If we ever needed more proof that DV and rape

[JustAnotherManicNameChange]

Are not taken seriously. Crime in name only, and not important enough to make the list for emergency crime. Nope, they get listed alongside anti social behaviour and complaints. I don't think missing persons should be on that list either btw.

Just deal with it online and don't bother the very busy operators and police officers with pesky allegations of rape,sexual assault and domestic abuse. There's more important crimes out there, don't you know?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-65039349?fbclid=IwAR2XbfNUjEAXn4x2-ptv8l7TD7Ay8iZbIuAdjBmDUSLlOO_71BhLh9uLS-o

Yeah and then when you delay reporting it - the police then question you why and if it ever gets to court it will be used against you!!

The campaign was Click B4 U Call, not Think B4 you call. It was about seeing if your crime better fit the online reporting option (in the past and not in progress and nothing an emergency response could do at the time). They were encouraging people to look at the option of online reporting to see if the enquiry they had could be dealt with through online reporting. They never said that anyone couldn't call 911 and reiterated that if any crime was in progress or if anyone was in danger or if it could get heated or violent or if anyone was in ned of immediate support. The reporting page actually asks if any of the above apply https://www.kent.police.uk/ro/report/ocr/af/how-to-report-a-crime/

Amazing how people can twist this into a positive thing and brush it aside

Amazing how low rape reports have fallen because clearly the police can't be bothered 🙄 and made it very obvious with this sign

No-one is saying you shouldn't be able to report it online but you shouldn't be lumped in with graffiti and crimes that can wait

They already treat rape victims badly enough

We are not twisting it - the more options you have to report things, the better. That way the number of reports should increase

Yes - the notice should have been worded a lot better, but it is giving the public more options of how to report.

It isn't really lumped in with anything. Hate crimes and missing persons are also on that list. The list isn't in order of priority of the enquiry or the crime. There is zero prioritizing the items on the list - that is simply people's interpretations. It isn't numbered, there is no reference to these not being important - just that enquiries CAN be reported using the online form. It isn't all under one reporting form. Each crime listed has a separate reporting process online and likely a separate investigative process once the enquiry is reported. When you go to the website to do a report, it is very clear that online reporting is not to be used for any emergency situation.

People can choose to get their knickers in a knot about what ever they want but having the option for anyone who has experienced any of these crimes in the past to use an online reporting form if they wish is not something that I have a pitchfork out about.

You do realise it's not having the option to report online we object to? We also have no interest or intention in having it removed from victims.

So not only you managed to spin this into a positive, our concern is being spun as wanting victims to have less options.

JustAnotherManicNameChange
You do realise it's not having the option to report online we object to?

But you can report online, as the poster states. Or you can phone. Which ever is the better option

I don't understand your argument.

It wasn't spun in any way into victims having less options. Only you and a few others spun it that way.

Only you and a few others spun it that way

Including the BBC. When I read the article just now it seemed obvious to me that the writer was trying to spin this as something it wasn't.

It seems very clear to me that it was a botched, but well-meaning attempt to make crime reporting more efficient. Not an attempt to downgrade rape and DV's status to a' lesser crime' (nor does it reveal anything about the polices or society's view that they are lesser crimes).

I wonder how Catherine whatshername from the WEP found out about it. I'd lay a bet that the journalist called her for comment, and she wouldn't have known anything about this before she got the call, which probably went something like 'Catherine, I wondered if you'd like to comment on Kent Police's recent poster that lists rape alongside other crimes that shouldn't be reported as emergencies...'. And then we get the police officer's response directly beneath Catherine's...

Such transparently bad journalism, formulaically written, and biased despite its hamfisted attempt at 'balance'. And people fall for this crap all the time. Honestly I've got myself all worked up about this now! I'd better go and have a cup of tea.

Not hamfisted actually. Performative.

I honestly hate this sort of journalism, it offends me because I'm in an adjacent business myself. I am very lucky to deal with
great journalists on a daily basis who do genuine and important investigative work.

I'll shut up now and get that tea!

@VoodooQualities

I agree there was an agenda in the article. I am just surprised how many people are saying they actually though this poster meant that rape and DV are non emergencies and can only be reported online. Missing persons is also on that list. I am suprised that didn't also get people angry as the same line of thinking would be that police don't care my child just went missing and all I can do is report it online and hope someone eventually does something. I find it odd that those saying they truly thought this was the police saying rape and DV are not emergencies and are the same i importance as graffiti are also not up in arms that a missing person is also not an emergency and that if their child disappeared, police wouldn't care and they couldn't call 999.

I wonder if it's a case of them focusing on crimes where they realistically have a high chance of a conviction.

My workmate had somebody try and break in using a ladder - they thought she was out. They ran off leaving the ladder so she had fingerprints and his face on cctv. The visiting officer said the guy was well known locally but they couldn't do anything as the fingerprint team will only attend if blood had been spilled.

The problem with fingerprints is that you will have to eliminate anyone else who has touched the ladder in its lifetime. Also, you can't lift fingerprints off other fingerprints - where blood is more unique to the incident itself as it will not be dried out. The picture would have been a better chance and should have been circulated.

I don't think its about focusing on conviction rates - especially with offences like rape. Conviction rates aren't the priority for the victims and we shouldn't be putting any pressure on victims to pursue the complaint to boost our conviction rates. A lot of victims don't want to pursue the complaint through the courts as they don't want to re-live the offence over & over. But they do want support and have the offence recorded. Some are happy that the offence has been taken seriously and the offender arrested.

Of course - if the victim does want to pursue the complaint to the courts, we will support them all the way, but we shouldn't be putting any pressure on them to do so.

The sign is a clear indicator that, from 1st to last contact with the Police & Judicial system in the UK a female survivor of an assault or rape will be dismissed & the crime will be ignored.

Where does it say that on the sign?

The sign is giving options of how to report the crime - not that it will automatically be dismissed.

Ah, yes. But misgender a man and "hurt his feelings" and five cops will turn up at your door to arrest you. So at least the menz are protected.

The notice is about how to report various incidents & crimes

Forgive me if I have missed it, but where as this ever happened - 5 cops arresting someone for misgendering a man?