Police interviewing Caroline Farrow under caution and threatening to arrest her for "misgendering"

[Pimmsnlemonade]

twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1107787009614065664

And, as she says in the thread:

"Meanwhile a group of people have terrified and harassed my family. Doxed my children, made violent and sexual threats, signed me up to porn accounts, did the same to my husband, threatened to visit here. And tumbleweed..."

“I believe a number of trans-antagonistic folk have been - or are going to be - interviewed under caution due to concerns raised re: the nature of their online communications.

I'd really like to see a journo do a proper investigation into this:

How many interviews
Which police forces
Which complainants
Details of complaint
How many cautions issued
Why the CPS is pushing these cases

These are massive own goals but they appear to be too narcissistic to recognise this or they want to get the stats for an increase in 'hate' crimes and so more money to educate schools and obviously the judiciary who are failing to protect the most vulnerable and marginalised community ever. I am beginning to understand how Trump happened....

In the last 10 mind or so...

Julia Hartley-Brewer @ juliahb1
Hey @SurreyPolice & @SurreyPCC @DavidJMunro: this journalist is facing police questioning for calling a BOY by his correct birth gender in a tweet. This is NOT hate speech. It is NOT a crime. It’s not your job to harass people for tweeting words someone else doesn’t like. Stop it

I am sorry this has happened. I will keep checking to see if tgere is any support i can give.

So it seems to have been the scope of the request that led to the Yardley FOI being considered vexatious. "All data" probably is unreasonable.

With reference to posters being surprised that Susie is doing this - I'm not.

Essentially the strategy here seems to be let's throw enough mud hoping some of it will stick.

Remember it costs them nothing to make a complaint to the Police.

However, for those they accuse they cause stress, anxiety and the accumulation of legal costs.

Even if their complaints are not successful, I suspect they feel they have accomplished something by virtue of the négative intercession in someone else's life and the potential that others will be put off from speaking out in fear of being similarly targeted.

It's still #nodebate - just via a more insidious mechanism.

The hope is that after a number of these cases repeatedly fail the Police and CPS stop pandering to them.

In the meantime it's shitty for those being targeted and we need to support them.

There seem to be some police officers who should be at risk of being arrested for wasting police time.

This is absolutely crazy

Remember it costs them nothing to make a complaint to the Police.

Hopefully it will start to cost them credibility and darkness - with each unfounded allegation, more and more sunlight will be shone on this

I would advise every woman to remain vigilant, and be aware that even the most ridiculous, innocent or unknowing tweets are vulnerable to being reported under malicious communications. It is actually frightening what is happening, and the agonising wait for resolution is AWFUL

Julia H-B tweeted again.

twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1107989768338632704

"If you agree, please also tweet @SurreyPolice and @SurreyPCC police and crime commissioner @DavidJMunro to let them know how much you value the right to free speech too. This is dangerous stuff and we mustn’t let it continue".

Let's see what Surrey Police have to say for themselves. Maybe they'd like to explain themselves on Talk Radio?

I believe Miranda read a prepared statement and then answered no comment to all other questions on the advice of her legal representative. Not sure if this would be relevant for your case Caroline.
I'm a bit confused about how they can make you attend for an interview if they don't have enough evidence to arrest you already. Seems to me they wouldn't be able to proceed unless you them the information to make a case.

From this side of the keyboard I'd feel inclined to let them come and arrest me if they think they have the evidence but I'm not sure how I would feel in your shoes.

Please know you have a huge amount of support from feminists and allies. Happy to chip in for legal fees.

Is 'misgendering' only a crime when it involves correctly sexing someone?

I mean, I've lost count of how many times my bank, charities, gasboard and the like have irritatingly misidentified me as 'MrKitties'. Shall I have them all arrested?

Or should Susie Green grow up?

Oh ffs, this is totally ridiculous. I saw it on Twitter this morning and have just dropped in to give my support.

What the hell is going on in policing, serious crimes ignored, your stalking ignored, threats ignored, but holy jesus on a bicycle you've called that women's "daughter" a boy 6mths ago and you're being harassed.

Crazy stuff.

Would be happy to donate a few quid to a crowd funder if needs be.

For posters asking about the basis of this, it is most likely to be:

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/27/section/1

See section 1(1).

When I was a Student Nurse, a person, with M.H. issues, came up to me - put her face a couple of inches away from mine, and said "I fear the future".
That was 40 odd years ago.
Now I know what she meant.
I fear for my daughter and Granddaughter.
Thinking of you

According to Harrop it is

"Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, I’m pleased to point out that an offence under this Act attracts a maximum 2 year custodial sentence."

He is a nasty piece of work. HarrytheOwl is attempting to put him in his place, I see.

This is totally ridiculous. I'm sorry you're going through this - please know how much support you have behind you.

I really hope this gets picked up and reported more widely. I am absolutely astonished that the police think is a suitable use of resources and that legislation has been so widely drafted and poorly thought through to make this even possible.

Caro

Good lord, well that’s Twitter fucked right there then. Guilty on all counts by that legislation!

Caro

Glad Julia H-B is on it. What I'd really like to see is for the papers to connect the dots. Individual cases have gotten a write-up (Hazza etc) but someone needs to cover the pattern as a whole, in detail, and get the police higher-ups on record. Pace Trump, this is actually a witch hunt.

Here's Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003

It says:
3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

So 6 months, not 2 years as Harrop says.

Here's what the legislation says.

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.

(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—
(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
(b)causes such a message to be sent; or
(c)persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

I'm pretty sure Harrop himself is guilty of some, possibly even all of those offences. As is much of Twitter, particularly TRAs.

I'd forgotten about Communications Act 2003 Needmoresleep. One interesting part of Section 127 that the "offender" sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false.

If the CPS are going to use this against Carowiththegoodhair it is ironic that they will be misgendering her: a message that he knows to be false.