What i find troubling is the whole plausible denability of this.
Was she interviewed or wasn't she?
Was there a complaint or wasn't there?
Underlying this the stuff we do know. That police across the country have gone and talked to women following rather vexatious complaints because they have been trained to prioritise hate crime which basically means in this context, saying that we should use our exemptions as lawfully laid out in the Equality Act.
Even if the story is not true, many will believe it, because the police action in the past has been to take action where its highly questionable that it should have been remotely taken seriously.
In this particular case, if its true, is you have police visiting a woman for pointing out the actual law and calling it hate crime.
Thats intimidating. Even if its not intended to be. But you have to question why, if no law has been broken, would they visit? Surely the police should be aware of the law? Rather than just prioritise the claim of hate without asking any questions at all?
Whether its true or not kind of becomes some what irrelevant. What is apparent is that women feel like the police have been over zealous in the past and trust in the police is no longer there.
You have to add in the background of all the crap thats been highly publicised at the Met too in terms of how women feel about the police and whether they feel they are being treated appropriately or fairly.
Would you go to the police if you were being seriously harassed over women's rights issues in this context?