I have been recorded by my local police force as 'hateful'

[Spero]

Dear All

I am posting here in case I 'disappear' from Twitter. I set out the background here if you want to read more.
twitter.com/SVPhillimore/status/1289109245280100353?s=20

In a nutshell I made a Subject Access Request of Wiltshire police after a Twitter account boasted I now had a 'record for life' of my 'hate'. The police disclosed to me 12 pages of screenshots that were not hateful in the least; they were mainly discussions about the GC debate that have been confirmed as protected political speech.

I have requested this is deleted; the Information Management Team at Wiltshire have declined so I will go through their appeal process, eventually to the PCC and then judicial review.

I am writing to urge ANYONE who publishes on line about gender ID etc in their own name or is otherwise readily identifiable, to make a SAR of you own force to see what is recorded against you; you will not be told.

If there are others in the same position as me it might be sensible to consider joining forces in some kind of class action.

hopefully I will know by the autumn if I am going for JR.

Presumably there is nothing to stop convicted criminals accusing the courts or judges of hate each time they are convicted, or the witnesses for the prosecution (or defense)? It could mean anytime someone with a protected characteristic went to court everyone involved in the prosecution of that case could find themselves with a record for hate...

Spero - if you have the time or inclination, it might be useful if you could send examples and proof of your tweets being recorded by the police as being hateful to every member of the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee who will be considering the Scottish Hate Crimes Bill imminently and ask them if it is parliament’s intention to criminalise such tweets under the wording of the new stirring up offence. Since lack of knowledge of the law is no excuse, our parliamentarians have a duty to let us know what it is. This new offence is extremely widely worded as it stands and leaves everything to prosecutorial discretion. Your example show that there can be no reliance on the police exercising this discretion with a light touch.

Thing is, if they can do this to a barrister of all people, well educated, detailed knowledge of the law, it's no bloody wonder most other GC women don't want to raise their heads above the parapet. Too frightening.

Just linking Sarah Phillimore's article - apologies if someone's already done it but I couldn't see it.
thecritic.co.uk/why-do-women-matter-so-little/

@EvelynBeatrice

Spero - if you have the time or inclination, it might be useful if you could send examples and proof of your tweets being recorded by the police as being hateful to every member of the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee who will be considering the Scottish Hate Crimes Bill imminently and ask them if it is parliament’s intention to criminalise such tweets under the wording of the new stirring up offence. Since lack of knowledge of the law is no excuse, our parliamentarians have a duty to let us know what it is. This new offence is extremely widely worded as it stands and leaves everything to prosecutorial discretion. Your example show that there can be no reliance on the police exercising this discretion with a light touch.

good idea. I've already emailed one MSP. But the consultation date closed on July 24th so they probably won't consider it.

Spero
The consultation has indeed shut but the individual email addresses of each member of the Committee are on the Scottish parliamentary website. The chair is a Conservative MSP. The Committee is tasked with scrutinising and improving the legislation so it is worthwhile to do this. Albeit that the Scottish - and some national - press organisations, religious and secular bodies, theatre companies etc are all united in opposing the new stirring up offences, many of the MSPs are woefully uneducated on the implications, taking as read the Justice Secretary’s unwarranted assertion that only very extreme hate will be caught. A pro forma to each setting out the bare facts would do; personally I intend to tailor my approach pointing out to the SNP members that this is another vote loser and bound to be subject to a human rights challenge like the much maligned - and now dropped - Named Persons Bill ( plan was for every child in Scotland to be allocated a state guardian!)

If you want to see my appeal grounds I have published them here - if this is of any help to anyone else in a similar situation, please feel free to use whatever you want.
medium.com/@sarahvphillimore/my-objections-to-being-recorded-as-a-hate-incident-6ddb7211446b

@JackiesArmy

The problem is with the definition of a "hate incident". Unless the current definition is changed, absolutely anything can be a hate incident and has to be recorded (according to the police).

So if I post on twitter, or even say, that I don't like someone, a person overhearing it can decide to be offended and report me. Because they perceive it to be hateful it is, no proof necessary.

The guidelines need to be changed.

It's worse than you think. If this is recorded as a (hate) crime and then there is an 'action' then it's closed. What a lovely simple way to boost your clear-up (solved case) rates: "We report that there is an increase in crimes against the person, but XXX Police force report that they have solved more than , an increase of 80 per cent."

This reminds me of at least 2 occasions where, despite reporting often to police, disabled.people were simply left to suffer abuse from young oiks until the.disabled personwas so completely defeated and exhausted thst they killed themselves.

Police didn't seem to mind that so much.

Jebediah but disabled people are not truly oppressed, not like men. Men are really oppressed and must therefore have there needs centred on every occasion.

Disabled people don't matter. We are literally left to die.

We have no flags, no parades, no police forces tweeting supportive things about us.

We have no flags, no parades, no police forces tweeting supportive things about us.

I’d settle for “accessible” meaning accessible.