Harry the owl visited by police

[Imnobody4]

This whole hate speech/incident law is completely out of control. This is sinister.
Check out @HarryTheOwl’s Tweet: twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1088144870991114241?s=09

A lot of police forces have been given dodgy as fuck advice. Disgusting that they don't have to ability to look up the equalities act.
No wonder so many crimes are unsolved.

and i would agree with that wholeheartedly ereshkigal

enlighten me please captain. what are we not solving and why.

I blame Tony Blair...

Why are police forces being trained by Stonewall who misrepresent the law and have been actively lobbying for the removal of sex as a protected characteristic, in addition to having some very dodgy people on their trans advisory panel?

smallhaddock

i really liked him till the war thing. bastard.

all i can say was i wasnt trained by stonewall. (obvs)

and actually wouldnt take much in now if i was. id blame senility. or something.

we did have some trans bloke wheeled in who was identifying as a woman. was sad. a bit thought provoking. and then business as usual as i had wayyyy more going on in my own life at that point to give much of a toss tbh.

There are two issues here:

1. General criticism of the current police guidance over hate incidents.

2. The specific actions of PC Gul in Harry's case.

Nobody is saying the current police guidance is your average plod's fault. They have to do what the guidelines and the law say.

Many people are saying that PC Gul went above and beyond in several ways: by contacting the employer instead of Harry direct, by referring to the complainant as a victim, by telling Harry he had to believe anti-science bullcrap or he might be in further trouble with the law, by telling Harry he is not allowed proscribed thoughts.

Additionally, PC Gul is an officer who goes around giving presentations about this stuff - not a job he'd be doing for the force if he wasn't fully signed up to the ideology, presumably.

So there are two things happening on this thread:

1. people are discovering they're not keen on the current police guidance re: hate incidents

2. people feeling that PC Gul overreached even considering that guidance

what are we not solving and why

The case of why Humberside police left sex off of their equalities guidelines.

The case of who provided training to them.

I can tell you those without even sending a fourth request.

Going request**

Foi*

Hate crimes are covered by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Criminal Justice Act 2003 not the Equality Act. There is speculation that the definition could be widened again to include misogyny but I’m not sure whether that’s a good idea or not since I think the whole thing should be scrapped. Having said that adding misogyny would make things very interesting!

well. if this brings about a change ill happily welcome it tbh.

Popychyk
I do have a recognised sen so I may be missing something. (Hysterically it is a protected characteristic! )

What ? What am I not reading in the room!

toetotoe i will watch the outcome with interest. i agree with you.

Yes, me too.

I think whatever people's views on this are, it is no good for anyone to have a UK Police force as a laughing stock. People need to have faith in the police.

The twitter responses to all of Humberbeat's tweets since this happened are eye-opening. People are openly laughing at them - yet they're doubling down.

I think the feeling is that people don't want to hear that "non-crimes" are taking up police resources, while victims of burglary etc are just given a crime number and not even investigated or visited.

i challenge the thinking thing right here and now

do the far right - the holocaust deniers and the nazis... do they have a right to think what ever they like and not be challenged?

I may not like what you say, but I fight to the death for your right to say it.

Hate crimes? Yes, they should be looked into, as should any crime.

Hate incidents? Should the police have to record/investigate these? Probably not.

By all means listen to the complainant in both cases, but surely a police officer should be able to tell the difference between the two and be allowed to act accordingly.

I can see what rytonsister is saying - at the moment, the police are currently not permitted that discretion. That's the problem. This is badly thought out legislation and the police are obliged to comply with it as it stands.

PC Gul on the other hand, appears to have overstepped the mark. However we should all be thankful to him for bringing this into the public arena. I wish you well, Harry, in your objectives - we're right behind you.

Oxytocind

"Oh I personally think the police are part of the problem."

I believe they are, and there is one thing about this whole charade which really bugs me. Keith Hunter is an ex policeman who is now the Police and Crime Commissioner for Humberside, which I believe is a good example of "conflict of interest", a bit like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.
He has been there since 2016, and immediately gave the Chief Constable, Justine Curran, six months to sort out the force described as "inadequate".

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-36259679

"However, it reissued a statement by Ms Curran from last week, which said: "I look forward to working with Keith Hunter in serving our local communities and keeping them safe."

I wonder if Mr Hunter thinks this is a suitable approach to serving local communities and keeping them safe?
Maybe the police force was rated "inadequate" because they were spending too much time investigating vexatious complaints, instead of tackling real crime?

reposting what Lang said above as it's a spot on analysis:

LangCleg Tue 29-Jan-19 22:27:03
There are two issues here:

1. General criticism of the current police guidance over hate incidents.

2. The specific actions of PC Gul in Harry's case.

Nobody is saying the current police guidance is your average plod's fault. They have to do what the guidelines and the law say.

Many people are saying that PC Gul went above and beyond in several ways: by contacting the employer instead of Harry direct, by referring to the complainant as a victim, by telling Harry he had to believe anti-science bullcrap or he might be in further trouble with the law, by telling Harry he is not allowed proscribed thoughts.

Additionally, PC Gul is an officer who goes around giving presentations about this stuff - not a job he'd be doing for the force if he wasn't fully signed up to the ideology, presumably.

So there are two things happening on this thread:

1. people are discovering they're not keen on the current police guidance re: hate incidents

2. people feeling that PC Gul overreached even considering that guidance

*ryton

Thanks for telling your story on here. It's important to hear from those who are on the front line; I'm not in the least surprised that it has made you ill. I really hope your new job is much better for your health*

Echo this. I don't think PC Gul is cut from the same cloth.

Thank you for the support 💐

I actually agree with what cressida dick said about hate incidents a while ago - that it shouldn't be taking precedent over crime or something along those lines.

I don't think it's really a police matter if I'm honest.

Everything now is totally "victim led" so if you say to me you're a victim of a crime or incident and you want police action then I as a cop am obligated to act.

That's fine to a degree - but I've know instances of things being crimes which are utterly laughable.

The last one that springs to mind was crimed as a harassment because a man was annoying his partner by making chicken noises at night.

And that was actually allocated to a colleague to "investigate "
Luckily my colleague said absolutely no way - but this is where it's going!
Definitely time for a rethink.

I will now have to name change
But will watch with interest.

Keith Hunter is much better than our last PCC who was a local Tory politician - much, much, much, much better. I don’t agree in principle with the creation of PCCs though - the old system of police authorities was better and I don’t think anyone had a problem with them anyway.

I still think it’s the fault of the legislation and national guidelines. Don’t make PC Gul some sort of scapegoat - especially when he has no means to defend himself against what people are saying about him.

Keith Hunter is much better than our last PCC who was a local Tory politician - much, much, much, much better.

He may be better in some ways and these ways may especially matter to some perspectives.

He is not responding well to this situation and it may illustrate a significant blindspot with regards impact on women.

Don’t make PC Gul some sort of scapegoat - especially when he has no means to defend himself against what people are saying about him.

He clearly drank the Koolaid about lady brains. He chose to regurgitate it to Harry, went on to question Harry's thoughts - and then spoke to a national newspaper. Stupid is as stupid does.

Keith Hunters twitter account makes him completely unfit for public office imho - he should resign immediately.