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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Carolyn Farrow taken to police station

785 replies

ScreamingMeMe · 04/10/2022 08:10

Long twitter thread here. She's had her electronic devices seized too, and has been accused of being certain posters on Kiwi Farms and Mumsnet

@BernardBlacksWineIceLolly and @BreakWindandFire sorry to tag you but she's been accused of being you!

We all know who this will be, but as Caroline says, please don't speculate/discuss them.

twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1577092705154666496?t=Cv7tRv3YdqIogpXT_MSwZQ&s=19

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
ToGanymedeAndTitan · 04/10/2022 12:17

What are you talking about? You're trying to say it doesn't matter because Caroline is middle class?

No, I don't think that's what the poster is saying at all.
I think they're saying that people get arrested all the time, say from minority groups, but they don't have the privileges, the platforms, and emotional support threads to possibly gather support, or to sway, there's no collective outrage for them.
I could be wrong though, hopefully the poster will be along to say soon

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 04/10/2022 12:20

You're posting about how CF doesn't have the correct, pure politics, rather than in outrage

It’s not feminists posting that shite. These are familiar usernames (and even more familiar posting styles) and there’s nothing feminist about them. They’re not outraged about the TRA Gestapo for the most obvious reason.

Herja · 04/10/2022 12:21

I would absolutely read the suggestion to rethink self harm or face a section as a threat. I've self harmed in a station, even during an interview, with nothing like that suggested at any point. The threshold for harm to self is pretty high for sectioning - you can absolutely cut or burn yourself a bit with no issue (as confirmed to me by both police and SS). IME, if the injury doesn't medically require a&e, institutions are unfussed.

That was a threat, not helpful concern.

Felix125 · 04/10/2022 12:21

whynotwhatknot · 04/10/2022 11:47

wait they have no evidience but theyre asking her if shes done anything

bloody extreme

The problem is - if there is an allegation then part of the investigation is to gain the evidence to prove or disprove an offence.

So if you take rape for example - an allegation is made which identifies a suspect. From that allegation the suspect will be arrested.

Under the same argument, if we wait until we had all the evidence before arresting the suspect, it could be months for any forensics to come back. We also then lose any forensic opportunities from the alleged suspect which would prove or disprove the offence.

WildishBambino · 04/10/2022 12:21

Using the search facility, neither of the posters Caroline was accused of being have posted here in (literally) years - not since 2019.

Why have a late night arrest for comments made 3 years ago?

MelodyPondsMum · 04/10/2022 12:22

What they're saying and doing is trying yo distract from what this thread is about. Lots of posters here work and campaign on lots of different issues. We raise awareness and write white papers about persecuted minority groups. Those issues are on their relevant threads. There's not a limit to campaigning or compassionate ... except with the posters trying to make this thread about everything except its topic. I've never seen so much sealioning.

Fwiw CF's faith could also be an aggravated characteristic. It wouldn't be the first time the police have overstepped their powers and indulged their bigotry against RCs.

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:23

dolorsit · 04/10/2022 12:03

Then he failed in his duty of care. In answer to a positive response of thoughts of self harm then he should have referred to duty health care.

Not say he would send her back to the cells to think about her answer and that he would section her.

I don't think so, she responded in a way that indicated she might be going to hurt herself. He gave her time to reflect on it and she confirmed she wasn't going to do anything. You can't just jump to the conclusion that people always mean the first thing that comes out of their mouth.

Apart from anything else he can't section her but he can keep her in a safe place if he has reason to believe she is a danger to herself. That is section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.

He kept her in a place of safety until he was satisfied he could safely release her.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 04/10/2022 12:23

The familiar two-harder! A patronising invented expertise on whatever the topic of conversation is. Police procedures, this time. 🙄 And using the pathetic pretence of knowing anything about anything to justify whatever violence and abuse has been committed most recently against enemies of the cause.

DifficultBloodyWoman · 04/10/2022 12:25

I’m not on twitter so this thread was the first I heard of this.

I hope it isn’t the last.

Caroline, I hope you are ok. I hope you sue the police because I think you have reason to. I hope you also sue the men harassing you. If there is a fundraiser, I will contribute. Please get FairCop and FSU involved in this. And please, please, please get as much publicity for this as humanly possibly. This situation is ripe for further intervention from Suella Braverman.

oakleaffy · 04/10/2022 12:26

It does seem that police go for the soft and easy targets.
If it has come to pass that one cannot say something as simple and as ''Women can't have penises'' it is very alarming.

It's surprising and worrying police take action on such things.

What about the women's rights to feel safe away from male bodied persons in their spaces.

I asked the leader of gay men's walking group a couple of years ago if I could go on one of the walks.
The bloke replied ''No, you are a woman''.

I replied that I could ''Self ID as a man'' and he just laughed and said that wouldn't be possible, that the group was for men, not women.

Men are very good at guarding their spaces from women, but the other way round? Men start throwing bottles of urine about in protest {as was in the news this year}.

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:27

yourhairiswinterfire · 04/10/2022 12:14

Some ''duty of care''.

She told him that she'd thought of self harming, and he didn't like her answer so he got another one out her and then sent her on her way.

Seems a bit dangerous?

So you think she should have been held for longer? I mean how long after she says she's OK, she isn't going to harm herself?

You weren't there, he is a trained custody officer and he made a judgement, that's his job.

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:31

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 04/10/2022 12:23

The familiar two-harder! A patronising invented expertise on whatever the topic of conversation is. Police procedures, this time. 🙄 And using the pathetic pretence of knowing anything about anything to justify whatever violence and abuse has been committed most recently against enemies of the cause.

If that's aimed at me I worked in a large regional police force for 15 years. I spent the last 20 years of my working life working in mental health.

Why don't you focus on the complain that was made against her and if the arrest was justified instead of making spurious allegations against the custody officer who was making a decision, as he is required to do, about if it was safe to release her. I'm pretty sure you would be fast to lay blame at his door of he'd immediately released her and she self harmed.

MarieIVanArkleStinks · 04/10/2022 12:31

ToGanymedeAndTitan · 04/10/2022 11:23

Threatening to section her too
Reading the tweet, she says that she said yes to have you had thoughts of self harm.
So it kind of makes sense that the police would be concerned that she was a danger to herself.
This seems to have been escalated on here to "threatened with" -seems a bit of an emotive twist for dramatics.

Anyone can see this was an implicit threat. That observation is less a case of 'dramatics' than simple reading comprehension.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn · 04/10/2022 12:31

The problem is - if there is an allegation then part of the investigation is to gain the evidence to prove or disprove an offence.

So @Felix125 do you always seize someone’s electronics if you get a baseless allegation they’ve been posting an offensive meme? Or in this case a barely offensive meme?

If so, what police force do you work for please? I haven’t got an enemies list made up yet but I’m sure with a handy attack dog like yourself to hand I could let the power go to my head a bit.

If not, what’s the secret sauce to get you to harass people for me? How can I weaponise the police against my enemies like the complainant in this case? Thanks!

Emotionalsupportviper · 04/10/2022 12:31

SuperCamp · 04/10/2022 08:44

Arrested without evidence? When she was not resisting or being violent? No interview ‘helping police with enquiries’ ?

And threatening to section someone who is feeling suicidal? When MN alone is full of really ill people who cannot get MH support.

Can the police be done for wasting police time?

This is making them look very, very stupid.

And like the Stasi.

All of this - this is what happens when nebulous, badly worded and ill-defined "perceived hate crime" legislation is abused and used to persecute people.

ALL legislation needs to be clear, concise and as tight as a fish's *rse to prevent either innocent misinterpretation of deliberate misuse.

Just read her twitter thread - it's chilling!

And surely , Yes - the police DO need a search warrant to enter premises and especially to seize personal property. Are there any lawyers on here who could clarify this? (Sorry if it's already been addressed)

How the hell have we got into this situation? It's abuse of process surely?? Real sledgehammer-to-crack-nut stuff - it was a not-very-veiled threat to terrify her into submission.

NitroNine · 04/10/2022 12:32

That Custody Sergeant was indeed issuing threats not offering help with his reference to sectioning.

Of course, had Ms Farrow not changed her answer, he’d have been a bit stuck. As this helpful guide from Mind explains (emphases mine):
A police station can only be used as a place of safety if your behaviour poses an imminent risk of serious injury or death to yourself or another person. The decision must be authorised by an inspector after consulting with a registered medical practitioner, a registered nurse, an appropriate healthcare practitioner, an occupational therapist or a paramedic.

So, while no warrant is required for an S136 & she was in a location where it can be enacted, a potential anxiety disorder (am unclear as to whether this is diagnosed/was declared to the police) wouldn’t meet the “appear to have a mental disorder” threshold; & expressing an inclination towards self-harm is worlds away from “in need of immediate care or control”. The police officers do not, themselves, have the power to section, it is always a decision made by clinicians.

As Caroline was leaving when she was asked, there is no excuse for the attempt to use the police station as a place of safety, either: A police station can only be used as a place of safety if your behaviour poses an imminent risk of serious injury or death to yourself or another person.
The police must review at least hourly (or every three hours if you’re asleep)
whether you still need to be kept at a police station rather than some other place of safety. If you no longer need to be at a police station they should transfer you to another place.

If there had been genuine concern for Caroline’s wellbeing they could have enacted a S136 at the nearest hospital or even at her home - or the home of a willing friend. Threatening to lock her back up was exactly that - threatening to lock her back up.

It suggests quite heavily to me a failure to adequately complete the necessary risk assessment (as per PACE Code C) - at no point while Caroline was being held did they consider that risk much less take additional steps to mitigate against it; so on finally asking her she was threatened into changing her answer.

Tangentially connected, but I’ve always found it fascinating Dante only gave the 8th Circle of Hell - where those who’ve committed fraud (not in the modern sense, but any kind of deception to benefit themselves) reside - an actual name. The Malebolge, or Evil Ditches. So Dante would have people deliberately making false reports spending an eternity aflame, I think, though I don’t know if he had any scope for multiple torments - they just wandered about, IIRC, so I suppose one of the stabby demons might impale them every now & then.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 04/10/2022 12:33

KettrickenSmiled · 04/10/2022 11:20

Thanks @AryaStarkWolf

So ... not "threatened with being sectioned" at all then.
In fact - advised to come up with a more sensible answer, to avoid the possibility.

Actually sending her back to the cells was sectioning her. Using a section at that point was a way of holding her in the cells for longer. I suspect you are not familiar with the police powers to section someone

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:33

MarieIVanArkleStinks · 04/10/2022 12:31

Anyone can see this was an implicit threat. That observation is less a case of 'dramatics' than simple reading comprehension.

Reading comprehension is nothing to do with it. She hasn't given a verbatim report, you know nothing about attitude or tone from either her or the officer.

You are reading what you want to see into it.

SantaCarlaCalifornia · 04/10/2022 12:35

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:33

Reading comprehension is nothing to do with it. She hasn't given a verbatim report, you know nothing about attitude or tone from either her or the officer.

You are reading what you want to see into it.

But so are you?

You obviously lean towards the police being correct whereas, from experience on these boards, the rest of us do not.

It doesn't make you any more right than anyone else.

MelodyPondsMum · 04/10/2022 12:35

If the police now act on memes, they're going to be inundated with reports about the death threat memes that women receive on Twitter and who 'might' be behind anonymous accounts that have posted them.
Then there were the threats against FILIA. And what about the paedophile apologists and academics? Will the police investigate them because of their online posts? They're going to be busy.

FlorettaB · 04/10/2022 12:35

’(A) man who thinks the police can be summoned upon demand’

As someone has already said, it seems that the Surrey Police can be summoned on demand. It’s amazing how anyone can get this level of response from them. This woman couldn’t get them to investigate properly.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10857503/Coroner-slams-Surrey-Police-failing-protect-mother-four-murdered-estranged-husband.html

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:36

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 04/10/2022 12:33

Actually sending her back to the cells was sectioning her. Using a section at that point was a way of holding her in the cells for longer. I suspect you are not familiar with the police powers to section someone

No he detained her in a place of safety under Section 136.

MIND's explanation of being sectioned

What does sectioning mean?
If you are sectioned, this means that you are kept in hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983. There are different types of sections, each with different rules to keep you in hospital. The length of time that you can be kept in hospital depends on which section you are detained under.

I think MIND know what being sectioned means.

ancientgran · 04/10/2022 12:39

SantaCarlaCalifornia · 04/10/2022 12:35

But so are you?

You obviously lean towards the police being correct whereas, from experience on these boards, the rest of us do not.

It doesn't make you any more right than anyone else.

No I'm not. I'm talking about the facts of what he is duty bound to do, you are saying by using reading comprehension you know what he really meant. You don't and I don't know how he said it, he can have said the right thing in a threatening way but there is no way the reading comprehension can tell us that.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus · 04/10/2022 12:41

@ancientgran you should be aware there are different types of section and section 136 where the police can hold someone for the safety of themselves and others due to mental health issues is one. Using it in this situation, they way it was done was wrong.

ScreamingMeMe · 04/10/2022 12:42

Photos showing the police officer pushing his way in.

twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1577251885962391553?t=ly-9U1mPvH4E4VP8S66vvg&s=19

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread