KJK v the Police this Friday

[Birdsweepsin]

Kellie is still getting harassed by TRAs it seems. Come and support if you can at Trowbridge Police Station, midday on 24th Feb.

She asked for carrots this afternoon to help pay her legal fees and she is close to 5 and a half already, more than the 3 she needed urgently. What a woman.

Onnabugeisha · Today 09:48

- -How could she provoke somebody into throwing a smoke bomb at her? - -
Unknown. The footage doesnt cover all the possibilities. That’s why police interviews are needed.

Seriously? You have no moral compass, if you think that speaking requires a smoke bomb to be thrown at a person, in response to words.

Words like 'no woman has a penis' and other blasphemous utterances.

So - you have no idea what the complaint is against her. You have no idea what the reporting person has said and what evidence they can offer.

You have not watched to footage and can't say exactly what KJK was doing at a any specific time

Hence - an offence has been reported to the police which is classified as a crime. If the police have to investigate things with impartiality - are you expecting them just to ignore the crime allegation because its KJK?

Or do you think the police should investigate the crime properly and gather evidence for & against?

WickedSerious
Words like 'no woman has a penis' and other blasphemous utterances.

Its fine saying this as its an opinion and not an offence - but what is the allegation that's been made against KJK on this occasion?

You need to know what the reporting person has stated to the police which classifies it as a crime.

It may be malicious - who knows - none of us here will know as we are not privy to what the allegation is and what the evidence for or against it is

But - to investigate it properly, KJK needs to be given an opportunity to put her side of the story across. And as its an allegation of a crime, then to do it properly it should be under a caution - to protect KJK as much as anything else.

It may be NFA'd after the interview, it may go onto the next gate in the process if there is sufficient to proceed - who knows - but it needs to be done properly if a crime is being alleged.

I don’t think that. You’re just jumping to the worst extreme because you disagree with me and so want to cast aspersions.

So - you have no idea what the complaint is against her. You have no idea what the reporting person has said and what evidence they can offer.

Nor do you. it's not public information.

The information I do have is that she, and other women, have been persecuted by the police over this issue.

Suella Braverman has told them to stop. And a judge who witnessed their tactics, has likened them to the gestapo. Not the usual moniker you would apply to police who merely want to 'investigate the crime properly and gather evidence for & against', is it?

It’s also arguably indecent to be tweeting about someone else’s child’s genitalia imho.

"Look over there, at someone imho being indecent, not over here, at someone chopping off their child's genitals"

I agree with you - none us know what the specifics are of this complaint

So none of us can say that the police are wrong for interviewing KJK or investigating the allegation made

"....The information I do have is that she, and other women, have been persecuted by the police over this issue...." - what issues? You don't know what the specific allegation is here (nor do I), so you can't judge if KJK is being persecuted here or investigated as part of due process. in a crime inquiry

Suella Braverman has never told them to stop investigating crimes. Here, a crime has been alleged and its being investigated.

But - to investigate it properly, KJK needs to be given an opportunity to put her side of the story across. And as its an allegation of a crime, then to do it properly it should be under a caution - to protect KJK as much as anything else.

But KJK DOESN;T WANT to put her side of it, which she's stated MANY times including in a phone call she recorded which I've watched - she referred them to the many videos of the event. The only reason she's doing it is because of the threat they won't let her travel to Australia if she doesn't. She's only doing it under duress, she refused previous requests for a 'voluntary' interview to 'put her side'. I think they want to try and trip her up.

There are MULTIPLE publicly available videos of the event AND the police officer's testimony AND multiple other witnesses. Have you seen KJK events? She's never not surrounded by people. If they had enough to charge, they'd have done so by now. Are you suggesting they can't charge people of a crime if they don't agree to be interviewed?

I thought it was a free country and we had the right not to attend 'voluntary' interviews.

As to the police investigating - utter bollocks. My friend had a bike worth 1k stolen. The thief then advertised it on ebay. Friend contacted the police with the bike ad and they did FUCK ALL. They just gave friend a crime number and told him to claim on his insurance. He's not big and he was too scared to try and set up a meeting to get it back in case the thief was violent (especially given there was no police support at all). The fact that the thief advertised it on ebay suggests that they know the police will do fuck all about reports of theft. They're too busy interviewing women who don't like paedophilia in order to bully them into silence.

Carrick and Couzens were the inevitable symptom of the deep seated misogyny and woman hatred in the police. They weren't aberrations, they were products of the system. How many times did Couzens commit the crime of flashing? Was that investigated? Maybe Sarah Everard would still be alive if the police had bothered charging him for that crime rather than spending time on interviewing KJK.

Got to admit I am fucked off with mn deleting my post where I say most people would consider sterilising, preventing growth to adult maturity and castration of a child, abuse.

FGM is where parents believe they are doing the right thing, but it is barbaric and rightly illegal in this country. It is deemed child abuse.

Mutilating the sex organs of a male child - total removal of the gonads cannot be considered okay while mutilating a girl is not.

@Onnabugeisha you're mistaken if you think that a 16 year old can consent to castration. When you say 'medical decisions regarding your own body' it almost sounds like you think castrating children is a good thing.

How can a child possibly consent to never having an orgasm and never experiencing sexual pleasure? That poor kid never knew the magnitude of what he was giving up.

What a world we live in where we cannot accurately describe an illegal medical procedure in clear language in case we hurt some feelings, yet the actual medical procedures - which WERE ILLEGAL IN THE UK at the time- are not under criminal investigation. Wtaf is that about?

Wtf? Indeed.

Agreed - children cannot consent.

And puberty blockers prevent the normal growth of genitalia making a sex change operation much more risky and unlikely to be successful.

Good Lord. She put the entire thing on a Ted Talk, ffs. And uploaded footage laughing at her child before the operation.

Crikey. If you can't identify 'what issues' at a rally about the dangers of trans ideology on children, hosted by a woman who has already been persecuted by the police, and joined by lots of other women who have also been persecuted by the police, then perhaps sleuthing isn't your forte.

Didn't Suella Braverman give you a clue when she said the police should be solving crimes, not policing pronouns?

Where was the investigation into Susie Green's actions? If a parent did the equivalent to a female it would be called FGM and they'd be investigated?

And, we are back to the mantra of “la la la can’t hear you, help help I’m being oppressed by jack booted fascist police” KJK fan club. Apparently KJK should be above the law, she shouldn’t have to put up with pesky complaints from the peasantry and the police should know their place and stay away from her £1m home’s front door.

Haha!! I bet you're jealous of her hair, too.

FFS are we back to slagging her off because she has a nice home, is happily married and looks glamorous?

The point is she is acting like she is above the law which is typical of her class.

Oh yes, absolutely. I lay awake a night dreaming of doing a makeover to look just like a 1950s #tradwife pinup.

Just go for it and don't lose any more sleep over your appearance.

How is she acting as if she thinks she is above the law?

Was she stood in a public space again?

Did she have the audacity to leave the house in possession of an opinion?