Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

14.02.20 Live updates on Harry and Kate’s cases HERE

625 replies

MrsSnippyPants · 14/02/2020 08:58

I shall be glued to social media this morning and thought it might be useful to have a place where we can post updates as they come in so people need to follow just one thread.
Please post Twitter handles of anyone providing live updates as you find them.
@WeAreFairCop are saying it is likely the judgement will NOT be read out so they hope to get a copy and summarise and tweet after 10.30am

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Michelleoftheresistance · 14/02/2020 14:21

And note the organisations the judge intentionally mentions: the stasi, the gestapo.

Organisations who encouraged people to inform on others, without evidence necessary, to have them punished and harmed. What the fuck is happening in this country? How stupid and bad does this have to get? How does this make anything better?

Floisme · 14/02/2020 14:21

But given the provenance of this in the wake of the Macpherson report, it seems very unlikely it will be repealed.
You know, I had forgotten how much of his stems from the Macpherson report. I agree.

Mockersisrightasusual · 14/02/2020 14:22

Deputy Chief Constable Bernie O'Reilly, of the College of Policing, said: "Policing's position is clear - we want everyone to feel able to express opinions as passionately as they wish without breaking the law." He added: " Hate incidents can be a precursor to these types of crimes ..."

There you have it. This is "Pre-Crime."

Where's Tom Cruise in a vat of amniotic fluid when you need him?

BovaryX · 14/02/2020 14:22

Floisme
The judge repeatedly cites the Macpherson report in the ruling

Mockersisrightasusual · 14/02/2020 14:25

Macpherson probably correctly concluded that the only way to get the police to take racism seriosly was to make them record all reports and give them no discretion to decide if a report was serious or not.

Racism is generally regarded as being entirely unacceptable today. The problem comes when you extend this to other concepts.

nauticant · 14/02/2020 14:26

The judge repeatedly cites the Macpherson report in the ruling

In other words "above my pay grade". It will need to be sorted out at the level of the Supreme Court or in Parliament.

karencantobe · 14/02/2020 14:27

And anyone pointing out the potential issues at the time of enshrining what was in the MacPherson report into law was just told they were being racist.
This is why principles of law matter.

Geoffreythecat · 14/02/2020 14:27

Why is sex not in the list of hate crimes - probably because some women are abused on a daily basis it would be impossible to police.

This is something I've been thinking about a lot recently. There was a police programme on TV where an arrested man called a female police officer a 'fucking lesbian'. He was further arrested for that. He also called her a 'fucking slut' but wasn't further arrested for that. Am really struggling with the definition of a hate crime.

R0wantrees · 14/02/2020 14:27

A trans person can have you given a recorded 'hate' mark on your enhanced DBS for no better reason than that they were displeased with you or wanted to. You have no recourse in this.

'Mrs B'
(extract)
"All the transgender community want is to be LEFT IN PEACE. Transgender people ARE who they say they are.
Trans women ARE women and Trans men ARE men. It NOT for the likes of Mr Miller to decide who is what, nor is it any of his God damn business.
All they wish is to be treated with full and unswerving respect from their peers – respect should be automatic and, contrary to popular opinion, not earned. To be treated equally and fairly before the law. That is it. No more, no less" (continues)

karencantobe · 14/02/2020 14:28

@Mockersisrightasusual Sorry you are being naive. There is still plenty of racism about.

BuzzShitbagBobbly · 14/02/2020 14:28

Plus say what you like about America - but they have a damn fine respect for freedom of speech.

That was referenced extensively in the first few pages of the full judgement.

I am always full of admiration as to how Justices lay out their arguments. Agree or not, they take such exceptional care to examine every angle possible.

The whole basis came from Macpherson/Steve Lawrence. At it's heart, the College guidelines have a good reason for existing. And the fact is, recording (non crime) incidents can and does give useful intelligence about local trends and issues, like a topographical timeline map.

I urge people to read the whole judgement, not just the summary, as it contains so much intricate detail and relevant information.

R0wantrees · 14/02/2020 14:29

In other words "above my pay grade". It will need to be sorted out at the level of the Supreme Court or in Parliament.

It was always going to have to progress to the higher courts.

karencantobe · 14/02/2020 14:30

I have always had an issue with the idea that respect should be automatic. Of course you treat people decently, but that is not the same as respecting them. I work with people who I treat decently, but I think they are fucking idiots.

Mockersisrightasusual · 14/02/2020 14:31

...sadly it is on the increase. It never went away, but people knew they had to keep it to themselves. It's back out in the open now, with a PM who speaks of muslim women as letterboxes and 'piccaninnies with watermelon smiles.'

CatalogueUniverse · 14/02/2020 14:32

Racism is generally regarded as being entirely unacceptable today. The problem comes when you extend this to other concepts.

Or the concepts that you choose and the ones you do not choose.

I don’t understand why the protected characteristics of the equalities act are

age
disability
gender reassignment
marriage and civil partnership
pregnancy and maternity
race
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation

But hate incidents and crime are

disability
race
transgender identity
religion
sexual orientation

Floisme · 14/02/2020 14:32

The judge repeatedly cites the Macpherson report in the ruling
Thank you, Bovary I had completely missed that Blush
It all makes a lot more sense to me now.

youkiddingme · 14/02/2020 14:36

I was thinking almost exactly what you wrote after I heard it Barracker
The judge said some important things but I heard the BBC summary on the radio and what most people, who hear it, will take away will not be very helpful. Oh the principle is all ok, but the police made a mistake with one person. Yet at the same time this is a huge problem for the trans community. The Beeb can't even hear the dissonance in their own tone.
The whole principle of crime, non-crime has got to be a huge threat surely?

Geoffreythecat · 14/02/2020 14:39

Yes catalogue That's the crux of what feels so wrong about the definition of hate crime

ThePurported · 14/02/2020 14:40

recording (non crime) incidents can and does give useful intelligence about local trends and issues, like a topographical timeline map

But literally anyone could have reported Harry Miller to the police, including someone who has none of the relevant protected characteristics but has some other personal grudge against HM or his family member.
The police say that there has been an increase in trans-related hate crimes and incidents. How meaningful is this data?

OnlyTheTitOfTheLangBerg · 14/02/2020 14:40

Humber Police statement says they accept the judgment and will learn from it.

"Right lads, lasses, boths and neithers...we just whack the nasty transphobes straight on the database from now on and whatever you do, don't let on to them that their names are in the Catalogue of Wrongthinking."

You know, I had forgotten how much of his stems from the Macpherson report. I agree.

I made the point on another thread recently about how much of the police's approach to trans hate crime comes from the top brass not wanting to have a trans Stephen Lawrence on their hands, which is a laudable aim up to a point - no one here wants to see any murders or attacks - but just as there are issues with safeguarding (as Lang always reminded us) the problem that arises when the police/CPS make a group into a sacred caste is that justice for anyone not a member of that caste flies out of the window.

NotTerfNorCis · 14/02/2020 14:40

Quote from Kate's case:

[Adrian] Harrop is currently the subject of a full GMC enquiry in relation to both online and off-line behaviour towards at least two women and towards me and my family

Mockersisrightasusual · 14/02/2020 14:40

It is odd. I can call someone a "stupid barren old bitch" and none of these insults constitutes hate.

BathTangle · 14/02/2020 14:41

"I think it will reinforce an opinion that courts don't understand trans lives and aren't there to protect trans people."

No they're not there to protect trans people. They are there to protect all people: the judicial oath requires all members of the judiciary to

"do right to all manner of people...without fear or favour, affection or ill will".

BovaryX · 14/02/2020 14:41

floisme
Yes. I think the appalling failures of the police in the Stephen Lawrence case caused a serious paradigm shift. But now the inherent problems with hate speech and non crime incidents are becoming clear. It will be interesting to see how this is resolved on appeal

10FrozenFingers · 14/02/2020 14:42

I wonder if the judgement will make MN rethink their rather precious and quaint moderation of the feminist boards.