My complaint to Sussex Police re their handling of protest at WPUK Brighton Meeting

[WomanBornNotWorn]

I was at the WPUK meeting in Brighton in September.

It was targeted by a group of protestors rather bigger than Saturday's London bunch - well, that one was just a little posy ...

They kicked and punched the windows for several hours, while Julie Bindel's video shows police officers staring into space:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7497869/Anger-crowd-transgender-rights-protesters-intimidate-meeting-womens-rights-group.html

I submitted a complaint that the officers allowed it to go on for a long time (watch the WPUK videos on You Tube and you'll hear it).

I've now received the detailed response from the police:

"Following your complaint, made regarding the actions of Sussex Police in dealing with a protest at a Woman’s Place UK meeting in Brighton on 23 September 2019, I have now completed my enquiries.

In your complaint you explained that you were unhappy that the officers who attended the incident at the Woman’s Place meeting took no action to prevent the disruption from protesters and stood by while protesters were shouting and banging on the windows of where the meeting was taking place.

Chief Inspector Sproston was the Public Order Silver Commander during the event, he held full responsibility for the actions of the staff who reported to him and he provided a report following the event.

The Bronze Commander was Inspector Lovell who was on the ground with the Public Order teams, he provided me with an account of the event.

Chief Inspector Sproston was fully aware of the problem caused by protestors at a previous WPUK meeting in the city and the requirements for public order policing. He and Inspector Lovell held a briefing prior to the event and formulated a plan to manage the protest against WPUK using the Protest Liaison Team (PLT).

The agreed venue, which WPUK had arranged for the meeting, was at the Odeon cinema. This afforded complete security with no access to the protestors once inside the venue. However on the evening of the event, the Odeon management declined to allow WPUK to hold their meeting there and the venue was changed. WPUK organisers had already identified a secondary location which Sussex Police were unaware of until they were informed of the venue changed half an hour before the meeting was due to start.

Inspector Lovell deployed his staff to the new venue at the BMECP Centre in Fleet Street using the same plan as was intended at the Odeon. Protestors were already at the venue and a public order team were sent to the front of the building. There were also four security staff employed by WPUK at the front, controlling entry to the building. The initial approach had been to use the PLT to try and engage with the protestors and they deployed as soon as they arrived at the new venue.

As the meeting progressed, part of the protest group went to the rear of the premises where the windows to the meeting room were at ground level. The protestors began banging on the windows and the PLT asked them to stop. When the banging escalated Inspector Lovell sent two Public Order Teams to form a cordon in front of the windows.

The protestors continued shouting and chanting at the front and the rear of the premises. Residents from the flats above threw water down onto the protestors, which also covered some of the Police Officers, but it could not be ascertained exactly which flat it had come from.

Chief Inspector Sproston had considered a number of things when making his assessment. The venue had been moved, with no notice, to a location that police had not been able to carry out a reconnaissance at. Their public order assessment had been for the Odeon cinema which had one manageable entrance and resources available to deal with that. Chief Inspector Sproston is confident that had there been a consultation on the new site, it would not have been recommended by police.

WPUK have the right to hold a meeting and not be subject to serious disorder, damage or disruption to the community. The protestors have the right to protest under articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act. Freedom of Expression under article 10 is applicable to the expression of views that may shock, disturb or offend the deeply held beliefs of others. This does however, have to be balanced against the rights of WPUK.

Chief Inspector Sproston considered imposing section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 as the banging on the windows could have been interpreted as being intended to intimidate WPUK members with a view to compelling them not to hold their meeting, which they had a right to do.

Section 14 would have allowed the senior officer present to stipulate the location, duration and numbers of people allowed to protest. There was no suitable place to direct the protestors to as any place which would not have affected the venue of the meeting, would have meant the protestors would have been completely out of sight of the venue. This would have effectively stopped the protest and not just restricted its effect which is not in the spirit of articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Humans Rights Act. In turn this would have not stood up to scrutiny or challenge.

Although the protestors were loud, the meeting did go ahead and there were no reports of serious disorder, serious damage to property or disruption to the life of the community.

Public nuisance under common law was also considered. However this offence constitutes injury, loss or damage to the public in general. Undoubtedly the protestors were a nuisance by their presence but they did not commit this offence.

Inspector Lovell reported that there was no effort on behalf of the protestors to damage or enter the building. No one was prevented from entering or exiting the building and the meeting was able to go ahead.
There were 6 phone calls to police between 18:30 and 21:00, four from people inside the venue and two from third parties who were not in attendance.

The first caller was at 18:37 expressing concerns over people outside shouting. During the call they told the call taker that police were arriving on scene.

The second caller was at 19:15 concerned about the banging on windows. During the call they advised the call taker that police were now inside the building and helping.

The next two callers were also from inside the venue who expressed concerns about the banging on windows. One was at 19:24 and another at 19:27 who said that she was scared to leave the venue due to protestors smashing on the glass.

The last two callers were from third parties who had been in contact with people inside the venue. They were alerting the police to the banging on windows. One call was at 20:32 and the other at 20:54

There was only one call from a local resident at 21:20 complaining about the noise from the protestors. However Sussex Police were aware and monitoring the social media posts.

I have viewed Body Worn Video footage from several officers at the event. I have also viewed the video footage obtained by the Public Order Evidence Gathering Team (EGT).

At 19:09 the EGT footage showed a small group at the rear of the building with a few of the protestors banging on windows with their hands. The PLT were speaking with the protestors.

At 19:27 the EGT footage showed a larger group gathering at the rear and many of them were banging on the windows with their hands. The public order teams formed a cordon in front of the windows and the officers were physically pushing the protestors away from the building in order to prevent a Breach of the Peace.

At 19:30 BWV footage showed the officers getting between the protestors and the building to form the cordon, preventing the protestors from banging on the windows. Although some banging could be heard in the background, it was unclear where this was coming from. The footage continued until 20:20 and showed the officers with their backs against the building. The protestors formed a line in front of the police, with their backs to them whilst they continued to shout and chant.

At 21:09 BWV footage showed a protestor telling the group to go to the front of the building as the meeting was coming to an end. She told the protestors make sure they filmed the police and got their ID numbers.

At 21:11 BWV footage showed the police cordon between the protestors and the building, leaving a clear walkway for the attendees to leave the meeting. The protestors continued shouting until everyone had left the building.

The protestors were creating a lot of noise and their chants were not only against WPUK, they included obscenities aimed at the police. The footage supports the reports made by Chief Inspector Sproston and Inspector Lovell. There was no violence and no serious disorder.

Using the core principles, and legal framework set out by the College of Policing in their Authorised Professional Practice, I am satisfied that the event was policed lawfully, proportionately and appropriately.

The Professional Standards Department will retain a copy of your complaint and the local resolution outcome."

OhDeez what is a woman? And what is the basis of the oppression that women suffer from?

Aesop - what is a transwoman?

Answer the question, What is a woman?

A person who feels like a woman.

Now answer my question.

deez. Can you not answer is that why you ask something irrelevant to the discussion here, OPs thread remember if?

It seems a bit goady tbf, especially given your stance on this thread towards other contributors

So according to you. A person who feels like a woman is a woman.

Could you erase the female sex anymore with that sentence?

And for you information a transwoman is a person of the male sex who identifies as a woman.

A person who feels like a woman.

So, you can be an 18 stone labourer built like a brick shit house, complete with beard, big swinging dick and balls and can be a woman because you "feel like a woman".

Right. All clear.

So you accept that they identify as women?

To return to the original topic...

To be fair to the police (bending over backwards perhaps) I would read the comments in the letter regarding the change of venue as an admission that insufficient officers had been booked to protect a venue with windows at street height.

I should imagine arresting the protesters safely would require a large number of officers, ( no expert, but possibly with riot gear?).

Instead they sent a sensible number to guard the doors of a venue that was much harder to attack.

Calling in sufficient officers to arrest all those who were actively intimidating the women inside at short notice would be very difficult.

No idea what the police would have done if the protesters had broken the glass, but in the event the police got away with it because no physical damage occurred to property or people.

They got lucky, basically, unlike the courageous women, who were forced to hold their meeting in the face of considerable intimidation.

I hope that next time, the police will be better prepared and will better understand the level of intimidation that is being aimed at women who are meeting legally to discuss their rights.

what is a transwoman

A man who identifies as a woman either due to gender dysphoria or as a sexual paraphilia (is turned on by the thought of himself as a woman), though stonewall throw this definition wider to include part-time cross dresser and others. The vast majority of transwomen retain their male genitalia (penis). Some also do not see any need to make any changes to their masculine presentation. Post-transition they experience suicide rates several times higher than pretransition. They also retain male pattern criminality - they commit crimes at the same rate as other men. Under the GRA transwomen can obtain a GRC that means in certain circumstances they must be treated as women - but not all circumstances; they can still be excluded from spaces and services set aside for women where it is proportional to do so (for example Rape crisis centres, breast screening services). Without a GRC the EHRC have confirmed that the appropriate comparator is men - they must not be discriminated against compared to other men. As such, without a GRC transwomen do not have the right to access spaces set aside for females.

Now your turn - answer my question please.

What is the basis of oppression of women? Their feelings?

WPUK want the protests to occur in order to show how angry and aggressive trans people are to women

Possibly the answer to that is the political extremist group you refer to as 'trans people' (I take issue with that, it's a negative generalisation the talk guidelines frown on and rightly so) should stop being angry and aggressive to women then.

Rather than get annoyed when they do it and look bad. This is 'look what you made me do' straight out of Lundy Bancroft.

I have XX chromosomes but I don't feel like a woman. Am I a woman?

That is goady?

You know full well you disagree.

I will answer. I am a woman.

I can tell you I am, because I am, its not because I feel any particular way.

I feel different every day, some.of my feelings I share with men, and associate with male, others I associate woth women, particularly the more physical aspects of being a woman, like when I needed support breastfeeding from another who had experience to offer me sonit was relecant and supportive.

I also, through contact and communication with other women can share my frustrations at the physicality of flooding during a period and specific medications for period control and taking contraceptive devices.

This is my womanhood. I am genetically female too I cannot change it no matter if I want to swim on a period day when doubled with cramps which cold water wouod make worse.

I can tell you what a male erection feels like, as I dont have male.erections due to lack of penis.

Im not being obtuse, but these do seem very very blatantly obvious things to be stating that mean I am female woman. Am I to be hated for saying this? Am I saying illegal things? Is it offensive to others that I am a woman and want the protection that I and other women are given?

If it is, there's very little I can do about it. I have tits that leak milk when I'm pregnant and bf, I can tell you I feel woman. So I don't understand that.

I dont know what that is. I know what periods are like to experience, and how hard it is to give birth and lose pregnancies, etc, etc.

I do many ungendered things, but that doesnt change the fact I am still a woman, I didn't shake off being a woman or want to be called a man because I didnt dress in a female gendered way some days, or didn't paint my nails. Those things don't define your sex.

Gotta love MN - the words 'objective reality' are 'provocative' but banging on windows while people are trying to have a meeting on women's rights is totally deserved.

A person who feels like a woman.

This is completely disingenuous. Don't you realise that to 'feel like a woman' makes it very clear that there is a fixed fact of a 'woman' for people to feel like?

By this logic you're clear that a woman is an adult human female and males who believe they feel like an adult human female.

Dysphoria must be awful to live with and as such, sufferers should be treated with empathy and understanding. People saying that you are a women because you feel like one is both insulting to women and does nothing to help sufferers of dysphoria.

Both instances where I have written cant tye posting has changed to can

So, very obviously I CAN'T know what it is to have a male erection

...and even when bf I CAN'T tell you I feel woman.

Just know this is what women are capable of doing, amongst many and other things.

what is a transwoman

A person who feels like a transwoman.

What evidence have you @thehorseandhisboy that trans people are the most likely group to attack women?

Now who's being disingenuous?

I've no idea who Harry Miller is, but I do know that there are laws governing social media conduct.

Yes. But not always appropriately applied, necessarily. Perhaps you should look into this specific case which is under judicial review?

Should police resources be used to police Pride marches while women and girls are being raped and assaulted? In fact let's have an embargo on all protests until the appalling failure to prosecute crimes ends.

Agreed @Imnobody4 or even 900 hate crime officers but not enough police on the streets to prevent or investigate serious crime.

In my opinion Sussex police should be concentrating on preventing attacks like that and helping the victims rather than having to do public order policing at WPUK meetings and investigating and writing up responses to complaints.

Perhaps you should aim that comment at the people who committed the public order offence, not the women who were holding a peaceful meeting.

Women are not responsible for the actions of people who disagree with women having sex-based rights.

Was there an update on this in the last day or so ? There seems to be a bit of deviation from the original topic