'Breaking' - Transgender rapist won’t be imprisoned in Scotland’s all-women jail, Nicola Sturgeon tells MSPs

[zaramysaviour]

Excellent news.

And Sturgeon has really shot herself in the foot here (again). Because if she really thinks 'trans women are women', why is she not allowing this 'woman' to go to a female prison?

So therefore she knows this person is not a woman.

So therefore she is being transphobic...

Well.......

MBM's excellent thread around the Scottish Prison Service's process (EQIA etc) for their transgender prisoner placing policy -

twitter.com/mbmpolicy/status/1619670133659799552?s=20&t=NmdLuMiBve8iot7MIJ3gCw

And the UN special rapporteur on torture

https://twitter.com/dralicejedwards/status/1619579182245347330?s=46&t=-F6jj0eY8Spmg2Fx4CkRrQ

I suppose she's deemed a bigot, too? Gosh there are a lot of them about!!

Breaking news.

Means bugger all IMO. Just a way to fob off inquiries about their policy or prisoner numbers or any information, basically. "As you know, a review is currently under way so I can't comment until it's concluded." Or something similar. And said review will last until they think everyone has forgotten about this issue and they can resume imposing males on vulnerable women.

Let’s carry out that review now:

should biological males ever be incarcerated with biological females? No.

Have I missed anything?

Yeah. Like their 'careful risk assessment' sold as 'let's decide on whether they're safe in the women's estate' and which actually means 'what does this man need provided in the women's estate' with 'no' never being an option considered at all.

This is a kick to the long grass, listen to a lot of wailing and emoting from trans charities who loathe women and safeguarding, and then crack on terrorising and harming women in the name of happy violent sex offenders.

Just fuck off with that.

No wonder the 'interesting' wings of the male prisons are all abuzz with how many of them can exploit this and exploit women before the Sturgeon gets thrown out.

From that article:
“Finally, our ongoing policy review will be independently assessed by experts in women affected by trauma and violence."

That is something new because the policies were assessed by trans groups and no women’s groups last time.

Yeah but which experts.

Because I'll bet the chap in charge of Rape Crisis will be first in line. Followed by the other sock puppets paid by the Scots govt to swear women love being excluded and harmed by male people in their spaces and it's good for them.

I could at this point write the bullshit myself we've all been so drenched in it.

It will not be any women's group likely to go off message and say unhelpful things like No Men In Women's Prisons Ever.

This review will be interesting - whatever the time it's done in - and it'll have to be quick given the circumstances. Because even the General Secretary of the Scottish Police Federation broke ranks today (WarriorN at 8:16 today on this thread) and - like the police - the Scottish Prison Service is in an invidious position. In part because they too allowed activists to infiltrate and dictate men's sexual rights. Does it:

• rewrite the policy to exclude natal males from natal female prisons and bin the original policy?

• do a bit of fiddling round the edges but end up with a fudge and shrug its shoulders?

Does SPS want to be in the position that the first one gets you to? Which is that Bryson has a claim, take it on the chin but forge ahead with a policy that better meets international standards, public expectations, and what might still be possible given Haldane?

Does SPS fiddle round the edges but still face a claim from Bryson AND from women incarcerated with him?

Taking a claim - however it pans out - wins in the court of public opinion, and in the meantime, it seems inconceivable that there won't be other moving parts to this.

It seems likely that you could judicially review the decisions of the SPS to allow certain prisoners into womens prisons. It would be the application of any guidance available would be the interesting issue; the key tests the rationality of the decision, such that a reasonable could have made it and was it lawfully applied? Judicial review goes to the how of a decision, but not necessarily the merits.

The answer to these questions will tell you just how much trouble Scotland is in.

..."in the Scottish Parliament, Ms Sturgeon said she agreed with the chief executive of Rape Crisis that it was not possible to have a rapist within a women's prison.
Referring directly to the Bryson case, she said: "It would not be appropriate for me, in respect of any prisoner, to give details of where they are being incarcerated.
"But given the understandable public and parliamentary concern in this case, I can confirm to parliament that this prisoner will not be incarcerated at Cornton Vale women's prison.
"I hope that provides assurance to the public."
The first minister said any prisoner who poses a risk of sexual offending is segregated from other prisoners including while a risk assessment is carried out.
She said: "There is no automatic right for a trans woman convicted of a crime to serve their sentence in a female prison even if they have a gender recognition certificate.
"Every case is subject to rigorous individual risk assessment..."...

When Nicola Sturgeon stated that the prisoner will not be incarcerated in Cornton Vale and hopes this provides assurance to the public while not giving details of where they are going to be incarcerated as this would not be appropriate...hmm... I have read that he was moved to HMP Edinburgh but has anyone read whether it is the Male or Female estate he will be placed in while here? Thanks - there is just so much being updated, so quickly, I cannot keep up although I am attempting to read everything.

I'm surprised there's no mention of Katie Dolatowski in the article. Mind you, it does say "movement of transgender prisoners will be paused", it doesn't say they will review ones who are already in women's prisons.

I'm surprised there's no mention of Katie Dolatowski in the article.

I'm not. Inconvenient fact is the name of the game.

"Every case is subject to rigorous individual risk assessment..."...

Yeah, right.

"Guilty, take them away to Cornton Vale immediately."

This, exactly this - see how easy it is SPS?

"It gets worse. Rapist Adam Graham (Isla Bryson) was rightly rejected from a self-defence course for women to fight off sex attackers.

Yet the SNP thought it was okay to send him into a women’s prison "👇

twitter.com/RussellFindlay1/status/1621067602222288897?t=KHbCaWwUdxw4J6cFHiwOKw&s=19

www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/10156773/trans-double-rape-fiend-isla-bryson-self-defence-blocked/amp/

Bloody hell.

That charity has better screening and safeguarding procedures than the Scottish Government and the Scottish Prison Service.

So Isla Bryson was hoping to be in a female prison, improving on her propensity for rape with self-defence techniques. Just ... 🤯.

It's pretty obvious from looking at "Isla", that he would have no problem taking on a couple of other blokes if he had to (not that anyone is likely to try to molest him).

It was particularly disturbing that he apparently said that women on the beauty course were misgendering him, and he needed to be able to defend himself. Who needs physically aggressive techniques to cope with "misgendering"?

Thank heavens Alan Bell, who runs the courses at the Scottish Centre for Personal Safety refused him entry following their robust screening process. Mr Bell is obviously a very professional trainer who takes the job of protecting women, and teaching them how to protect themselves, very seriously.

It is ridiculous that a screening process should even be necessary to exclude men from these courses, but Mr Bell obviously thought ahead to the possibility that this might happen, and wisely put one into place.

Thank you, Mr Bell. I wish our politicians had even half of your sense, courage, and integrity

To be fair, it isn't a high bar.

I'm surprised he hasn't tried to sue them.

If he had had a GRC would the course have found it more difficult to turn him away?

In theory, no because of the exceptions in the EA2010, but in practice a less savvy course provider might have been intimidated or confused and erred on the side of caution through fear of legal action.

I’m very happy for the women on those courses that ‘Isla’ was turned away. Congratulations to the management there. But we don’t know why he was turned away I don’t think they said?

So was it an obvious sensible risk assessment and safeguarding decision based on ‘Isla’ history of repeat rape of women convictions (knowing how hard it is to get a rape conviction in this country?)
or was it the self ID and they would have taken him on if he had a GRC?
or regardless of GRC or Self ID status was it that the gym decided to take the risk of applying the Equality Act exemption knowing that it would be an insult and a deterrent to the women using their courses to allow men on to their self defence courses?

Agree it has come to something when a gym is doing more to protect women than government organisations and the Scottish parliament though.