Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Harry the Owl and others launching high court battle

209 replies

Nephilim1964 · 12/05/2019 10:49

Link to story below

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7018915/Businessman-launches-landmark-High-Court-battle-overhaul-official-rules-hate-crimes.html#comments

OP posts:
SmallHaddockAndChips · 07/06/2019 17:08

The Humberside Police Cadets scheme sounds more like some sort of wokeness brainwashing programme to me 🙄

JackyHolyoake · 07/06/2019 17:28

It strikes me that someone should make Humberside Police aware of the Gender Recognition Act 2004:

Section 22: Prohibition on disclosure of information

subsection 4c: But it is not an offence under this section to disclose protected information relating to a person if—

the information is protected information by virtue of subsection (2)(b) and the person by whom the disclosure is made does not know or believe that a full gender recognition certificate has been issued,

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/section/22

See also Section 9 Explanatory Notes, subsection 28:

"Subsection (2) provides amplification of subsection (1), making clear that the recognition is not retrospective, so the certificate does not rewrite the gender history of the transsexual person, and that the new gender applies for the interpretation of enactments, instruments and documents made before as well as after the issue of a certificate"

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/notes/division/4/9

JackyHolyoake · 07/06/2019 17:32

So yes, so-called "dead-naming" is irrelevant; as is the "pronouns" issue,
or what some prefer to label as "misgendering", since history of the person cannot be erased + Legal Fiction of a GRC does not change that history.

Birdsfoottrefoil · 07/06/2019 17:42

Been banned from twitter for saying men who identify as trans should use the men’s loos alongside other men.

Could you screenshot the ‘transphobic’ tweets?

Jux · 07/06/2019 19:25

Oh dear, just did a little unmentionable thing on the Fair Cop crowdfunder thingy.

It is fun to see mansplaining routed in black and white, especially so soundly; and even more fun when it is so clear that the explainer is not blessed with brains or facts. Thank you all for amusing me all afternoon when I have been pretty much bed-bound Star and congratulations on your patience,

Treefloof · 07/06/2019 20:22

It's just mindboggling how anyone could defend this abuse of police powers. How does this constitute part of a "hate incident"?

twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1136909760647835648
I just googled this because I forgot the name (menopause strikes again) and it's now listed as CJ

How can that be?

Popchyk · 08/06/2019 11:09

Harry intends to retweet all the Tweets this weekend.

twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1137143092757372929

"Hey @Humberbeat Quick heads up: those tweets you decided were transphobic and needing intervention? I’m retweeting them all. Every one. To several thousand. I’ll be in all weekend if you want to send the Phobe Squad round".

If someone complains again, then surely Humberside cops will speak to Harry about his thinking again surely? In order to be consistent. If it was a hate incident last time then surely the exact same material is a hate incident this time?

If it was a non-crime before, then is it still a non-crime? Less of a non-crime?

Certainly look forward to Humberside cops explaining their thinking on that one.

Popchyk · 10/06/2019 09:37

Harry is continuing to publish the "evidence" against him. Which is really strange because the cops haven't contacted him this time. Somehow, and for some reason that nobody knows, Tweets that were transphobic 6 months ago are no longer transphobic now.

Plus, the cops are saying that they simultaneously assessed the Tweets as transphobic and also didn't review the Tweets at all.

“There were 30 tweets reported to us of a transphobic nature.” 28 January

“It cannot be inferred that we reviewed the tweets.” 6 June

twitter.com/HarryTheOwl/status/1137985003730677760

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 10/06/2019 10:14

I thought the whole point of hate crimes was that it was in the eye of the beholder. So if someone somewhere thought the tweets are offensive that is all that matters. So the tweets are hateful because someone said they were so there is no need for the police to review them as their opinion is not relevant?

Datun · 10/06/2019 10:48

so there is no need for the police to review them as their opinion is not relevant?

Well that does appear to be the logic, yes. It's absolute nonsense.

Hopefully the fact that there are so many people leveraging this nonsense, which Harry is now pointing out, will be enough to address The entire 'eye of the beholder' premise.

How they ever thought it would not be used to harass people, is beyond me.

Jux · 10/06/2019 11:57

Someone reported a disability 'hate crime' against me quite recently. I had to work quite hard to persuade the police that, vis a vis that incident, I in no way and at no point felt intimidated, threatened, hated, frightened etc.

It is a box ticking exercise to make the police look woke and with it and these non-crimes are dealt with much more quickly than real investigations into real crimes.

theOtherPamAyres · 10/06/2019 12:32

The entire 'eye of the beholder' premise

Successive governments have had a healthy suspicion of the police. In a nutshell, various scandals and tragedies showed that the police were unable to recognise racism and homophobia in particular.

Government decided to take away any discretion from the police. As a consequence, the complainant gets to decide. Hate crimes and incidents occur in the eyes of the beholder.

The complainant is not the same as the victim - anyone's perception will suffice whether they are a bystander, witness, family member, friend, anyone.

The policy assumed that perpetrators would be brought to justice/warned if only the police had the right mind-set. If you subscribe to that view (and many people do) then so far, so good.

The hate crime policy is an important one because it gives the Government some legitimacy and support from 'communities' affected by racism, disability and homophobia etc, where there is mistrust of the police.

They won't give up that support easily. And they don't trust the police anyway.

There is a lot at stake for a Government that wants to redesign hate crime/incidents and I believe that they are prepared for 'collatoral damage' in people like Posie, Glinner, Harry, Margaret and the rest.

Birdsfoottrefoil · 10/06/2019 12:33

A hate crime require a crime the ‘hate’ bit relates to the motivation for the crime. Harry has not committed a crime, the police admit he has not committed a crime.

theOtherPamAyres · 10/06/2019 13:19

Harry has not committed a crime, the police admit he has not committed a crime.

There doesn't have to be a crime.

The police were investigating a hate incident. A non-crime.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 10/06/2019 13:32

The police were investigating

......Laughable if they didn't even look at the tweets....

Datun · 10/06/2019 13:39

Government decided to take away any discretion from the police. As a consequence, the complainant gets to decide. Hate crimes and incidents occur in the eyes of the beholder.

If the police can't be trusted to decide if something is a crime, and conclude that the word huh is, then something has gone wrong.

I genuinely don't see how the eye of the beholder could ever work. Anyone, with any kind of malicious intent, can tie the police up, full time, until the end of time.

And are.

If the police are incapable of deciding whether or not something is homophobic or racist, they need to be trained better.

Birdsfoottrefoil · 10/06/2019 13:44

If the police are incapable of deciding whether or not something is homophobic or racist, they need to be trained better.

Or the law needs to be written with clear definitions not left open to interpretation

2BoysandaCairn · 10/06/2019 15:04

I don't know why I am back, but Harry the Owl was investigated for a hate incident, which is not automatically a hate crime, but can be.
Please look at Citizen's advise, they have the law as it stands today.
Hate incidents are defined by the Police and CPS,
one of the CPS definitions of a hate incident, according to Citizen advise is
verbal abuse, including offensive jokes
online abuse for instead facebook or twitter
CPS/Police guidance says anyone can report a hate incident if they believe the act was motivated by hostility or prejudice against disability, race, religion, transgender identity or sexual orientation
It is the right of the complaint to have this recorded as a hate incident. all police forces record on these personal characteristics, some on extra ones.
I think Harry tweet met one of above reasons to be reported, so was and was recorded as a hate incident.

Further CPS/Police guidelines say a hate incident can be also a hate crime, and the Police may investigate further, and hate crimes will be prosecuted by CPS.
Though the Police/CPS may decide there was no hate crime and take it no further.
The Citizen Advise ask people to report hate incidents, as they can often lead to hate crimes, they say even if it isn't a hate crime the police may be able to help the victim further.

I know the above is the law of England, and how the Police/CPS work, my eldest has a CSE and hate crime booklet from CPS, which was given to all officers, PCSO and cadets in Humberside, which explains all the above over 50 pages.

So I know you think I'm deranged, but seeing Harry meet the hate incident threshold, and a Police officer has the right to further investigate, how you all think he was victimised is beyond me.
In fact I would say most of faircop cases are correct under CPS guidelines.

Or do you believe the Police in these cases should just ignore their guidelines, because it suits your GC sensibilities.

Because right now, we are trying to convince eldest son, who has letters of thanks from Care workers, social workers, former and current Police officers and specialist youth workers, all saying he would make an excellent front line officer, from his cadet performance, to do anything but become a copper. I even suggested Bomb disposal with RAF, because this thread and RL, proves what ever the police do they are always blamed.
Speak to someone posting tweets with an hate incident report, male bastard
women attacked, police don't do enough to stop,
CSE police blamed,
Fights at football and in street, police don't stop it,
Terroism at Manchester/London police's fault the bombers weren't stopped.
No way do we want our caring(CAMHS treated) lad facing that, it also why no one wants to be a social worker.
50% of ex officer's tell him don't do it, because the 75% public treat you like shit and don't respect you.
You be left with kids like him and lots of the female cadets walking away, and you just end up with macho white cops, who still believe in Life on Mars policing.

2BoysandaCairn · 10/06/2019 15:10

All the guidelines on how to deal with Hate Incidents/crimes go back to the cases like Stephen Lawrence and institutional racism.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 10/06/2019 15:13

I don't know why I am back

Because we haven't shut up and kept in our place.

Harry the Owl was investigated for a hate incident

He was harassed, there was no investigation, the police apparently didn't even read the tweets in question.

Unless you are telling us not even looking at the evidence counts as investigation.

DancingRaven · 10/06/2019 15:13

This has really got under your skin, hasn't it?

Anyway, great news about the unmentionables, good stuff. Be great to have clear guidelines so everyone is treated fairly

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 10/06/2019 15:15

2boys

What do you think you repeating the same nonsense about your boys is actually going to achieve?

We are not responsible for that fair cop campaign, we are not running it, and you seem to be driving people to donate.

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 10/06/2019 15:21

The police in this case we're in the wrong, very wrong.
If you didn't agree you wouldn't be posting here trying to rewrite what happened and worrying about payouts.

JackyHolyoake · 10/06/2019 15:49

2Boys

Does the CAB or the police, or any other organisation, provide a definition of "transgender identity" that is agreed to in UK law, please?

JackyHolyoake · 10/06/2019 15:55

Or do you believe the Police in these cases should just ignore their guidelines, because it suits your GC sensibilities.

The case that Fair Cop is bringing is against those "guidelines" from the College of Policing is because it infringes the Human Right to disbelieve the belief of another [Article 9] and it interferes with freedom of expression [article 10].

See Human Rights Act 1998: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1