The police

[BlackForestCake]

I was just thinking that the GC analysis is the only one that can explain the behaviour of police forces up and down the country.

The liberal position is “It’s awful that the police are institutionally racist and misogynist, but it’s great that they stand up for LGBTQ+ people!”

No. The promotion of trans ideology is part of the misogyny.

No - its the same - non crime hate incidents will not be recorded.
So officers involved in such Whatsapp groups outside of work will not be recorded if they are flagged up by police

You’re confused, or perhaps deliberately attempting to mislead. They already aren’t recorded! Certainly not as non crime hate incidents because misogyny doesn’t officially count as hate.

Imnobody4
Mal cooms - the message has to be 'indecent or grossly offensive.'

Can you not see the grey area it creates. Is a swastika grossly offensive?
Can it be grossly offensive to some people?

So, at that point what does the call taker do - are they in a position to tell the reporting person that in the call taker's opinion, its not offensive and you should not be getting stressed over it - goodbye and end the call?

Think my tongue is bleeding from biting it so hard. You know damn well it's not the same or are you saying the police record and investigate every incidence of workplace misconduct, anywhere?
What exactly is your agenda except for trying to antagonize women and distract from their concerns? I sincerely hope you are not a member of the police and that the only place you get to peacock and try to feel superior is here.

TastefulRainbowUnicorn
The incident is still recorded - its just not recorded as a crime.
Its still an incident reported to police, its just not crimed
Its recorded as a NCHI and closed
But the record still exists.

What they are now being told is to stop recording NCHI at all

So Whatsapp groups can flourish unrecorded so long as they don't fall into a crime categaory

Oh, wow. That is bloody excellent!

Now wondering how Scotland will find a way to ignore this advice under the new Hate Crime Bill ...

Believerinbiology
No - but if one is reported to police by someone, it will be looked at to see if its a crime - so is the messages grossly offensive or indecent - so that would be mal comms

Or are the reported tweets etc not a crime but fall into a NCHI category

Or are the tweets just opinions -so the job gets binned off at source.

Police don't just go around to workplaces examining every misconduct. But if someone at that workplace reports something to police, it will be looked into as above.

i suggest most will get binned off by the call takers - but it depends what the messages are

There is crime, and there is gross misconduct. The latter need not be the former for employers to take action.

You know I typed a response out but it's not worth explaining again. Arabella put it much more succinctly.
You know exactly what you are doing.

ArabellaScott
But if its done outside of work, can it be gross misconduct?

If its outside of work and they create a Whatsapp group where they make comments to each other on the group that are misogynistic for example. So long as they are not grossly offensive or indecent - then no crime has occurred

And if NCHI are not recorded any more - this will not be recorded anywhere either.

I think they should be recorded and officers engaging in this inside or outside of work dismissed based on the intelligence gathered on them.

I don't know the policies for police HR, but yes. If someone brings their employer into disrepute, that can def be misconduct, and I'd imagine the police more than many employers have a need to be not only law abiding and respectable but seen as such.

app.croneri.co.uk/feature-articles/misconduct-outside-workplace-and-dismissal

'Examples of misconduct that could lead to dismissal include the following.

Membership of an extreme political party.

Inappropriate use of social media, including rants about the employing organisation and compromising blogs and pictures.

Involvement in football hooliganism.

The employee is charged with, or convicted of, a criminal offence, particularly those of a sexual nature.'

'It is established in case law that the key issue for employers to consider is whether or not:

the employee's misconduct goes to the employment relationship, bringing the employer’s reputation into disrepute; or

affects the employee’s ability to do their job.

An employee can be dismissed for misconduct outside the workplace'

I accept that

My point is:

If its not recorded - how would they know?

As we are not recording any NCHI any more

For example:

If i was part of a group sending grossly offensive messages to each other - then yes, inside or outside of work - gross misconduct (in any profession - not just police)

What if it wasn't grossly offensive - just mildly offensive

If it was done in work - then yes gross misconduct, bringing the company into disrepute, dereliction of duty etc

If it was outside of work, what then?

Should it be recorded somewhere if its brought to light?
This will not be a crime, but would be intelligence on someone in case they go for a job where it may be relevant.

That's all I'm asking - is there some merit in recording it somewhere?

Can I just salute the posters with the patience of saints on this thread

I don't see your point, Felix. Employers generally keep a record of staff history on file.

Oh, I see, you're asking about for future work.

Well, this is why we have job references, if someone was dismissed for gross misconduct then that would generally be something that the employer would disclose to a future employer when asked.

The inability of police officers to distinguish between offensive and grossly offensive is new. When I was a librarian I constantly dealt with complaints about books being offensive, including 'Satanic Verses'. Not once has a police officer questioned my judgement in stocking these books or advised me to remove them, let alone arrested me. If this meme had appeared in a book on political satire in the 21st century, I would have stocked it and dealt politely with any complaints.

Why are you pretending that the threshold on freedom of speech is not a high one? Are you attempting to appear incompetent?

The police should stop using public money to encourage people to report hate incidents, like these idiots :

unherd.com/thepost/do-the-police-know-the-difference-between-offensive-and-offence/

Farcical scenes on the Wirral, where the police have apologised for a billboard reading “BEING OFFENSIVE IS AN OFFENCE”. Superintendent Martin Earl announced that this alarming declaration “although well-intentioned was incorrect.”

@Felix125 - watch the news right now to see another example of police failing women, not taking domestic abuse seriously led to 2 women murdered.

Yet they have time to facilitate the vindictive and repeated harassment of an innocent woman for alleged social media posts.

Yes, NAPALT

It's like the police can do no wrong and have to spend endless hours dithering over 'offended' males, whereas women being actually murdered, assaulted, raped - well I'm sure there is a reason for it.

ArabellaScott
I don't see your point, Felix. Employers generally keep a record of staff history on file.
Yes - i get that and if you are dismissed for gross misconduct, then any future employer will see that

But the records that the employer keep on staff will only be there if its recorded. So, gross misconduct stuff that's reported - no problem. So if it comes to light that an employee has been posting grossly offensive things on Whatsapp which was reported to police and recorded - then this can be used by the employer also and used against the employee - no problem

But if we are now saying that NCHI which are not crimes are not to be recorded. Then the employer will never know. How would they, nothing will be recorded. Anyone phoning police about a matter on Whatsapp which is not a crime just a NCHI will be told there is nothing we can do and its not being recorded either.

I'm just asking will this cause issues along the line - so that people like Couzens cronies (in any profession) can fester their misogynistic views unhindered?

SigourneyHoward
Can I just salute the posters with the patience of saints on this thread
Thank you very much - I am a patient person

Imnobody4
Its all about the context in which this swastika was used/sent.
If I send it to someone who i know would be offended by it - a holocaust survivor for example - would that make it grossly offensive?

As apposed to just sending it to say a history student with a comment of "... this flag was readily displayed all over Europe in the early 1940's"

There is a lot of grey areas within the law and questions like this will need to be tested - often by a court. This is why we have so much case law.

And does the reporting person/victim views count in this as to whether they have been grossly offended by it - or should there be an independent person to say what is or isn't offensive in each case. i don't know, might be a good thing as at present we use the courts to determine this, but this will be after the investigation is completed and arrests have been made perhaps unnecessarily.

AlisonDonut
reading the report, there was an ongoing firearms incident at the time which may have drained resources. Not saying its right and there were other failings along the way by the looks. But i would not have thought resources at that time were being stripped back by 'woke' jobs from the queue which prevented a unit being dispatched to it.

I'm not here to defend things when they go wrong - and if you want to start a thread on all the bad things that's going on in the police I'm sure me and Stillvicarinatutu will be avid posters and i can give you a list of issues which i constantly complain to senior management about.

Am I the only one that finds this sinister?
How did we get from recording e.g. incidents of domestic abuse by hospital staff, to recording peoples hurt feelings to stop the wrong thinking people getting a job?

But the records that the employer keep on staff will only be there if its recorded. So, gross misconduct stuff that's reported - no problem. So if it comes to light that an employee has been posting grossly offensive things on Whatsapp which was reported to police and recorded - then this can be used by the employer also and used against the employee - no problem

But if we are now saying that NCHI which are not crimes are not to be recorded. Then the employer will never know. How would they, nothing will be recorded. Anyone phoning police about a matter on Whatsapp which is not a crime just a NCHI will be told there is nothing we can do and its not being recorded either.

An employer also has an employment record that keeps info on staff on file. This has nothing to do with the police if it's not criminal. But if the employee does something that is gross misconduct it's recorded on the staff member's file and if you're asked for a reference you'd probably pass that on.

FWIW I've never asked for a police check on a member of staff, why would I if they're not working with vulnerable groups? References from previous employers are asked for as a matter of course.

Unless you're suggesting that we reserve NCHI just for police and those in positions of extra responsibility? That may make more sense, I suppose.

ArabellaScott
yes - I have no problem with the fact that employers can keep records on its own staff that it finds out itself - and then use this for gross misconduct proceedings. Things that would be gross misconduct in one job may be different to another job of course.

My point is, if an employer needs to do an enhanced check on someone - say its a social care type job - then anything criminal will be flagged. So, if they have been found guilty for something it will be seen by the future employer to judge.

But, if they are also members of groups with unhealthy interest in things (misogynistic) which isn't classed as criminal - so no crime of mal comms is recorded against them - and we are not recording any NCHI anymore - will people like this slip through the net? Because they will have nothing recorded on them which a future employer can check up on.

Thelnebriati
Its just a question that do we just use recorded criminal offences against someone for a prospective employer to use - or should we also use intelligence gathered on someone?

For example Couzens cronies who had a misogynistic Whatsapp group - might not have been breaking any law, but the intelligence of what they are posting in the group should render their position in the police as null and void. Simplified example i know, but its just to get a point across

And should we use this in other professions too?

I personally think we should - anyone with an unhealthy interest in things should be flagged if its brought to light.

Oh so that's why they record non crimes and rush as fast as possible to arrest women, to stop them working due to not committing any crime.

No wonder they are so keen on them. Anything to keep women out of the workplace.

And meanwhile, shall we present the men that are paedophiles that 'transition' and don't even have to declare their old identities and so can just waltz into any old job, with their actual crimes hidden.

Nothing to see here again.