that when trying to talk or argue with people who can’t see the issue you may rant and exclaim somewhat. Then you DEFINITELY are a witch “bigot” / “hate trans people” Hmm

Edited

Oh yes.
When you're pushing against a strong social narrative, and are constantly
slammed for it, it's really easy to get defensive, and then a bit shirty, and finally properly cross.

With each move, the tinfoil hat becomes more evident to the 'kind', 'liberal', 'thoughtful' person you're talking too.

But I do am utterly boggled that so many people were so stupid, or so willing to go along with the cool, 'kind' crowd, that they chucked safeguarding out of the window.

I was never cool, so that probably helped me...

Arran2024 · 17/06/2025 21:34

BundleBoogie · 17/06/2025 21:23

I seem to remember a government minister saying he was aware of this or confirming that this was correct a few years ago? I haven’t got time to check now but there are old threads on this on FWR

Interesting. It also came up during the Scottish gender recognition debates. There were amendments put forward to try to prevent criminals getting new ID and generally the SNP were having none of it.

DuesToTheDirt · 17/06/2025 21:26

"working through the implications", "waiting on the EHRC code of practice"

When my kids were young and trying to postpone chores I would say they were hoping lightning would strike and kill them so that they would never have to do the hated washing up. I feel the Scottish Prison Service are also hoping for lightning.

BundleBoogie · 17/06/2025 21:23

Arran2024 · 16/06/2025 18:08

The unit is not the issue. The unit simply allows trans people to disclose their previous identity confidentially.

The problem is that a gender recognition certificate gives you a new birth certificate. So anything under your old name is not traceable - people who change their name by deed poll are traceable because they don't get a new birth certificate. Only trans people get this new identity option.

So a trans person who wants to hide their old identity isn't going to use the unit, because that would mean they are admitting they are trans, and the unit would want the old ID.

No, the problem is that our trans woman with a criminal record now has a brand new name and birth certificate to prove it. They will fill in the dbs form with the new ID, their passport will show their new name, so will their driving licence. The dbs check will show up nothing on the new name so they are approved. They have broken the rules by not disclosing the old name, but who is going to catch them?

I seem to remember a government minister saying he was aware of this or confirming that this was correct a few years ago? I haven’t got time to check now but there are old threads on this on FWR

ArabellaScott · 17/06/2025 21:16

(Kaukab Stewart looks blank in the background)

OP posts:
ArabellaScott · 17/06/2025 21:16

https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-june-17-2025?clip_start=14:14:36&clip_end=14:24:53

several questions in ScotParl on this story today. (Link clipped to correct times, I hope)

Cab Sec repeatedly says this was a 'failure to disclose' - by this, I assume she means that the criminal involved didn't tell them about his crimes?

By gosh, good thing they make it clear that criminals should jolly well fess up when asked about their past, eh?!

Ash Regan asks for a full audit of data re corruption. Tess White asks for the SPS to get a fucking shift on and get rid of all men in women's prisons. (I paraphrase).

Cab Sec starts to whimper and insists that work is going on the length and breadth of gov to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.

Just as soon as the EHRC confirms that yes, the Scotgov have stupendously, absurdly, ridiculously and unforgivably fucked up for years and years. Even though the SC have already made that very clear.

Meeting of the Parliament | Scottish Parliament TV

https://www.scottishparliament.tv/meeting/meeting-of-the-parliament-june-17-2025?clip_end=14%3A24%3A53&clip_start=14%3A14%3A36

OP posts:
JanesLittleGirl · 17/06/2025 20:44

I am reluctant to explain how one could obtain a new NI number for obvious reasons but it can be done if you are willing to lie and forgo any previous NI credits.

SammyScrounge · 17/06/2025 19:13

SinnerBoy · 16/06/2025 10:35

This is absolutely shocking, when you have a DBS check, they ask if you are / have been known by any other names. We spoke to a mortgage advisor last week and had the same. Surely the cops can port his record to his new name.

And I hope to goodness he's not in a women's jail now.

He took. a Woman to court claiming she was transphobic..Why is he being allowed to do that?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/06/2025 18:53

Arran2024 · 17/06/2025 16:21

You can self identify for the NHS, the passport office, the dvla - they will change it if you ask. But NI requires a GR Certificate. It makes no sense!

Apologies was mixing up NI and NHS nos!

KnottyAuty · 17/06/2025 18:39

lcakethereforeIam · 17/06/2025 15:55

Surprisingly BBC news have...after a fashion...reported it. Admittedly it's only in the roundup of headlines (the Daily Record have it on their front page) but of all the stories they could have used they used that one!

I thought they did get a new NI number. Perhaps I'm misremembering but wasn't the original case taken to the European Court because the tw's NI no. was outing him as a tw? But regardless if a person's old and new identities can be linked for pension reasons then they can be for safeguarding reasons too.

I'm not 100% sure it was the National Insurance that outed Goodwin. Here are photos from the documentary Sex Change: Shock Horror Probe! You can pay £2 to watch on demand. The transwomen on the fim said they were ever so nice and would never want to use women's changing rooms etc.

ETA the European Court do not see the individuals in the cases they review. Goodwin's daughter writes about being in Strasbourg with her Dad but the judges never saw Goodwin. So they accepted the evidence that it was the NI number. I think the UK defence team might have got a slightly different result regarding privacy matters had they provided photos

Murderer's criminal record wiped due to 'trans' identity
Murderer's criminal record wiped due to 'trans' identity
Murderer's criminal record wiped due to 'trans' identity
POWNewcastleEastWallsend · 17/06/2025 18:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

lcakethereforeIam · 17/06/2025 17:54

Well that's ridiculous. If we can work it out in a MN thread! These people are supposed to be ensuring the safety of vulnerable individuals. Actual vulnerable individuals that is. It's literally their job.

POWNewcastleEastWallsend · 17/06/2025 17:52

FarriersGirl · 17/06/2025 17:37

I have an enhanced DBS check every 3 years and I'm sure it does not include NI numbers. Includes passport and driving licence previous names, addresses etc.

According to KPSS it is optional at the moment. Making it mandatory would make a big difference.

DBS CHECKS AND IDENTITY VERIFICATION: SAFEGUARDING LOOPHOLES CREATED BY CHANGES OF IDENTITY

Page 27-29

Recommendation One:
mandatory use of National Insurance numbers for DBS checks and identity changes

A National Insurance number is a number used in the United Kingdom in the administration of the National Insurance or social security system. It is also used for some purposes in the UK tax system. Individuals are normally issued with their National Insurance number just before their 16th birthday.

National Insurance numbers are allocated for life and are unique to each individual. They do not change should an individual change identity, no matter what that change of identity consists of and no matter how that identity change is affected, be that via self-declaration, enrolled or unenrolled deed poll, or by statutory declaration. When an individual obtains legal recognition of acquired gender and is issued with a gender recognition certificate, the individual’s new details are recorded against their existing number. Records of previously used identities are not deleted from the individual’s National Insurance number record. Rather, they are retained, together with the relevant dates of use, until 50 years after the individual’s death.83

No matter how many identities an individual assumes, their National Insurance number is an unchanging and unchangeable constant. National Insurance numbers, therefore, enable all information held about an individual to be tied together in a way that cannot be circumvented by changing identity. Because of this, National Insurance numbers provide an opportunity to contribute much needed rigour, reliability and accuracy into the DBS system. However, whilst the DBS system does not exclude National Insurance numbers entirely, in our opinion they are under utilised and their potential to contribute to the DBS system remains unrealised.

Currently, although an applicant undergoing a DBS check is able to include their National Insurance number as part of the application, this is not a mandatory requirement and checks against an individual’s National Insurance number only take place in very specific, arguably exceptional, circumstances. Thus, the applicant may submit identity documents that display that individual’s National Insurance number, however, other identity documents that do not include the National Insurance number can be used instead. Although the online DBS check application form provides the opportunity to record the applicant’s National Insurance number, to do so is optional.

Checks against an individual’s National Insurance number are far from routine. The Police Act 1997 Part V at section 118 (2A)(d) states that it may be necessary to confirm an applicant’s identity with reference to their National Insurance number. From the response we received to a Freedom of Information Access Request we submitted, it is clear that recourse to National Insurance numbers only takes place in very specific situations where the applicant is either unable to provide the required identity documents, or where a close match on the Police National Computer needs to be confirmed or eliminated.84

National Insurance numbers are not included in the information recorded for individuals who are placed on the Barred Lists.

Our recommendation is that full use be made of National Insurance numbers in order to close the current safeguarding loopholes that exist around identity documents and identity verification.

We recommend:

That it be a mandatory requirement for applicants to submit their National Insurance number during the DBS check application process

That DBS checks include a check against the applicant’s National Insurance number in order that all identities the applicant has used can be retrieved and checked against data held on the Police National Computer, local police force system and the Barred Lists

That individuals placed on the Barred Lists have their National Insurance number recorded against their name

That when an individual makes an application to change their identity on their passport or driving licence, the applicant is required to provide their National Insurance number in order that these identity changes can be included on their National Insurance number record

Currently, the safeguarding loopholes that exist around identity documents and identify verification mean that organisations that request a DBS check cannot be certain that the information displayed on the certificate is complete or accurate. Use of National Insurance numbers would remove this uncertainty and mean that organisations can justifiably be confident that all necessary checks against all current and former identities have been carried out. Using National Insurance numbers also removes the current reliance on the applicant’s honesty to ‘do the right thing’ and provide all previously used names or to go through the Sensitive Applications Route. Incompleteness of information as a result of innocent absent- mindedness is also no longer an issue.

We do not consider that requiring applicants to submit their National Insurance number for the purposes of a DBS check or when changing identity for passport or driving licence to be intrusive, disproportionate or onerous. Indeed, it is a common requirement for individuals to provide their National Insurance number. Many organisations routinely require individuals to provide their National Insurance number including:

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC)

An individual’s employer

The Department for Work and Pensions, or in Northern Ireland the Department for Social Development, if the individual claims state benefits

The local council, or the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, if the individual claims Housing Benefit

Electoral Registration Officers (to verify identity when an individual registers to vote)

The Student Loan Company, if an individual applies for a student loan
Pensions providers

Individual Savings Account (ISA) providers

Authorised financial service providers.85

In our opinion, requiring an individual to provide their National Insurance number for the purposes of a DBS check is a proportionate measure to further the legitimate aim of safeguarding.

https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-and-identity-verification-pdf/

DBS Checks and Identity Verification PDF - Keep Prisons Single Sex

https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-and-identity-verification-pdf

FarriersGirl · 17/06/2025 17:37

I have an enhanced DBS check every 3 years and I'm sure it does not include NI numbers. Includes passport and driving licence previous names, addresses etc.

OpalescentFruit · 17/06/2025 17:36

pontefractals · 17/06/2025 17:09

Oh, please enlarge on this, I'm genuinely intrigued. It's nearly late enough for a glass of wine so we'll be OK...

You mean a large bottle - or two - I hope!

POWNewcastleEastWallsend · 17/06/2025 17:22

BeeCucumber · 17/06/2025 16:49

As I understand it, your record doesn’t get “wiped” - it remains on relevant databases and the information can be seen by individuals with suitable access levels. For example - Janice Smith with a dob of 10/12/1981 could have an alias name of John Smith dob 10/12/1981on their record as their former name. If anyone did a search on this dob, a list would be generated and anyone with decent knowledge and research skills would find the match. Their fingerprint and dna records will of course remain unchanged.

If the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal's Service can miss something obvious like a convicted criminal apparently having a clean record . . .

"The blunder came to light after a solicitor requested a standard previous convictions disclosure from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal’s Service on prosecution witnesses, including Stewart, in a case that involved alleged conflict inside HMP Greenock jail.

He was provided with full rap sheets for witnesses – all prisoners – who had not changed their gender.

But the name change had apparently allowed trans killer Stewart to separate himself from his grisly past, as the new name wasn’t marked up with any convictions."

. . . and the only way to be sure is to check the records of everyone else with the same birth date. Then if you do find people with the same birth date who have criminal records, what next? How would you know if any of them were the same person as the one who needs a DBS check?

Am I missing something?

Is the NI number included in the DBS record fields?

If it is and that does not change (apart from the letter indicating sex category?) then an NI number search would be quicker than a DOB search to find any matches.

EDIT: Kate Coleman has covered the National Insurance number angle. The first KPSS recommendation is to make National Insurance numbers a mandatory part of DBS checks because they do not change.

https://kpssinfo.org/dbs-checks-identity-verification/

pontefractals · 17/06/2025 17:09

OpalescentFruit · 17/06/2025 16:58

They also get a new soul according to a former colleague.

Oh, please enlarge on this, I'm genuinely intrigued. It's nearly late enough for a glass of wine so we'll be OK...

ClosetBasketCase · 17/06/2025 17:08

That should be criminal, but I bet you anything that all the little sensitives will go oooh but trans rights... christ alive

OpalescentFruit · 17/06/2025 16:58

Arran2024 · 17/06/2025 15:19

https://www.gov.uk/tell-hmrc-change-of-details/gender-change

But they do get a new NHS number so it's hard to keep up!!

They also get a new soul according to a former colleague.

BeeCucumber · 17/06/2025 16:49

As I understand it, your record doesn’t get “wiped” - it remains on relevant databases and the information can be seen by individuals with suitable access levels. For example - Janice Smith with a dob of 10/12/1981 could have an alias name of John Smith dob 10/12/1981on their record as their former name. If anyone did a search on this dob, a list would be generated and anyone with decent knowledge and research skills would find the match. Their fingerprint and dna records will of course remain unchanged.

PrettyDamnCosmic · 17/06/2025 16:40

Arran2024 · 17/06/2025 16:21

You can self identify for the NHS, the passport office, the dvla - they will change it if you ask. But NI requires a GR Certificate. It makes no sense!

I think it all goes back to the reasons why the GRC was brought in after adverse ruling by the ECtHR. It was partly so a transexual could marry when same-sex marriage was unavailable but also to prevent outing to an employer that the holder was transexual.

Arran2024 · 17/06/2025 16:21

Ereshkigalangcleg · 17/06/2025 16:04

Yes me too, I think on declaring (self identifying) your “transition” however you define that, to the NHS you get a new one.

You can self identify for the NHS, the passport office, the dvla - they will change it if you ask. But NI requires a GR Certificate. It makes no sense!

Swipe left for the next trending thread