Caroline F - new arrest / harassment ?

[catsrus]

Caroline has just posted on twitter that the police were trying to force entry - WTF going on?

Three officers saying she has to go with them.

Three.

twitter.com/cf_farrow/status/1651514281471492096?s=46&t=rbPMHI1uvxUAiQC4E1EE3A

Mycatwantsmedead
He continues to shitpost about her. She reciprocates.
That is basically it. And it needs 4 officers to come and arrest her.

i know people are saying I am repeating myself - but this is why

We don't know if the police had attended for that reason yet.

@Felix125 she.says.this.on.her. Twitter.

The police may or may not know the history, but if they do, it will be via the alleged victim who has initiated the complaint.

But lots of people post about a town in Scotland and they don't get multiple police officers knocking at their door. I've read threads, I've seen this. I may not agree with CF on many things, but she has the right to defend herself against the sort of shit that has been flung at her and is likely to continue to be flung at her unless someone like the police and CPS step in and stop the targeted harassment.

That is basically it. And it needs 4 officers to come and arrest her.

But no-one arrests the man.

You don't know at this stage if its 'the man' who has made this current report/allegation

Yes - we can get things from Caroline's twitter account - but you need to see what the reporting person has said also, as often the two accounts will conflict

Mycatwantsmedead she.has.not.said.what.the.reporting.person.has.said.on.this.occasion

Felix has made 117 posts on this thread. Almost all of them saying 'we don't know what she's done', or some variation of that.

https://www.mumsnet.com/search/advanced?allTopics=false&from=2023-04-27&to=2023-05-02&topics[0]=Feminism%3A+Sex+%26+gender+discussions&username=felix125

You'd think he'd be bored of saying the same thing over and over again by now. Like the rest of us are reading his posts.

OldCrone
Indeed I am - but people still throw the same argument back at me (see a few posts above) - That is basically it. And it needs 4 officers to come and arrest her.

The leading figures in the GC world seem to have ignored this latest Farrow drama. She has tagged KJK so many times, for example, but never a response. Even her own organisation, CitizenGo, has not said a word.

What to make of this?

Because she is clearly emotionally affected? (Absolutely a reasonable response I'm not criticising). But openly upset women get called hysterical etc and leading GC people don't want that mud flight at them too?

Just a guess. I absolutely do not want to criticise CF

Why make anything out of who is amplifying who on Twitter? Nothing has actually happened yet in that CF hasn't been charged: we just have more police overreach and, after a while, it becomes a blur. As for "leading GC people" I don't regard anyone as having special influence or having authority so interactions, or lack thereof, with certain people really isn't on my radar.

So you do know that more than one allegation has happened. You obviously know more than you want to let on, fine, we dont much care what you know, just dont play the innocent.
If we dont know already, we soon will know who made the allegations and what they were. (I'm well behind on this thread and the farms was playing silly beggars this morning)

Btw for a police officer, your spelling is terrible.

@FGCPC raises the question that's been in my mind for some time on the subject of those who use the justice system and the civil courts to pursue personal vendettas. Some recent high-profile instances of civil cases playing out in the media/live stream have disintegrated into complete clown shows, but have shone a light on some fundamental flaws with the system.

Seemingly anyone can defame, slander or libel whoever the hell they like: unless they are very wealthy and have the money to take that on. Everyone else gets no legal recourse and will just have to take the damage to their reputation on the chin.

Secondly is that is clear personal vendettas can be pursued and individuals abused with the law seemingly on their side. Enthusiastic litigants are well informed as to their rights, and are by default very wealthy, are in the media trade, or are bankrolled by powerful organizations who like to employ strong-arm tactics. At present, there's nothing much to stop them indulging in their very corrosive pastime of intimidating and silencing people in this way.

I thought those recent cases might at the very least highlight where sometimes the law is an ass, and to stop it being abused in this way. I agree with that poster: such people do need dealing with robustly. Proving their little game is another matter, but in cases like this there is a clear pattern and it's preserved for posterity on the www.

As to @OldCrone's point about the motivation of the sea lion, seems bang on the money.

In a world with any justice or fairness whatsoever, Vexatious Litigant would get his richly-deserved comeuppance and his equally unpleasant sidekick would be permanently struck off.

Unfortunately, the law is still an ass.

@Felix125 did you even read my post properly before quoting it?

In case you're posting in good faith, but simply have compression difficulties...

(Others did, but) I did not make any mention of the alleged victim's actions. I called scrutiny to those actions solely of the police in that if you have previously arrested someone on full facts and later realised they had not committed a crime I would say that is a mistake. AFAIK first mistake was on twitter based spats fully out there not any kind of he said she said subjective investigations. Later police appear to have agreed no crime committed by Caroline. I also said the police should be mindful of their powers and empathetic for distress that arrest and lawful investigation causes.

I then said that 2nd arrest with full facts out there with no crime - shame on them, the police. IMHO at this point the police owe the woman they arrested a huge unequivocal apology, to overhall their processes and to give a resolution never to arrest her again unless they are 100 sure that an actual crime has been committed.

An escolation to forced entry on a 4th arrest to a woman (intentionally or not) already traumatised by THE POLICE who's whole raison d'etre is to protect feels absolutely abhorrent to me unless to proven to be an imminent risk of serious harm that requires immediate arrest to prevent.

To compare to repeat call outs for DV or suicide in reply to my post is disengenuous when I specifically stated no evidence on full facts rather than evidential difficulties. We both know there is plenty of evidence in DV cases, but they fall due to evidential difficulties when the victim denies any assault. Hence the introduction of the DVPO. IMHO this doesn't go far enough and an initial statement in the context of DV should hold more weight than a retraction. Similarly in the case of a suicide risk there is genuine reason for repeat attendance. Often repeat attendance due to the failure of mental health services to act sufficiently...

Repeat attendance for non-crime is not the same and you and I both know it. Whether or not the most recent arrest was justified IMHO the police should be fully accountable for the past trauma THEY CAUSED and have used a softer approach to mitigate their own past wrongs.

That the police are traumatising women due to process for non crimes is wrong and needs to be called out whether or not you agree with Caroline. And I base that on past arrests, that I believe should have been taken into account before escolation on this occasion.

Ourladycheesusedatum
I am saying this allegation - meaning this current allegation against Caroline.
Not this allegation as in the same person making it - as I do not know if it is the same person making it.

119 posts.

Yawn.

@Felix125, I say this with kindness, but you’re coming across as obsessively misogynistic, pal.

andweallsingalong

I agree - and it will be stressful if Caroline has been arrested unlawfully. And if it is unlawful, she has the right to a full apology and compensation - and the officers disciplined.

The police are never going to be able to show 100% that a crime has been committed and a person is guilty. That's why only a court can say if a person is guilty or not. Of course there are circumstances which are fully witnessed by CCTV etc etc and ID is not in issue - but for cases where the reporting person makes an allegation against another - you are never going to establish full facts. Both the reporting person and the person being accused will have differing accounts.

Hence the need for the investigation - to establish the evidence.

An escolation to forced entry on a 4th arrest to a woman (intentionally or not) already traumatised by THE POLICE who's whole raison d'etre is to protect feels absolutely abhorrent to me unless to proven to be an imminent risk of serious harm that requires immediate arrest to prevent.

Exactly - the police need a necessity to arrest. But we don't know what has been alleged this time - so we can't make judgement on the police's actions. If they have broke her down down, forced entry and arrested her for a non crime - then they are in the wrong. If they haven't got a necessity to arrest then they are in the wrong.

Comparing repeat calls is not disingenuous - if we have a person claiming suicide and it turns out that they are just messing about and not suicidal at all. And they do this over & over again - at what point do the police ignore the call. Because on the 10th time, that person actually does it - do you think the police will be criticised for not attending?

For DV's if an initial statement has been gained from the reporting person, then a DVPO can not be applied for. DVPN's & DVPO's are there whilst the reporting person decides if they want to provide any evidence.

But what if they call and when the police arrive there is nothing happening.

For example "...my ex partner is at the front door trying to get in....". When police arrive, they can't find him despite area searches and the use of police dogs, drones etc. This happens 4-5 times that night and each time he can not be located.

Do we stop going after the 5th time? Of course not. Each report has to be taken on its merits and investigated properly.

Each arrest must have a necessity for that arrest. So we can't simply say that we are not going to arrest a person because last time it did not result in a charge. This would give a green light for that person to do what they want? And I am not saying Caroline would do this before you make that comment.

Since you have called me it

How am I coming across as misogynistic?

I am saying that we need to establish what the reporting person has said this time before we can judge if the police were right to attend her address.

How is that misogynistic, pal?

Fucking hell, you’re a piece of work.

is that the sarcastic tone you take with members of the public?

Ourladycheesusedatum

If you're going to criticise my spelling - then look at your grammer.
The word "don't" has an apostrophe

thedancingbear
Answer the question then - since you are calling me it
And what is sarcastic about my last response?

It's perhaps worth noting that Caroline is taking civil action against Surrey over her first arrest and that, before doing so, she was advised about the merits of any such claim (even this advice costs four figures). Her counsel aren't simply proceeding on a fool's errand but due to facts concerning the arrest.

I've spoken to her today and CitizenGo are very supportive (and of me to a lesser extent should anything happen - I can't see what but even a generic statement of support is likely to provoke a complaint somewhere).

I have no idea why Lisa Townsend or Sarah Phillimore have both commented. The former cryptically and the latter has, frankly, made un-evidenced claims (some I'm in a position to disprove). Whatever the case, it's unprofessional behaviour and saying nothing is best in their respective positions.

I see no reason to reference the tweets Surrey questioned Caroline about, case details, or the complainant(s). My hope, despite current police ineptitude, is that details will emerge when she's either charged or the case dropped and we can all see what she's been subjected to.

Want to borrow my clicker?

I can’t see that she has tagged in specific leading GC figures or KJK into this.

There could be a million and one reasons why her organisation hasn’t said anything, perhaps she has asked them not to? Who cares what they have to say?

Perhaps they don’t want to inflame the situation further for her and risk another arrest? Or maybe they don’t fancy being tracked down and receiving a dose of legals or police seizing their devices?

Your posts sound like alienation. No thank you. Women are wise to this old shit.

I’m getting strong ‘male neighbour offering unsolicited parking and DIY advice’ energy.