Girl's legal challenge to CPS!

[BovaryX]

I haven't seen this posted already, apologies if I missed an existing thread. The Times is reporting that a girl is challenging the CPS over 'pro trans' bias. Another legal challenge, another example of the flimsy construction of these policies.

^Girl, 14, takes on prosecution service over ‘pro-trans bias’ The girl has already forced the CPS to withdraw guidance on transgender bullying
A teenage girl has threatened the Crown Prosecution Service with legal action over its alleged bias about transgender issues. Lawyers for the 14-year-old have told the CPS that it must pull out of a “diversity champions” programme run by the charity Stonewall, which campaigns for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people.
The campaign group gives diversity awards to employers who support gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender staff members and expects them to do so “beyond” the workplace, encouraging members to be “advocates and agents of positive change”.A pre-action letter issued by the girl’s lawyers said the CPS’s association with Stonewall put it in breach of the law by failing to show impartiality on transgender rights. Stonewall believes that gender identity should be treated as a protected characteristic and therefore carry legal protection under Equalities Act 2010^

STILLT - in your screenshots - the CPS letter in reply to you, promises, "I will contact our colleagues at Mermaids"

"colleagues" - that rather suggests a lack of impartiality.

"The CPS works in partnership with the police, courts, the Attorney General’s Office, the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and other agencies throughout the criminal justice system (CJS)."

www.cps.gov.uk/criminal-justice-system

(No mention of Mermaids or any other lobby group on that page - or of Mermaids anywhere on the CPS site. There are however several references to "partnerships" with Stonewall and similar organisations on the CPS site: www.cps.gov.uk/search?keys=Stonewall
Perhaps "colleagues" indicates a less formal relationship than "partners"?)

"Prosecutors must be fair, objective and independent. When deciding whether to prosecute a criminal case, our lawyers must follow the Code for Crown Prosecutors."

www.cps.gov.uk/about-cps

The Code for Crown Prosecutors

General Principles

2.1 The independence of the prosecutor is central to the criminal justice system of a democratic society. Prosecutors are independent from persons or agencies that are not part of the prosecution decision-making process. CPS prosecutors are also independent from the police and other investigators. Prosecutors must be free to carry out their professional duties without political interference and must not be affected by improper or undue pressure or influence from any source.

(Well that is very reassuring. It would be very worrying if they were influenced by "persons or agencies that are not part of the prosecution decision-making process".)

2.7 When making decisions, prosecutors must be fair and objective. They must not let any personal views about the ethnic or national origin, gender, disability, age, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity of the suspect, defendant, victim or any witness influence their decisions. Neither must they be motivated by political considerations. Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not solely for the purpose of obtaining a conviction.

(Oh dear! Crown Prosecutors are confused about their legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010. They think that it is OK if they discriminate against someone on the basis of sex or gender reassignment - but not on the basis of "gender" or "gender identity", whatever they are.

Wonder where they got that idea? I do hope that they have not been influenced by "persons or agencies that are not part of the prosecution decision-making process".)

The CPS does seem to be rather heavily influenced by the College of Policing - and the CofP has shown itself to be rather easily led into misstating the law at Stonewall's behest.
(Screenshots)

Oops! I got so caught up in that reply I forgot to say how bloody wonderful your daughter is TheBigBad !

They’ve been banking on the hope that no one would have the means, capacity or drive to mount any sort of legal challenge

Highly unlikely that they are unaware of the existence of legal aid.

There is hardly any legal aid anymore.

Oh dear. Surely they are not suggesting 14-year-olds don’t know their own minds, that they could possibly be influenced by others around them and shouldn’t be making decisions they are not mature enough to understand?

TRAs keep shooting themselves in the foot, don't they?

Excellent analysis, Molesmokes. The failure to follow their own code, and to correctly represent the Equality Act, is astoundingly blatant.

Could someone send me the link for fundraising please?

Great post mole.

BigBad, for your daughter:

Of course they think 14 year old girls are idiots who don’t know their own minds- look at how Twitter activists view adult women (empty headed) so a female child can’t possibly have her own thoughts, beliefs and causes to support.

Anyone who has been a 14 year old girl or ever known one knows how switched on and intelligent with passions for a range of topics- politics, animal welfare, civil rights, the environment and so on. It’s certainly not all boys, dancing and bras at that age.

The people accusing this girl are so prejudiced against female children and adults they can’t understand how this is happening.

All the best to your daughter Bigbad.

You won't get legal aid for JR. Legal aid has been removed from majority of civil actions. So we are in the insane situation, as with Harry Miller, where private citizens have to challenge the State at their own financial risk.

The biggest scandal here is where is the Equality and Human Rights Commission! Where is their guidance? Why aren't they taking action?

The EHRC has the fragrant David Issac at the head of it, recently moved over from Stonewall... Anyone know why he is SO in league with the TRAs?

Bigbad you and your daughter are AWESOME! My own DDs are of similar opinions and determinations. There's a generation of fierce women growing up right now. Love and strength to you both.

Thank you Bigbad and your daughter. Spade employed!

Where can one find the directions for digging? Fair cop? SSA?

Oh gosh darn it I forgot you can't put links for fundraising pages. Sorry, sorry everyone. Sorry @finnmcool, sorry, sorry, sorry, won't do it again.

Sorry.

Anyway, this thing is spreading...

Can I say this?

Have a look on the second page of the SSA press release, which you can find here:

safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2020/05/16/teenager-demands-that-the-cps-withdraw-from-the-stonewall-diversity-champions-programme/

Oh dear. Surely they are not suggesting 14-year-olds don’t know their own minds, that they could possibly be influenced by others around them and shouldn’t be making decisions they are not mature enough to understand?

Interesting, isn't it?

Bigbad What an awesome daughter! I am glad that she is well protected as you say. And has at least one excellent role model in her family.

Not to take away from her efforts, but that support from Scotland might be coming soon, by the looks of this tweet.

twitter.com/millar_marion/status/1261899163052146688?s=21

@Xanthangum got it, thank you.

I'm laughing at the comments on the Times article. There's one very aggressive TRA who says things like "No trans person is anti-women. Trans women are women so that would be illogical."

Well, firstly there are many women that are anti-women so that doesn't hold water for starters.

Secondly, if we were to accept that a transwoman could not be anti-women because she is a woman, does that not present a huge opportunity for me (and anyone else: but I'll use me as an example for now) to flout the Equality Act in order to discriminate as I see fit?

If we expand the current madness — and yes I think it's madness — that seems to allow 'anyone who thinks they're a woman to be a woman', then what's to stop me picking another protected characteristic and following suit.

So, I'll pick one: age (this is all theoretical btw). Let's suppose that I'm advertising a position for a new assistant in my team and I really want someone 'more mature' because they're less likely to leave after a year. Why can't I self-identify as a 20 something — I'm in very good shape for my 53 years and feel better and fitter than I did in my 20s — discriminate against any younger applicants and then claim the defence that I couldn't possibly be discriminating because I am a 'young person' and it would be 'illogical'?

I know my example is extreme and probably a bit 'silly' (as Lisa Nandy said to Piers Morgan when he wanted to identify as an otter, or some such). But if we let this go unchecked where will it stop?

I'm 53. I can dress as if I'm 20 and go clubbing as if I'm 20 and that's all fine: no problem to anyone (apart from my niece who may be embarrassed but that's a story for a different day ). But I'm not 20. And never will be. Just as men will never be women. Have I got the right to gaslight the population into believing that I'm 20, allowing me a Young Person's Railcard and all the other things that are (legally) age dependent?

Shouldn't someone sit me down and just tell me, no: you are not 20?

When did the word 'no' become so sodding unfashionable?

And of course, huge thanks to @TheBigBad and her amazing daughter for doing this. You are doing this for me and for women everywhere. I am in absolute awe

This is such good news - we are grateful to this girl and her family for their bravery

This is such good news. And I'm another one thinking middle aged men getting really het up about children wanting to protect their tights to single sex spaces is really not a good look, no matter what their sexuality.

I will get my spade out

This morning, I dug and I dug well...just to stick it to the man!