Police withdraw stalking protection order application against Caroline Farrow

[BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn]

Or rather their barrister does. The case somehow got as far as court without the police giving Caroline's representations to the barrister. Once he read them he declined to proceeed.

https://twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1671854328485691392?

https://twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1672117973862039552?

I can't wait for a certain someone to wade in here to declare "they did nuffin' wrong guv" or "not providing your barrister all of the relevant material is JUSTICE".

<Pulls pew>

I'm glad she was given a proper opportunity to defend herself and unsurprised that, when given the opportunity to appropriately defend herself they dropped the application.

There is some distance still to go in reversing the capture of some public institutions but progress is being made I think.

The more sunlight the better.

IMVFHO, police shouldn't use ''this is so awful it has to be true because they wouldn't make up something that serious'' instead of actual evidence.

Thelnebriati

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/management-information-stalking-protection-orders/review-of-stalking-protection-orders-accessible-version#:~:text=In%20order%20to%20apply%20for,other%20person%20from%20that%20risk.

Have a read up on how SPO are used first.

How they can be applied before the point of going to CPS for a charging decision.
How they are seen as a success and over 70% are approved

ANameChangePresents
The police provided their barrister with 'all the evidence' - that's what the list of conditions were.

What was not presented was CF defence submissions. But if she went 'no reply' in her interview - the police would not have been able to submit her defence submissions because there was nothing to submit

Felix is, unsurprisingly since he's not a police officer, wrong.

The police had submissions but, for reasons I won't speculate upon, failed to include them. They hadn't even read them before submitting the application.

Given that the submissions, once rightfully taken into consideration, binned the application, one wonders if the complainant's statements and / or other conduct now warrants scrutiny. It's clear a case cannot proceed merely upon someone's say-so.

This is so shocking. I would hope it is reported as an example of how institutions can have their procedures hijacked and misused.

Although there is a part of me that now thinks most institutions whether institutional or commercial dont have the first idea how to do their work properly.

Is there any chance of compensation for wrongful procedures, or at least an apology?

What a surprise. Absolutely ruins every single thread he's on

Personally I think he makes the threads he's on. It's always wonderful to watch someone of his 'calibre' make themselves look like an utter plum. But then I've always been one for schadenfreude.

He's like one of those sketches from The Fast Show but stretched out to fill the whole of each episode.

😂😂😂

I'm not even going to comment on his comprehension fail regarding evidence.
Oh, I just did.

DrLouiseJMoody
So are you speculating that CF's interview was not a 'no reply' one?
How were the other 'submissions' made I wonder if not under caution - were they sent in the post?

IwantToRetire
It was submitted to the court who are the ones who put the order in place. They could have kicked it out at the first hearing but didn't - it was adjourned. So the court must have thought it had some merit in progressing it.

LOLZ. Questions designed to trip me into being sued again. Nah. Not going there. Must be rather frustrating knowing that I know but won't be divulging anything :-]

Once he read them he declined to proceeed.

Says it all. They don't know their arse from their elbow.

knocks back a wine in celebratory solidarity

🍸🍸🍸

🍷

She went to sea in a Sieve, she did,
In a Sieve she went to sea:
In spite of all her friends could say,
On a winter’s morn, on a stormy day,
In a Sieve she went to sea!
And when the Sieve turned round and round,
And every one cried, ‘You’ll all be drowned!’
She called aloud, ‘My Sieve ain’t big,
But I don’t care a button! I don’t care a fig!
In a Sieve I’ll go to sea!’

Fucking hell! You're like a dog with a fucking bone, aren't you? Do you identify as a police officer in the same way you identified as a solicitor?

I read these threads and think they’d easily slot into The Crucible.

utter weird shit

I hope you're wrong...

What a relief for Caroline that this nonsense is over (until the next time - grrr!)

@MNHQ please could we have an ignore or block poster button? It would make threads much easier to follow and less prone to derailment.

I'm just posting this as I dont think it has been yet on this thread.

The is Caroline Farrow on twitter saying what happened.

https://twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1671854328485691392

https://twitter.com/CF_Farrow/status/1672117973862039552

DifficultBloodyWoman
I'm not derailing - I am talking about the subject matter of the thread.

FuckNuggets
I've never identified as a solicitor. Whether you believe or disbelieve I am a police officer is irrelevant - I have never cited to my credentials in a discussion. That's effectively and argument from authority, which doesn't work in any discussion. Its like saying "I have a degree therefore I am right". Either the argument is good or the argument is bad.

Thanks @IwantToRetire! I'm not on twitter so I rely on these links

I'm not on twitter so I rely on these links

I'm not either - I find it really irritating! But when I have time to work my way through loads of nonsense you can find interesting info.

But it always amazes me as in fact twitter is one of the least subscribed to social media platforms that really clever and interesting women (like JKR!) bother with it.

But it seems to be a way to get lazy journalists to maybe pick up a story.