Trans murderer Sophie Eastwood ‘would be out of jail already if she was a man’ Times Scotland Article

[Igneococcus]

I'm not sure I understood all of this:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b2c06182-6993-11eb-bc24-b1bb9cd3bc5f?shareToken=fbc7145abe114134df501b674c2919fc

It's not entirely clear but it sounds like this murderer who has not fully transitioned wants to be moved to a less secure prison with women, and the prison service are refusing.

It's confusing, isn't it?
I think Sophie blames the SPS for makingSophie kill Sophie's cellmate in an attempt to prove Sophie was mad and should be in a hospital rather than prison. This would not have happened if Sophie would have been held at a women's prison, claims Sophie.

I read it as they would be allowed to move to a less restrictive area now if they were to be amongst males (who statistically commit more violent crime) as presumably their low risk areas would be more prepared for high risk becoming low risk.

Leading me to think there’s significant risk to the females in low risk areas

I think Sophie blames the SPS for makingSophie kill Sophie's cellmate in an attempt to prove Sophie was mad and should be in a hospital rather than prison. This would not have happened if Sophie would have been held at a women's prison, claims Sophie.

No. Sophie was an 18YO man when she killed someone. She clearly accepts that was her fault. Her complaints seem to be:

1. She doesn't meet the criteria for transfer to a less secure women's prison. Someone told her she would if she were assessed as a man (like Chaka I presume they really meant assessed for a male prison)

1. Someone also told her that she would have been released by now if she were a man (I can't even begin to discuss the irony here without getting another strike).

I agree it's a confusing article. Just putting it in chronological order would help a lot.

Lived in the female estate since Jan 2018 but hadn’t had a psychological assessment since they started living as a woman (which could have been 2 years before - 2016 is mentioned).

Wants to be transferred to a less secure conditions but previously strangled other vulnerable prisoner to death.

Speaks of being naive and immature in their outlook before. (Ie thought something would solve all their problems)

Has had testosterone treatment but no surgery. Is In a female prison.

So yes I agree the CPS do need to rethink their transgender policies but perhaps not for the same reasons that this person has.

This male prisoner is complaining about being treated like a female. Females who use ‘considerable and prolonged force’ to strangle a person to death are rare, and probably considered particularly dangerous. In any case, they are not suitable to be housed with other much lower risk females. Because these females are so rare, it is unlikely the Prison Service has suitable lower security accommodation for them.

However this kind of crime isn’t that uncommon for males so the Prison Service probably does have suitable accommodation for such male murderers as they reach the end of their sentences.

Add in the fact that this male appears to still be anatomically correct in the genital department and you can see why transferring this prisoner to a less secure facility with much lower risk females (in terms of crime committed) is a bad idea.

Perhaps a little more sunlight is a good thing.

He's upset because the prison services won't put him in a low security women's prison.

Because he isn't a woman.

He's a dangerous man.

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Also, I am not sure he has learned his lesson as he says. If 15 years was "not enough to be honest." then he should just get on with serving what he considers a longer suitable sentence.

It seems this person was in a relationship with another transwoman while both were in a women's jail.

www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/2606211/transgender-killers-sophie-eastwood-alex-stewart-transferred-prison-greenock-polmont/

The article is so one sided and lacking in actual, verifiable facts that it’s basically junk

“I was naive, immature, and thought that by killing my cellmate they’d consider me mad, section me and I could spend the rest of my life in hospital being looked after.

Chilling comment!

Naive and immature doesn’t even begin to cover the reasoning here. The kind of logic that considers killing someone in order to get something (as opposed to killing someone in anger, or for other reason attached to pain or emotion) is something I can’t imagine you would grow out of.

The article is made odd by concealing what's actually been happening. For example:

Eastwood has been held in women-only units since January 2018, mainly at HMP Edinburgh, until an unwanted transfer back to Polmont last month.

was because:

The source told the Daily Record: "Some of the lassies were getting more and more uncomfortable and complained. Alex Stewart has been here for some time but Sophie Eastwood is a recent arrival.

"Right away they seemed to click and formed a relationship. All well and good. But more and more their intimate behaviour was seen in public areas.

"To put it in a nutshell, neither was shy at letting things all hang out. And they were not shy at touching and groping in front of the other prisoners.

(see the link posted by NotTerfNorCis above)

Is the female wing at Polmont an actual female wing? Or does it house just "women"?

Surely this person is not held with women.

Polmont is listed as a prison for males but over 20% of the inmates are women and it's listed as catering "specifically to young offenders"* but Eastwood is 35.

Polmont is Scotland's national holding facility for male young offenders aged between 16 - 21 years of age. Sentences range from 6 months to Life. The average sentence length is between 2 - 4 years.

I think that in a way Sophie may be right in that generally women who commit violent crimes are considered worse than males who also commit them more frequently and are given longer sentences. However this person seems to be wanting it both ways . Glad they have been refused the transfer.

@Dalyesque

I think that in a way Sophie may be right in that generally women who commit violent crimes are considered worse than males who also commit them more frequently and are given longer sentences. However this person seems to be wanting it both ways . Glad they have been refused the transfer.

So a male wants to be 'treated as a woman', but when they are treated as a woman they decide they want to be treated as a man.

It's as if they think they should have the right to pick and choose which parts of being 'treated as a woman' they want to opt into.

@Vermeil

The article is so one sided and lacking in actual, verifiable facts that it’s basically junk

It could, certainly, be clearer. Basically:

'They told me you had been to her,
And mentioned me to him:
She gave me a good character,
But said I could not swim.

    He sent them word I had not gone
      (We know it to be true):
    If she should push the matter on,
      What would become of you?

    ....

    If I or she should chance to be
      Involved in this affair,
    He trusts to you to set them free,
      Exactly as we were.

    My notion was that you had been
      (Before she had this fit)
    An obstacle that came between
      Him, and ourselves, and it.

    Don't let him know she liked them best,
      For this must ever be
    A secret, kept from all the rest,
      Between yourself and me.'

(From 'Alice Down the Rabbithole').

MNHQ once said they wouldn't force women posters to contort pronouns and speech for violent murderers.

So I won't, and I hope they'll stand by that.

Eastwood, an intact man and a murderer, failed a psychological assessment whilst living in a women's wing of a prison and has subsequently been refused a move to a lower security women's option.

He believes that this refusal is because he 'identifies as a woman'. I think it's more likely it's because he is a murderer, a man, and the authorities have currently hit the boundaries of their own pretence and are now unable to carry the lie onwards to the point at which an extremely dangerous man has even greater access to vulnerable women with reduced security.

He's already incarcerated with women, and according to the second article, they are forced to shower with him.

I'm not judging anyone here for trying to abide by talk guidelines, but I'm not colluding with the pressure this time to obscure the fact that Eastwood is a man and convicted murderer in a prison with women.

I'd really hope MNHQ would allow the truth to be spoken in plain English this one time so that people can properly feel the outrage that results from clearly understanding.

A man who is a murderer is suing to have greater access to vulnerable women in a reduced security prison environment. And he's currently with women as we speak. Incarcerated women who are apparently supposed to say they are fine with this to demonstrate that they are properly inclusive.

Women are being denied their human rights in service to upholding a lie about men. Perhaps MNHQ can take a small step to helping others do something about this by not requiring us to obscure the sex of men with euphemisms and hidden pronouns when we talk about it.

So a male wants to be 'treated as a woman', but when they are treated as a woman they decide they want to be treated as a man.

It's as if they think they should have the right to pick and choose which parts of being 'treated as a woman' they want to opt into.

Yes, this rather confirms my suspicions that many transwomen would suddenly find their way back to feeling like they really are men if they were to wake up, say, in the middle of Afghanistan, or a Rohingya refugee camp.

Barraker, in case your post is deleted, bravo and applause.

Thanks, Barracker.

I was worried for a minute that the report that they were sexually aroused and "letting things hang out" might mean we'd have to accept a new definition of 'womanhood', meaning basically, 'manhood'!

He admitted he killed someone in order to be moved somewhere else. His obvious lack of impulse control combined with a chilling lack of empathy for others are reason enough to keep him well away from female estates.

The moderation principles at the top of this board include this:

What about, for example, Karen White – is it ok to say he is a man and call him 'he'?
We think we've allowed for flexibility and context here; we’re unlikely to delete where an individual is primarily known for extreme or criminal actions undertaken before they transitioned.

Should there be a challenge to any posters referring to a man who is a convicted murderer as a man, this is the guidance I have relied upon.
Just in case any other posters are concerned or would welcome the opportunity to be able to speak clearly without having to obscure the truth.

@TriflePudding

He admitted he killed someone in order to be moved somewhere else. His obvious lack of impulse control combined with a chilling lack of empathy for others are reason enough to keep him well away from female estates.

I'm waiting for a "Do you honestly think someone would be so devious as to cold-bloodedly kill another person just so that they can...?".

To be filed with "DYHT anyone would become a youth worker/priest/step-father etc. just to...?"

Thank you Barracker.

I do not believe that what you have said there is transphobic. This is a violent male person who is incarcerated with female people who are a population which are almost universally vulnerable, most of whom have a history of adverse childhood events or issues with addiction and 65% of whom have suffered head injury.

It is state sanctioned abuse to house a violent male person with female people who have been subjected to violence.

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/06/nearly-65-of-prisoners-at-womens-jail-show-signs-of-brain-injury