Update from CF

[DerekFaker]

This sounds horrendous. How can the police do this.

And yes, it was exactly as we predicted in the previous thread.

Should a certain police officer pop up in this thread, please try not to get drawn into protracted, repetitive arguments with him. Please!

https://twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1666337645427847169?t=LWaRDewlk7r_8pVTdkE_tw&s=19

I sincerely hope the Magistrates don't grant the order-they don't have to.

The fact you don't understand that what you put on SM and it's impact to your professional competence (especially when you specifically talk about altering a persons care records) demonstrates exactly why you are in the situation you are.

I'm going to disengage with you now because it's obvious that beyond derailing the thread your aim is to gaslight lurkers that you have been mistreated.

Unfortunately, all the receipts are archived that prove the reverse.

The only thing your engagement here proves is that women's concerns about safeguarding are well founded.

You know when they say every accusation is a confession...

You hope.

“The only thing your engagement here proves is that women's concerns about safeguarding are well founded.”

Menacing really.

That's exactly what you did with your Twitter account.

Blame yourself for once.

You either have an amazing imagination or your prejudice allows you to see the things you prefer. I've never tried to intimidate anyone on twitter, aimed any abuse at them or engaged in any of the sadistic attacks which Graham Linehan encourages. Give it a rest.

Anyway. It wasn't me who was suspended form twitter. It was the people retweeting my images. the images i am in, and by extension, own. If you use them by proxy it matters nil who posted them first. It is the intent which matters.

Henrietta Freeman knows exactly the game she is playing and is boosted by people on in nationalistic, homophobic and racist accounts. All provable and all sectioned by Kellie Jay Keen who uses her when she likes. Be realistic

I have to say I would rather not have seen those images. I have food to keep down.

Two porn addled TRAs fighting it out over who is the most best at harrassing women. Welcome to 2023.

There are always two sides to every story. There will be a flipside to CF’s.

The police are lazy feckers. I suspect that they didn’t need to do a lot of work on this case as statements were pre-written for them and that is what they are relying upon.

If she gave a NC interview then they will not have had an opportunity to hear her side and will be relying upon the account of the person reporting. Statements are hearsay evidence.

These orders are usual for offenders released from prison on licence. It’s very normal stuff for child abusers or terrorists.

The police must consider that CF poses a serious risk to life. I don’t believe she does. My view is they’ve fallen for a load of old tosh.

I wonder if the initial complainant was bleating on about tweets being like genocide, and some muppet at Surrey Police slightly misunderstood and thinks they've arrested Arkan.

Anyone would think from the strictures and gross lack of privacy regarding her mobile and computer, as well as from the amount of time and resources they are taking over bullying her, that she is a paedophile. Extraordinary.

DARVO in action here.

Getting back to the thread topic….
I don’t know CF. I don’t know her views on everything and chances are if I did we’d disagree on at least some of it.

But the restrictions the Police want to put on her by virtue of this order are extreme. She has not been charged let alone convicted of a criminal offence.

IMO these orders should only be used where there is a serious and credible threat of causing actual harm to another person and whatever she may have said I don’t think CF has done that.

Words on the internet that you don’t like people saying about you don’t count.

This is using the Police to enforce TRAs definition of ‘literal violence.’

@GCalltheway

Are you truly trying to imply that there are no corrupt police officers trying to bend the law to suit them or their agendas?

No. I am not trying to imply there are no corrupt officers. I am as interested as the rest of you in seeing the evidence that is presented and whether the SPO is issued. That may go some way towards seeing the legalities of the process. If it is issued then to surmise it is corrupt is to not only implicate the police but also the court. I am by no means a senior ranking officer but I have never ever experienced court/police cahoots. I'm sure it happens but it smacks of a far bigger conspiracy. I just don't automatically jump to corruption when I see something I don't like. If I am proved wrong though I wouldn't be jumping for glee.

Can we just pause and consider Wayne Couzens for a moment? And the inside support he received?

And naturally I cannot be an officer and also disgusted at this? I've already said up thread that it's long past time to clear this out and that is what is happening.

@MrsDanversGlidesAgain I haven't told anyone not to discuss this. It absolutely should be discussed. Discussion and debate and the right to speak is exactly what all of us want. I don't necessarily agree with everything being said here but I definitely want there to be discussion.

In my experience a paedophile is arguably treated with more dignity, at the very least they are usually convicted at this point.

CF treatment is absolutely shocking and unacceptable. Regardless of outcome.

I do not think the courts and police are ‘in cahoots’ at all. I would like to see the reasons provided for the request, and to understand on what grounds such a severe order has been issued in the first place.
I have significant experience and you know as well as I do that the conditions are extremely onerous and rare, and reserved for higher profile convicted criminals usually at the end of their sentence. Or dangerous defendants on bail/waiting for trial that are known to be high risk.

The conditions are very harsh. I accept that. And I am surprised based on the public information available that they applying for those conditions but that's what is so confusing to me. Who, in their right mind, would apply for an order like that without the evidence to back it up?

If you are knowledgeable about the system as you say then you know the burden of evidence. Even with a civil order and the balance of probability you still damn well better come with evidence that such conditions are needed. Courts won't even issue criminal behaviour orders if it might cause a bit of discomfort to the poor 'serial burglar'. Courts in some areas are letting defendants that have repeatedly breached DVPO's - and I'm talking 2 or 3 breaches in 28 days - get away with a £50 fine.

So knowing all that, I'm just struggling to believe that they would apply for this order if there's nothing to back it up.

Of course, pretty soon I guess we may all know a bit more.

Or dangerous defendants on bail/waiting for trial that are known to be high risk.

Or likely to have witnesses intimidated.

Whatever CF has done, not done or said, not said it cannot be at the level of requiring this kind of order.

But why can't it? That is not to say I know either way but how can you be so sure it cannot?

You really think CF and her actions or words for which she has not even been charged for must be in the realms of :

the conditions are extremely onerous and rare, and reserved for higher profile convicted criminals usually at the end of their sentence. Or dangerous defendants on bail/waiting for trial that are known to be high risk.

I don't honestly know what to think

It's pretty shocking based on what we know. The people usually subject to these requests suirely have a significant history of actual abuse.

I can't imagine what we don't know, that could justify this.

Tomorrow will be interesting.

Really? If you now so much about court orders you will also know minimal information is usually given - highlighting risks, concerns etc. certainly not concrete evidence of any wrongdoing, that is saved until the trial assuming a non guilty plea. Why exactly are you giving the impression the process for aa court order is like a conviction? it certainly is not.

Bloody hell this is awful. What is happening to Britain?

@PonyPatter44

Police slightly misunderstood and thinks they've arrested Arkan.

... When in reality, they've arrested Akela.