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

Yes - I am more than happy that this thread sticks to Caroline's case only.

Felix125 it is not up to you what we discuss. My point, which I am sure you understood, is that when another case with which many of us are very familiar is raised, such as Scottow, then it provides an opportunity for you to either learn or ignore, rather than fill up the thread with uniformed musings about possible comparisons.

If Felix125 is trying to argue that there isn't a major problem within the Met, when its own Commissioner has recognised deep-rooted problems of racism and misogyny, then that's ignorant and obtuse in the extreme, and tells us all we need to know.

The example of misogyny on this thread, while denying misogyny, was illuminating at first, now I feel it is tedious.

Exactly, we can see the misogyny in the respect he shows on this thread, if he can't see it in this thread he's not going to see it in real life.

If it walks like a duck….

*Felix125 · Yesterday 16:51

Number of Met cops under investigation - 548.

I notice that you have emphasised the percentage, rather than the number. 548 cops under investigation for crimes, including rape, is a large number for one force.

Rape and sexual assault are the apex behaviours of demeaning, sexist, misogynistic behaviour, perpetrated by men, upon women.

The number of horrible, misogynistic creeps in that one force is far, far higher than the number of men under criminal investigation. Don't forget, you lot close ranks, cover up and stymie complaints and investigations into your own.

How many bystanders must there be for that percentage. And these are those we know about.

I’m a white woman from a middle class background. Someone who historically might be well disposed towards the police. So if it’s as clear as day to me, then the ship has truly sailed.

Bystanders indeed.

Bosky
I'm more than happy to learn about the Scottow case - but we will need to know what the reporting person has said/claimed/alleged from their point of view to gauge what the police did. But I don't think we are going to get that.

thedancingbear
Where have I denied it exists?
And where have I said that the 1.6% is not a problem?

Dumbo12 & BaronessEllarawrosaurus
And how have I been misogynistic on this thread?
Just because I have a different view to others about the subject matter, doesn't automatically make me misogynistic.

SinnerBoy
I didn't say it wasn't a problem and you are right 548 is 548 too many.
But it still appears that the vast majority of cops do not fall into this category
Besides which - I was answering a direct question you asked on the previous page.

MissMissive
I absolutely agree. There will be people who are 'bystanders' and they are just as bad. But even if you include those numbers in the percentage its not going to be a 90%+ figure for the entire force. If you are a 'white woman from a middle class background' and have had personal experience of a cop who has spoken to you in misogynistic way then you need to complain about them and get them out of the force. Or are you just going on what you see in the press? A recent report showed that the fire brigade is just as bad or worse - yet that seems to have been swept under the carpet.

I would call it out and raise any issues i see/hear - but on our shift I haven't seen or heard it. But people on this thread seem to automatically accuse me & my shift of being misogynistic - yet have never even met them.

The case of former PC Samantha Lee is proving illuminating, with more to emerge. And not in a good way.

Yes - and its right that she was flagged and investigated.
And if its proven she is guilty, then get rid of her and have her jailed.

I would call it out and raise any issues i see/hear - but on our shift I haven't seen or heard it. But people on this thread seem to automatically accuse me & my shift of being misogynistic - yet have never even met them

You won't see or hear any misogyny on your shift because you are blind to it. You are blind to it on this thread, you don't understand what it is or how it manifests. That is a major part of the problem. Please note I haven't said your shift is misogynistic just that you wouldn't recognise it if it was and on the balance of probability you will see misogyny every day.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus

So what misogyny am I being blind to on this thread?

So far what I have said - we don't know what the allegation is being made against Caroline. We don't know if its related to her 'back story' . We don't know what the state of the enquiry is. We don't know what the necessity was to arrest her? We don't know if it is the same person who has reported it? We may well have got Caroline's side of the story on Twitter - but we haven't got the reporting persons side of the story to compare.

Until we know what these are - we can't judge if the police actions have been correct or not.

Otherwise we are just assuming - and you know what assuming does.

How is this thought process misogynistic?

If it is a case that 4 cops were bored one day and just decided to arrest Caroline for no particular reason - then its clearly wrong. And if it is the case then Caroline must surly complain for false arrest, damage to her property & false imprisonment. The 4 cops and the custody sergeant should then be sacked and jailed.

Disclaimer - I am using 'we' to mean me and most others on here. I acknowledge that some on here will know or have been told the details of the complaint and I am aware that Caroline may have access to this thread or indeed people close to her. I also acknowledge that the reporting person, OIC and direct witnesses may also read the thread and hence will not be included in the term 'we'.

This post is also answering a point raised by BaronessEllarawrosaurus. Other posters need not comment on it. By all mean post if you want to, but I reserve my right to answer posts raised by members of this forum.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus

And also to add - if it can be shown that the reporting person has lied in their allegation against Caroline - then this should be investigated and that reporting person summonsed to court. They have to present some sort of evidence to back their report up.

So what examples of misogyny on my shift will I be seeing everyday that i am blind to?

The same that you can't see on this thread, the talking down to people because they are women, the brow beating, the assumption of superior knowledge, the dismall of previous knowledge.

Do you honestly think that misogyny is some major thing? It isn't, it's in the every day, its treating men with more respect because they are men, it's writing women off because their little minds can't comprehend. It's a thousand little things, calling a man sir and a woman love. It's the way you mansplain. it's the way you treat us as idiots, it's the way you constantly fall back on but we don't know what was alleged. It's the way you can not acknowledge the the police as an institution are treating men and women differently, iit's the way you can not acknowledge that reports from men and women are not treated with the same seriousness. It's that even when these are pointed out you just say but we don't know what was reported.

Nailed it Baroness

BaronessEllarawrosaurus

And people on this thread haven't talked down to me, or been directly abusive to me and told me I have no right to have an opinion on here because I'm a man have they? Accusing me of telling 'women to shut up' when I have done no such thing. Go back to page 1 to see almost straight away I started to receive abusive comments - even MNHQ deleted some of the posts.

But this presumably is alright - because I'm a man. I should have to just put up with it.

I've not been abusive to anyone on here or talked down to them. If they have raised an argument which i think is wrong - i will answer it back. That's what a discussion forum is all about and is nothing about misogyny.

I don't call people sir, luv, dear or anything similar. the only phrase I use is either their name or 'mate' which can be used for both sexes - and is used throughout our shift.

I don't treat anyone on here like an idiot - and where have done this?

I do fall back on the 'we don't know argument' - as its constantly thrown back at me that 'we do know'. Well clearly (as others have acknowledged on here) we don't know. We can assume, but we don't know. So how can we judge what the police have done if we don't have all the facts?

If you are 100% certain that this is a case of 4 cops being bored one day and have decided to attend Caroline's home, break her door down and arrest her for no reason. Then mange to persuade a custody sergeant to detain her in custody. Then you stick to that belief. We will soon here off Caroline taking the force for false arrest, criminal damage and false imprisonment. Perhaps you can stand as a witness in court for her if you have all the facts.

Disclaimer - I am using 'we' to mean me and most others on here. I acknowledge that some on here will know or have been told the details of the complaint and I am aware that Caroline may have access to this thread or indeed people close to her. I also acknowledge that the reporting person, OIC and direct witnesses may also read the thread and hence will not be included in the term 'we'.

This post is also answering a point raised by BaronessEllarawrosaurus. Other posters need not comment on it. By all mean post if you want to, but I reserve my right to answer posts raised by members of this forum.

Hi Felix, what is your aim. Repeating the same message in the hope that us wimmin will cave and agree you were right all along, is unlikely to be successful, and is becoming a bit boring.

Or is your intention to repeatedly bump the thread. In which case you have suceeded. Without your efforts it would have died a long time ago.

I'm not saying it is a case of 4 cops being bored and deciding to break down her door I am saying that the police have an issue with institutional misogyny which means that reports made by male members of the public are treated with far more seriousness than reports by female members. I'm fairly certain the police can justify their actions on a superficial level but that those decisions are made in a culture of misogyny. When something becomes so ordinary and every day then people stop seeing it.

OP; This is what happened, its pretty bad.
'Splainer; Let me tell you what is supposed to happen.
Chorus; What was supposed to happen didn't happen. That is why this is bad.

Repeat ad nauseum.

Needmoresleep
Read the disclaimer above
And people keep raising the same argument and suggesting that i am wrong or I am misogynistic. So I will reply to those posts if i think they are wrong. Its a discussion forum.

BaronessEllarawrosaurus
if the police treat men with far more grace than women - how is it 90% of the prison population are male? How is it the vast majority of DV cases going to court or the suspect is in jail have a male perpetrator and female victim? If the police force are totally misogynistic, then surly it would be the other way around - or even closer to 50/50

Thelnebriati
Chorus;What was supposed to happen didn't happen. That is why this is bad.
And how do we know it didn't happen......?

if the police treat men with far more grace than women - how is it 90% of the prison population are male?

Because the majority of violent crime is perpetrated by men.

How is it the vast majority of DV cases going to court or the suspect is in jail have a male perpetrator and female victim?

Because the majority of violent crime is perpetrated by men.

if the police treat men with far more grace than women - how is it 90% of the prison population are male?

Oh my days.

I wish they were live-streaming this. Is it normal for former officers to be subject to misconduct hearings? So many times when there has been misconduct I read in the press that no action can be taken because the officer is no longer employed by the police. Or have the rules changed?

Misconduct hearing for former PC Samantha Lee
Notice of hearing to be held in public

Name of the officer concerned: Former PC Samantha Lee, formerly based at SN - CU

Date: 15 to 23 May 2023

Time: 9.30am

Location: Misconduct Hearing Suite, 4th Floor, Palestra House, 197 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8NJ

The conduct that is the subject matter of the case and how that conduct is alleged to amount to misconduct or gross misconduct as the case may be, as set out in the notice given in accordance with Regulation 30:

It is alleged that in March 2021 former PC Lee failed to undertake the correct investigative enquiries into an allegation of indecent exposure (concerning Wayne Couzens as the named suspect) and that she subsequently provided a misleading account of her actions when questioned about them.

It is alleged that in doing so the following Standards of Professional Behaviour have been breached:

Duties and Responsibilities
Honesty and Integrity

The matter set out above is alleged to amount to gross misconduct in that it is so serious as to justify dismissal.

The hearing will be held at Palestra House, viewing via authorised attendance in hearing room.

Important note

Applications to observe this hearing must be made no later than 1pm the previous working day. This is to allow for sufficient time to process the application. Any requests received after this time will be unable to be processed in time for the hearing and therefore will be rejected.

The identity of victims and witnesses will be protected during the hearing as appropriate.

Register to attend

Please ensure that you have read the conditions of entry prior to booking.
https://www.met.police.uk/foi-ai/metropolitan-police/misconduct-hearings/2023/may/misconduct-hearing-former-pc-samantha-lee/