Met apologise for 'sexist, derogatory' language when searching woman

[ArabellaScott]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jan/24/met-apologises-to-academic-for-sexist-derogatory-language

'The Metropolitan police have apologised and paid compensation to an academic for “sexist, derogatory and unacceptable language” used by officers about her when she was strip-searched.'

'Duff was arrested on 5 May 2013 on suspicion of obstructing and assaulting police after trying to hand a legal advice card to a 15-year-old caught in a stop-and-search sweep in Hackney – allegations she was later cleared of in court. '

Is anyone going to do something about the police, at all?

Why is what she describes as happening to her proportion to what she did?

Handing a card and what she says about the search

Language on top which was awful but how is the above ok

If she was sent to court for it, it must have passed the evidential threshold for CPS to take it

As CPS only ever take cases to court that have a good chance of a conviction, i would suggest there was evidence there sufficient to have a case to answer to at court.

Oh, really. How come Marion Millar got taken to court, in that case? On the evidence of a photo of ribbons?

I'm sorry, but your advice on what should happen doesn't seem to completely match up with what I've observed does happen.

If she was sent to court for it, it must have passed the evidential threshold for CPS to take it

You realise this doesn't mean she actually did anything wrong though. You know....that's the point of court.

Otherwise we could just go from arrest to Borstal.

Why the fuck aren't the officers named?

We need to know who they are

@MarshaBradyo

Why is what she describes as happening to her proportion to what she did?

Handing a card and what she says about the search

Language on top which was awful but how is the above ok

The handing the card isn't the issue

Its the assault on police & obstruct police which is

@ArabellaScott

If she was sent to court for it, it must have passed the evidential threshold for CPS to take it

As CPS only ever take cases to court that have a good chance of a conviction, i would suggest there was evidence there sufficient to have a case to answer to at court.

Oh, really. How come Marion Millar got taken to court, in that case? On the evidence of a photo of ribbons?

I'm sorry, but your advice on what should happen doesn't seem to completely match up with what I've observed does happen.

Wasn't the ribbons alleged to have looked like a noose?

Its the assault on police & obstruct police which is

Assault? Is that what she did or is it part of the one thing?

I get the arrest but her description of what was it tying her up and cutting her clothes off and sexually aggressive behaviour - why is that necessary

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

If she was sent to court for it, it must have passed the evidential threshold for CPS to take it

You realise this doesn't mean she actually did anything wrong though. You know....that's the point of court.

Otherwise we could just go from arrest to Borstal.

I know

Its up to the court to prove whether there is sufficient to convict and say 'your guilty of that offence'

But to get it to court it must have some evidiential basis to get it past the threshold.

So, we have an independent body (CPS) which reviews the evidence and makes a decision on whether there is sufficient evidence or not.

@MarshaBradyo

Its the assault on police & obstruct police which is

Assault? Is that what she did or is it part of the one thing?

I get the arrest but her description of what was it tying her up and cutting her clothes off and sexually aggressive behaviour - why is that necessary

From an earlier post where this was discussed - page 7 I think

"....Then, when she arrives in custody, you have the issue that if you don't know anything about her and she is still refusing to give her details - you don't know if she has a risk of concealing items. Therefore you have to consider a search, just in case it turns out she is prolific in concealing dangerous items...."

She didn't obstruct or assault a police officer. A court saw the evidence, heard the testimonies of everyone involved and acquitted her of all charges.

Your assertion that she assaulted someone could be considered libellous. You are victim blaming and minimising the proven gross(?) misconduct of police officers.

Oh, aye.

Those of a nervous disposition, look away now:

And for the avoidance of doubt, I'm posting this for information purposes and certainly not directing these ribbons at anyone.

You're brave posting those Arabella, they'll be cutting your clothes off tomorrow to make sure you have no dangerous stickers concealed in your bra.

Your assertion that she assaulted someone could be considered libellous. You are victim blaming and minimising the proven gross(?) misconduct of police officers.

Absolutely this. Pretty poor conduct from a police officer. And sadly what I have grown to expect.

The police force is broken.

@Felix125 not sure if this has been asked…but are you male? I can only think that you are, because you keep defending the process of the arrest and strip search - as it should have been done. As a female, I am reading the description of the reason to strip search and that she received visible injuries from the strip search with absolute horror. As females we know that our bodies can be used as a way to ‘punish’ us. We live in threat of that everyday of our lives. It is clear from her description and the language around the incident that the strip search was acted out in a way that was to ‘punish’ her. You can defend process and protocol until the end of days, but we all know it’s subject to the individuals carrying out that process. Women here are telling you what happened is appalling. Women here are telling you that they would feel violated. Women here are telling you that this is a fine example of why we don’t trust the police. If you are a woman I apologise, but if you are, maybe you need some self reflection on your internal misogyny. I presume you are a man though because you just don’t get how horrifying we all find her account of events - it reads like our worst nightmare - something that should not happen at the hands of those that we should hold in the highest regard. Women are telling you we don’t trust the police - if you can’t hear us…then that is why the police service is in the mess it’s in.

@Felix125

Sexual assault definition:

A person (A) commits an offence if—
they intentionally touche another person & the touching is sexual

In this case it was a strip search whilst in custody. So it will need to proven that the sexual assault was done for sexual gratification by the officers and not just a search process.

According to the Met:

The overall definition of sexual or indecent assault is an act of physical, psychological and emotional violation in the form of a sexual act, inflicted on someone without their consent...
Not all cases of sexual assault involve violence, cause physical injury or leave visible marks. Sexual assault can cause severe distress, emotional harm and injuries which can't be seen – all of which can take a long time to recover from. This is why we use the term 'assault', and treat reports just as seriously as those of violent, physical attacks.

Yes, he's a male @Whatthechicken.

@TooBigForMyBoots

Yes, he's a male *@Whatthechicken*.

@Felix125 please, please listen. You’re not listening. Women are shouting it out loud! You’ve not experienced how it feels to be afraid of the police as a woman, we are telling you. As I tell my kids sometimes ‘shut your mouth for one minute, and open your ears’. You could make things better if you just bloody listen.

You can shout as loud as you like @Whatthechicken, he can't hear you. He is so enmeshed and practiced in police culture that he can't see the problem. And I think he knows, deep down, that "decent cops" are a massive part of the problem.

@TooBigForMyBoots

Yes, he's a male *@Whatthechicken*.

Blimey. Doesn’t reflect well at all does it? But I understand now. Dr Duff also said that the tape released wasn't even the worst of the ‘banter’ she witnessed. Apparently male officers were talking about the size of their penises, real school playground stuff but given the circs I imagine that could come across as very threatening.

Just how de-sensitised to people's emotions do you have to be to read this thread and still defend "due process" fuckssake.

I'm hiding this thread now because the minimisation and continued victim blaming is causing harm to my body / brain

ideas.ted.com/peoples-words-and-actions-can-actually-shape-your-brain-a-neuroscientist-explains-how/?fbclid=IwAR3Fafm0L-1oKs2ymb1VmJjZLQHNLmZq4gLsbM54x1l98jpyNA4wEom59Ds

@TooBigForMyBoots

She didn't obstruct or assault a police officer. A court saw the evidence, heard the testimonies of everyone involved and acquitted her of all charges.

Your assertion that she assaulted someone could be considered libellous. You are victim blaming and minimising the proven gross(?) misconduct of police officers.

I didn't she did

I said that is what she was arrested for

We can't fast forward time to see if she will be found guilty at court before we arrest. So she is arrested on suspicion of that offence. In this case it was assault police & obstruction

[quote Whatthechicken]@Felix125 not sure if this has been asked…but are you male? I can only think that you are, because you keep defending the process of the arrest and strip search - as it should have been done. As a female, I am reading the description of the reason to strip search and that she received visible injuries from the strip search with absolute horror. As females we know that our bodies can be used as a way to ‘punish’ us. We live in threat of that everyday of our lives. It is clear from her description and the language around the incident that the strip search was acted out in a way that was to ‘punish’ her. You can defend process and protocol until the end of days, but we all know it’s subject to the individuals carrying out that process. Women here are telling you what happened is appalling. Women here are telling you that they would feel violated. Women here are telling you that this is a fine example of why we don’t trust the police. If you are a woman I apologise, but if you are, maybe you need some self reflection on your internal misogyny. I presume you are a man though because you just don’t get how horrifying we all find her account of events - it reads like our worst nightmare - something that should not happen at the hands of those that we should hold in the highest regard. Women are telling you we don’t trust the police - if you can’t hear us…then that is why the police service is in the mess it’s in.[/quote]
So, in this case - if people here are 'happy' the arrest was lawful (as stated in some previous posts on here) but she is refusing to give her details - can you see the issue custody have in safeguarding her?

Can you see the issues they will have to ensure she is not concealing any items if they know nothing about her?

What would you expect to have happened in this case? Bearing in mind it wasn't long ago that a custody sergeant was shot dead at work by someone concealing an item.

@TooBigForMyBoots

You can shout as loud as you like *@Whatthechicken*, he can't hear you. He is so enmeshed and practiced in police culture that he can't see the problem. And I think he knows, deep down, that "decent cops" are a massive part of the problem.

So does that mean we shouldn't strip search any female?

At 16:40 today you said in response to my comment about women being told to "challenge the police, yes, but not to the point of assaulting & obstructing them. Dr. Duff did not assault or obstruct any officer.

At 17:34 you wrote The handing the card isn't the issue Its the assault on police & obstruct police which is Dr. Duff did not assault or obstruct the police.

And this is why women are scared of the police.

I was going to try to demonstrate it another way but I won’t bother.

Whatever happened with the arrest, that poor women should not have felt that she was sexually assaulted upon search. No way should she have received physical injuries through a search.

You’re not listening. You won’t listen. You know better, Fuck women.