Trans criminals can use ‘loophole’ to hide previous convictions when applying for jobs

[ChristinaXYZ]

Very long article in the Telegraph www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/05/trans-criminals-can-use-loophole-hide-previous-convictions-when/ of which the following is a short extract:

"Soham murderer Ian Huntley was able to get employment in a school by changing his name by deed poll and hiding his real identity from a criminal record check before killing 10-year-olds Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells in 2003.

Ministers are currently reviewing an existing loophole in the legislation which relies on sex offenders notifying them when they change their names by deed poll but have so far refused to consider issues created by a gender change.
The report warns that the change of both name and gender, which can be done on the basis of self-identification, allows an extra layer of privacy which means an employer will never be told or be able to verify that previous identities have been checked.

Allowing birth sex to be removed also presents a “particular risk including where protections for women and children are concerned” and may prevent employers from providing single-sex care....

...The DBS, a part of the Home Office which carries out the checks, set up a “sensitive applications route” for people who are transgender.

This includes anyone who has self-declared that they have a new name and gender identity and obtained a new passport and driving licence, as well as those who have gone through the legal process of obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate.

They are asked to call and tell officials about their previous identities. They are the only group of applicants who are exempt from listing their previous identities on the application form.

All others, including married women and those who have changed their name by deed poll, have to list their former identities.

The report warns: “The current DBS system relies on the assumption that these disclosures will be made accurately and fully when there are reasons why they might not be. Omission could be deliberate, including for nefarious reasons.”

Coming up to the twentieth anniversary of the murders of 10-year-olds Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells and we're enabling criminals evading the checking systems all over again.

I've been troubled by this. I tried to find information on Victoria Monaghan's darts results before they changed to presenting as a woman. I couldn't find anything. I assume because of the horror of "deadnaming", all the information had gone. I couldn't even find their actual previous name. And I remembered my DBS check, which needed my maiden name from 2005, and I did think WTF? If transgender people can disappear, so can paedophiles and domestic abusers.

I'm pleased to see the article, KPSS deserve wider recognition for their work on this. Its disappointing that the DBS refuse to see the problem.
If you can't see the article, there's a website called 12ft.io you can use.

I think it's Helen Joyce I'm paraphrasing - she points out that trans people through the GRA process are allowed a level of secrecy that is akin to witness protection, and far more than any other group in society.

I know some of the history of the European Court judgements, and some of the history of the UK GRA, but none of it helps me understand why a potential wide group of people should now be allowed to self identify into this Fort Knox grade protection.

The GRA requires consent to process the subject's status and previous information, if you do not have consent, you do not have the legal right to process. There are not the exemptions within the legislation you find in other legislation such as the Equality Act, so it's very easy to see how this could be abused...

I'm sure poster on here have been talking about this for years.

They certainly have.

I can't go into too much detail, so please forgive me for being slightly cryptic (!): the knowledge and expertise of MNers was invaluable to this report.

There is a good thread by @KeepPrisonsSingleSex on twitter if you want more details

twitter.com/NoXYinXXprisons/status/1589260240671109121

In the Mail today, the comments are mostly supportive. A few don't get what the issue is (maybe they didn't read the article.)
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11394923/Transgender-criminals-able-exploit-loophole-withholding-past-names-hide-convictions.html

Why isn't this stuff linked to NI no or similar?
I bet transpeople don't lose all the pension money they have paid in & their NI contributions on their male wages before becoming Doris instead of Darren, so there is always going to be a real link that can be followed.

Funny that the tax man doesn't have to lose them, or anything else that costs the govt money or loses them money, but the police are kept out of the loop.

It's almost as if someone wants male sex offenders to be able to get unrestricted access to women & children.

I'm going to guess if you detransition you can pick a new identity too, so a man could easily rape a child, pretend to be trans & get a new name, then say they are detransitioning and get back to being a paedophile with no awkward history following him around.

I believe sex offenders would go to far greater lengths than that to get access to victims.

Some really good points @Brokendaughter

"I'm going to guess if you detransition you can pick a new identity too, so a man could easily rape a child, pretend to be trans & get a new name, then say they are detransitioning and get back to being a paedophile with no awkward history following him around."

In theory it may be possible for the switch to be repeated several times - especially if Labour or any other government that believes in 100+ genders legislates for that. The switches could go on and on.

"I believe sex offenders would go to far greater lengths than that to get access to victims." When you think about the way Huntley behaved I cannot see why anyone would disagree!

When you think about the way Huntley behaved I cannot see why anyone would disagree!

[It was rumoured] at one point Ian Huntley was wanting to become Lianne Huntley, that was the very point the authorities should have sat up and changed the process. Instead they continued to throw the door open.

This is nothing to do with being trans and everything to do potentially letting an individual to exploit a loophole in a process that his original despicable crime aimed to close.

One of the consequences is that if, for example, one was working in a job where safeguarding was especially important and there was a trans employee, one would have at the back of one's mind that they might be hiding convictions.

This isn't great for the trans employees that are just behaving normally.

It seems as if virtually every bit of policy bending and reality mangling that TRAs demand serves to foster what might be experienced as transphobia by trans people. Is that actually the point? Because none of this was necessary. Trans rights could have been fought for trans people as trans people, with no compelled speech or deception. We'd be in such a different place now.

I couldn't agree more with this.

The way trans activism has been conducted over the last years has been an utter disaster for everyone, including trans people. I can't express how much respect I have lost for the likes of Stonewall - all the surveys show that public acceptance of trans people has actually worsened over the last few years and you'd think that would induce massive soul searching among those claiming to represent them. But no - they just plough on and on and on......incapable of any humility or honest reflection.

Another reason why the GRA should be repealed.
Most men won’t ‘pass’ anyway, so the secrecy is redundant. Those that do should not be helped by the state to live a lie.