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

"The offences" lol. FFS

Yeah, that would be, let me see, Monday.

We really are getting to, 'she turned me into a newt' territory here.

If we aren't there already.

Licks pencil "did the criminal witch commit any other criminal acts of criminal witchcraft, or shall we just proceed with turning you into a newt, for now?"

Caroline, if you do ever appear in court remember to let them know that carrot isn't your real nose.

🐥⚖️ 🧙‍♀️

BaronMunchausen
For recording purposes, the perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor in determining whether an incident is a hate incident.......

That is for recording purposes of the crime under NCRS rules, if the person believes it is a hate crime. But the primary offence still has to be there.

For example - if someone shouts racial threats to another in public, then the primary offence is public order one, but the aggravating factor of that is the racial element -hence it becomes racially aggravated public order.

But to investigate the crime, that reporting person is still going to have to provide evidence that it has happened. Witness statement, CCTV etc etc

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
That statement is prejudicial. It assumes that there are offences to continue to occur. There aren't necessarily any offences at all.

But there is an offence under investigation. So the SPO was applied for to prevent a further escalation of that offence and protect the reporting person whilst the investigation is ongoing.

There must have been an offence which CF was arrested and interviewed over. Whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the offence is what the investigation, CPS advice, court trial determines.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia
That would be every catcall I've ever had inflicted on me... if misogyny was deemed a hate crime along with racial hate etc. It's very clear who isn't granted the protection of the law here.

There are offences which cover this - s5 public order, harassment etc

One of the offences must have been stalking which the police have now dropped.

The complainant identified themselves, gave interviews to the media and said that the other offences were malicious communications and harassment.

In other words things that CF was alleged to have said on her Twitter and things allegedly posted by her on the fruit farms which it has been established she didn’t write.

CF has blocked the reporting person from her Twitter and they have already been told by a High Court judge to stop mining for offence on both of these sites. I wonder whether the police were aware of the reporting person’s own online behaviour?

It is hard to see how these alleged offences merited two arrests and the application of anti terrorist measures but I am sure Felix will be along to justify it.

Confirmedwitch
Are we talking about the last arrest here - the one in April?
Has the complainant identified themselves as the one in connection with that arrest?
Have they stated what evidence they have passed onto the police?

If one of the offences is stalking, it could still be under investigation. The fact that the SPO was dropped has no bearing on the investigation of that offence. It's the conditions which were not imposed, it doesn't mean that the offence has been dropped.

At this point we don't know if this is related to social media or if this has been direct messages/threats (or whatever it is) sent directly to the reporting person - text messages, emails, post etc etc. We also don't know what the messages/threats (or whatever it is) stated.

We don't know what evidence, statements, downloads that have been passed to the police that's under investigation. The reporting person might have said things to the media - but is this the same as what was passed to the police?

We are all just assuming and speculating at this time until the investigation is completed.

The reporting person might have been prosecuted in the past for their on line behaviour - but this doesn't preclude them from being a victim at some point. if a crime/offence has been identified it must be investigated.

SPO's are not anti-terrorist measures.

But there is an offence under investigation.

No, there is an alleged offence under investigation. It's not been proved yet.

Well how fucking insensitive is that.

I have had so many incidences of misogyny I stopped counting at 900 thousand.
If we women put a call in to the police for every cat call, unwanted touch, grope, very unwanted kiss, stupid comments thrown my way, whistled at by car drivers, yelled at by car drivers, kerb crawlers ffs(how I look like a prostitute while pushing a pram I do not know) patted on the back/bum, actually had my bum slapped so hard it left a handprint etc, ad infinitum. The police would have never had time to solve any crimes. Given just how badly they are doing now, then I might just start reporting everything. I'm assuming we can report events from decades ago too.

Surely an actual police offcer would know the term 'alleged offence' and not call it an 'offence' which has not yet been proved.

Felix, give it up pal. Nobody thinks any serving officer has the time or inclination to be on mumsnet telling women they are mistaken for days upon days, week after week, month upon month, year upon year. Only an unemployed TRA would have the time and inclination to keep up this act.

And the irony of that, @Ourladycheesusedatum is that the first person to have a complaint taken seriously will be a man.

I guarantee it. A run-of-the-mill woman. Pfft!

But a super speshul man, with ✨feelings✨ will get the police springing into action.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia

OK then:

But there is an alleged offence under investigation. So the SPO was applied for to prevent a further escalation of that alleged offence and protect the reporting person whilst the investigation is ongoing from further alleged offences.

There must have been an alleged offence which CF was arrested and interviewed over. Whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the alleged offence is what the investigation, CPS advice, court trial determines.

Ourladycheesusedatum
It not insensitive to say that there are offences in law which cover such incidents. The incidents that you have described are sexual assaults, harassment, public order etc.

I know its horrible to endure and you should not have to in a modern society and more stringent prosecutions of such incidents should occur with harsher penalties.

I have been groped, had my bum slapped & pinched, had women grab me between my legs when I have been dealing with fights & incidents in clubs & pubs. Been whistled at, kissed - its horrible, so I am not insensitive to it.

AlisonDonut
All offences are alleged until it can be proven at court - so I apologise for not calling it an 'alleged offence'. I will endeavor to do so from now on.

As before - whether you believe I am a police officer or not is irrelevant, I never make an argument from authority or cite to my credentials to justify anything. Either the argument is good or the argument if bad.

Ameanstreakamilewide
Not true - there are loads of people in jail convicted for offences committed against women. And 90% of the jail population are men.

I'm rather looking forward to hearing what the Actual Police Officers in Surrey have to say for themselves. I can't imagine that anyone would take kindly to being mugged off by a serial crybully who told them a pack of fibs to get them to waste their time and our money on this big bag of dicks investigation and attempt at a court proceedings.
Turning up to court with banana all and then having to just go home, after wasting everybody's time. They must be quite disappointed in themselves.

Felix seems to be trying to tell everyone what the charge is without using the words.

Well, he does seem to struggle with words, as a rule.

Thelnebriati
No - I have consistently said that we don't know what the reporting person has said and hence we don't know what the alleged offence/s under investigation is/are.

The investigation is still ongoing so we are not at the point of charge.

@Felix125 Anything that disturbs an individual or causes them concern constitutes an “incident” according to the updated Guidelines. So it is also determined by the subjective perception of the ‘victim’. The police do not question whether the thing being reported is an “incident” any more than whether the supposed "incident" was motivated by hate.

So say a woman were to object to the presence of a man in a female toilet or changing room or dormitory and that man reports her objection to the police because he identifies as a woman. Even if she communicated this objection in electronic format, it is an "incident" if reported as such. The police will not ask that man why the incident disturbed him or caused him concern any more than they would interrogate him about his perception that it was motivated by hate. No. The subjective perception of the victim claiming the protected characteristic is the qualifying factor, and the police will say they’re obliged to “investigate” by a) identifying the woman; b) calling at her home; c) threatening her with arrest; and d) interviewing her under caution.

The 'case' will then typically be deemed to have insufficient evidence for a successful prosection, but will be logged against the woman as a non-crime hate incident that will block her from any work that requires an enhanced DBS. The process is the punishment, and is consistent with the institutional misoygyny and sexism within the police force.

BezMills

If it can be proven that its a 'pack of fibs' then there are offences (alleged) which can be considered.

GOD he's boring. 💤

BaronMunchausen
But you still need to have a primary offence (alleged) in law.

The hate part is the aggravating factor to that offence (alleged).

Its a public forum - nobody is forcing you to read or comment