Expose of West Yorkshire police force

[EweSurname]

An uploaded an expose of West Yorkshire police force and their hate crime strategies

The thread it came from:

twitter.com/CatsLov14393186/status/1132790914794033160

Wow! West Yorkshire Police Service is operating under extremely crazy, guidance from somewhere. Perhaps an FOI is needed to discover from where / whom that guidance came?

Other police services around UK are subject to similar guidance?

The caller has an extremely good case against a police officer.

The sergeant is taking the complaint.

The sergenat gives the correct information about why the police record incidents and crimes in the way that they do - government guidelines. He tells her that individual police officers have no choice but to comply. She has a go at him even though she keeps saying 'I'm not having a go". He is extremely reasonable and patient and prepared to set out the policy, practice and procedures in a pleasant matter over the course of 30 minutes.

He says that he has his own opinions on the matter but that it would be unprofessional to reveal them.

It's almost as if she doesn't know that the police have been given instructions about self identification. It's pointless haranguing a sole police sergeant for the government's directions, surely? It's pointless shouting at him.

I wish she had stuck to her original complaint about the abusive police officer from West Yorkshire Police, rather than a debate on the rights and wrongs of guidance from the Home Office. The complaint is the ONLY thing that he can influence and investigate. "I cannot do anything about how they identify", he says.

If this is the expose, then it shows that WYP have been saddled with a crock of sticky stuff. She ends by saying 'I feel in my heart, that we're on the same side, bless you'.

Further it seems that West Yorkshire Police has no knowledge of the civil law that is the Equality Act 2010, which it would need to have for employment [HR] purposes, wherein the sexes are defined as:

man = male of any age and
woman = female of any age

The protected characteristic of "gender reassignment", which relates to the Gender Recognition Act 2004, is specific to transsexuals only [section 7 Equality Act: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/2/1/4 ] .

It is erroneous to record any person who has not obtained a GRC as the opposite sex.

Whatever guidance has been issued to our police services is erroneous.

For the record here is the Explanatory Note associated with Equality Act 2010, section 7: Gender Reassignment:

Section 7: Gender reassignment
Effect
41.This section defines the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act as where a person has proposed, started or completed a process to change his or her sex. A transsexual person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

42.The section also explains that a reference to people who have or share the common characteristic of gender reassignment is a reference to all transsexual people. A woman making the transition to being a man and a man making the transition to being a woman both share the characteristic of gender reassignment, as does a person who has only just started out on the process of changing his or her sex and a person who has completed the process.

Background
43.This section replaces similar provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 but changes the definition by no longer requiring a person to be under medical supervision to come within it.

Examples
A person who was born physically male decides to spend the rest of his life living as a woman. He declares his intention to his manager at work, who makes appropriate arrangements, and she then starts life at work and home as a woman. After discussion with her doctor and a Gender Identity Clinic, she starts hormone treatment and after several years she goes through gender reassignment surgery. She would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

A person who was born physically female decides to spend the rest of her life as a man. He starts and continues to live as a man. He decides not to seek medical advice as he successfully ‘passes’ as a man without the need for any medical intervention. He would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

This means that a man simply declaring himself to be a woman is not subject to the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment" and should never be recorded and treated as such.

Our criminal justice system should already know this, for goodness' sake!.

This is all so fucking dirty I actually feel like need a wash

I probably fucking correctly sexed as a mortal sin or something there.

Something something Barracker something something thing-that-must-not-be-mentioned something something.

Oh well at least it's not the weekend.

Again:

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

The Equality Act 2010 is very clear. It explicitly treats "gender reassignment" differently for natal men and natal women, for very obvious reasons. The examples given in the Explanatory Notes explain that in undeniable terms.

Beyond those Explanatory Notes in the Equality Act 2010, the police should never be recording any male as female unless that male can provide a Birth Certificate which proves they are in possession of a GRC.

Until that Birth Certificate is provided that male should be recorded and treated as a male.

Basic common sense and written in law as well.

Here are the Explanatory Notes associated with the Gender Recognition Act 2004. Note the explicit use if the term "transsexual".

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/7/notes/division/2

And, a reminder that the GRA 2004 restricts its purpose for "transsexuals" to the confines of that law; ie: marriage, claiming benefits and claiming state pension.

Reported m'sen for accurate language spoken in temper!

(Sigh.)

UK law is explicit via GRA 2004 and Equality Act 2010:

Only those who have obtained a GRC have legal recognition as being "transsexual" and are then subject to the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment".

A person subjectively declaring himself or herself to be "transsexual" is not adequate to achieve the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment".

Believe in innate gender, or else — say the police.
Jonny Best, 15/11/18

The police have launched their National Trans Tool Kit — a portfolio of definitions, policies and best practice recommendations developed in partnership with Stonewall, the National LGBT Police Network, and the Police Superintendent’s Association. Most of it focuses on how trans officers should be accommodated in their professional roles, but there are also aspects which have worrying implications for the public. What is most concerning is that the authors of the toolkit appear to think that the police are empowered to write new law compelling the public to accept transgender concepts and beliefs.

medium.com/@JonnnyBest/believe-in-innate-gender-or-else-say-the-police-4237baf692da

Police trans tool kit here:

www.lgbtpolice.uk/resources

For the record here is the Explanatory Note associated with Equality Act 2010,

Apples and Pears

The Equality Act is a civil law that has nothing to do with the police. The police enforce the criminal law.

The civil law is about suing for damages (among other things) at a Tribunal.

The criminal law is about prosecuting offenders at a trial in the Magistrates or Crown Court.

There are two sets of 'protected characteristics'

1. The Civil law - nine, including sex
2. The Criminal law - five, does not include sex.

Time and time again, I see the police criticised for not enforcing the Equality Act. They can't - it's got nothing to do with them. You have to employ a solicitor to enforce the Equality Act.

And the police are ignorant of UK law, in that case. We need to discover who has been giving our police services such information. The Fair Cop case will discover this, no doubt.

And there we have it. A woman threatened by a police officer on record on you tube and Twitter fir everyone to hear for not calling a person she had sex with who had a penis , a woman.

Shes been gas lit on the phone now twice. Shes the victim not the ex.

Shocking stuff

And what did he mean by " people make mistakes"

So that old lady they were talking about egi reported what she saw with her own 2 eyes was mistaken when reporting it as a man?

So again complicit in mental and emotional abuse of victims.

The police do not enforce the Equality Act but they must comply with it! It is completely wrong to say it has nothing to do with them.

theOtherPamAyres

The issue here is from what source has our police services received such guidance. Yes, our police services uphold the criminal law, but they also need to be aware of some civil law because, at times, that impacts on criminal law, as is the case with people subjectively declaring their "transsexual" status.

In the UK no person can claim to be the opposite sex from that of their natal sex recorded on their Birth Certificate unless they have a GRC and a subsequent Birth Certificate that proves this. [Note that the GRC only proves a change of status for the purpose of marriage, claiming benefits and claiming state pension.]

Police [and other parts of our criminal justice system] currently, are erroneously recording and treating people based on subjective hearsay. That is not what UK civil law permits.

Police had asked the public to look out for Ella Davies who was on the run.

twitter.com/DotAtomosBlog/status/1130569106728443904

The police went into detail about the offender's motorbike, in order to help the public find the offender. No further information was given.

The police didn't mention that Ella Davies was formerly Daniel Reeves, a convicted sex offender.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-48338381

Surprisingly, no member of the public spotted the offender while the offender was at large.

Further it seems that West Yorkshire Police has no knowledge of the civil law ...

This is fair enough. Their job is to prevent, detect and investigate crime, catch criminals etc. I'd expect them to have a good working knowledge of criminal law but there's no reason to expect anyone outside of HR to have an in depth knowledge of the EA or any other area of civil law.

The woman was contacted because of a complaint of malicious communication. She'll have been given 'advice' based on hate crime legislation and its farty little brother 'hate incident' (not sure if this is law or guidance) - these all come under criminal law, not civil law.

Nevertheless, all police officers should have a basic understanding of the EA because they provide a public function so are themselves bound by it in the way they treat the public.

The woman might possibly have a discriminatory harassment case against them if she can show the police created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for her because of her sex (section 26 - harassment). This would be difficult because they have also treated Harry the Owl just as shittily.

That would be a civil case though, she'd have to make a complaint to IPCC or use the civil court procedure.

Yes, there is also clearly a conflict here between civil law and criminal law. And this depends on advice given to our police services about where civil law currently stands. So who is giving our police services erroneous advice that causes this conflict between civil and criminal law?

Civil law says one thing and related criminal law is saying something else.

Where does this conflict leave the public, bearing in mind that our police services perform their role only with public consent?

I've listened to this and she's barking up the wrong tree.

Have to award that police officer with a medal for patience though....

also need to be aware of some civil law because, at times, that impacts on criminal law, as is the case with people subjectively declaring their "transsexual" status

The sergeant answered this one for the caller. He said that there is no law against declaring that you are trans, even when it's as plain as day that you are not. He's right!

He's also right when he says that the police can't judge or decide to ignore a man when he says that he is a woman. They HAVE TO record the person's self-serving description of themselves and have no discretion. They have no discretion either about what constitutes a hate crime or incident - the complainant decides that. (Any discretion was taken away after the Stephen Lawrence case).

This isn't something of their choosing. They don't get to make the laws. They can't refuse to comply with directions from the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, CPS and Select Committees.

The caller has a solid case for a formal complaint about PC Cavalier (sp?). There are some serious questions WYP needs to answer about the caller's treatment in the context of their Violence Against Women Strategy. I was so disappointed when she went off on a tangent about the Equality Act