Disciplinary Hearing PC Watson

[Brainworm]

I came on FWR to read posters thoughts on the disciplinary hearing happening today, but can,t find a thread. Sorry if there is one already.

From what I am reading, the defence for the alleged online harassment and stalking of those with GC views is that 1) those being harassed are 'terrorists' 2) It was a senior ranking Sargent who advised PC Watson to set up a sock account to cover PC Watson's tracks.

It seems a no brainier for the officer to be dismissed and, if there is evidence to support claims of the 'sock puppet' advice, for there to be a hearing for the Sargent also.

I am not sure how PC Watson's tran status will provide any reasonable defence....but that doesn't mean reason will prevail!

I've missed this - is there somewhere I can read the background, or could someone give me a brief summary? Thanks :)

Thank you @Brainworm would also love some backstory! Great to see the police being hoisted by their own petards.

1) those being harassed are 'terrorists

If only the law gave the police the power to arrest terrorists. Oh, wait . . .

Thank you OP for highlighting this!

Apologies. I thought this had been discussed on here.

This is a case whereby WeAreFairCop called out a trans officer who posted hostile and intimidating posts about 'terfs'. Harry (can't recall his surname and Sarah Philamore identified who he was and reported him. There claims were dismissed.

When sufficient evidence was presented, a disciplinary was called and that it taking place today.

I have found it now however, what is disturbing is the number of police misconduct cases!! Wowzers. Wonder if they ever look at who’s throwing the bodies in the river…

That was my thinking too.

Not only does the police force seem to be riddled with undesirables but it also appears that they are surrounded by enablers.

Is there a link where we can read about the ToR of the disciplinary, the range of plausible responses if the findings express some misconduct, and the eventual outcome?

I think most of us didn't know about the disciplinary.

https://twitter.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1717858180221538310

I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked

It was a senior ranking Sargent who advised PC Watson to set up a sock account to cover PC Watson's tracks.

I should be shocked at this but I'm not.
If a Sargent advised a member of staff to create sock account to continue harassment they also need a disciplinary

I'm moving towards the position that police aren't fit to be public-facing, interact with the public, or communicate among themselves without trained chaperones.*

Lay crisis counsellors who go into some areas as first mental health responders.

The sort of people on Parking Wars who genuinely calmed down situations and were astonishingly adept at making every contact count for education and drawing people into a network of support that would reduce the chance of future flare-ups.

*No, not possible in some situations but for the bulk of their work, yes. Although no occupation should be in such a state of disrepute that such a system of oversight is necessary, no matter even if it is a thought expt.

Leicestershire police officer accused of posting abusive tweets from multiple accounts (msn.com)

BREAKING: PC Watson found guilty by

of:

Gross misconduct.
Lying.
Using a false identity and maintaining the falsehood when challenged.
A high degree of personal culpability.
Targeted abuse.
Disobeying orders.

https://twitter.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1717898760678945249

Why hasn’t he been arrested?

"His mitigating statement states that he was acting on behalf of the persecuted LGBTQI community."

This should not be a "get out of jail" card, but of course authorities often turn a blind eye when abusers state they are "acting on behalf of the persecuted LGBTQI community"

I remember that officer, they've quite the history leading up to them arriving in Leicestershire.
I didn't know there was a disciplinary today, thanks for the update. I think the Sarge will be next up then, seeing as Watson's thrown the Sarge under the bus.

Not sure if readers here know of this link. Often an interesting read. The outcome should show up on it eventually, you need to subscribe, but it's free.

https://misconduct999.com/hearing/pc-lynsay-watson/

Had Watson and the ignorant of section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 Sargeant agreed this with the various countries around the world where there are death penalties, prison sentences, clinical harms etc.?

Sorry if I came across the wrong way.

I meant that this statement was used to excuse objectionable behaviour in the hope to get away with it.

Thank you for posting this,I was unaware that anything was being done about this officer.
Living in Leicestershire,I was genuinely worried that I or my daughters would come across this person at some point,as to be polite,they seemed extremely disturbed.

Sorry if I came across the wrong way.

You didn't. It's more that I can never get over the self-appointed thought and action leaders with no insight into the reality of life elsewhere when they appropriate the struggles of the "persecuted LGBTQI community".

And typically while operating within a culture of impunity for their own victimisation and terrorisation of others.

He's been sacked 🥳 and faircop are going after the Sargent and the chief constable 😀
https://x.com/WeAreFairCop/status/1717922943915995198?s=20

Anyone think there's a reasonable prospect of follow up charges wrt offences under Communications Act 2003?

"Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small; Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He all."

I hope so