Scarlet Blake - murder to officially recorded as a crime committed by a woman

[CousinGreg55]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/28/trans-cat-killer-scarlet-blake-crimes-will-recorded/

I know there are other Scarlet Blake threads but I thought this was significant enough to start a new thread.
According to The Telegraph the murder is to be recorded as a crime committed by a woman.

Leaving aside the specific problems of a male murder being misclassed as a women (stats, prison, disyortion of public understanding of who is a risk to who etc)already flagged by many PP...

It is impossible to consider a person with a male body to be a "woman" without subscribing to the belief that men and women have different types of mind.

In other words, to believe a man is "really a woman" is to believe all women have a certain type of mind which is different to all men.

That is a sexist, reductive belief that harms and diminishes all women.

Firstly, because it reduces our personalities and mental potential to a sexist stereotype.

Secondly, because it obscures the real truth that we are treated differently by society not because people somehow see our "womanhood of mind" but because people see and react to our bodies.

Thirdly, because it appropriates the mitigations and protections originally put in place because of how society treats people with our bodies and redeploys them as resources for people who identify as having womanly minds, thus forcing us to either accept the imposition of also being defined as someone with a "womanly mind" or lose access to these resources.

Fourthly, it takes away the formerly female only words we need to protect ourselves in law, make our case politically, or indeed talk about the issue at all.

Thank you for this post. There is a police SEEN network you might want to think about looking up and even joining. They have a Twitter account with joining instructions.

I work for a police force, it grinds my gears that we have to record crimes in the preferred gender and not sex. So stats are skewed/inaccurate.

Is that because of laws, or because of police written guidance?

I've signed the petition.

Earlier this month I spoke about about the need for clarity and accuracy following a case of sexual assault in Oxfordshire. The debate about the recording of sex and gender has remained in the spotlight following the conviction and sentencing of the vile murderer Scarlet Blake.

Yesterday I wrote to the Home Secretary urging a review of the Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which set out the legal framework for the way the police must deal with detainees.

I must stress again that in both of these cases Thames Valley Police have been exemplary in safeguarding a vulnerable victim and bring a dangerous killer to justice. Whilst I have raised concerns about the press statements issued the operational response has been everything that we would want from the police.

Nevertheless these cases highlight issues of public confidence and safeguarding that I believe can only be addressed through a change in the law. We must all expect the police to follow the law, and as currently set out, they are obliged to record self identified gender in the custody record and there is no legislative framework for them to record someone’s sex at birth. In my view this should change.

Excellent. Clear and concise.

I hate to bang on about this but the fact that Kier Starmer says that 1% of women have penises, totally condones this sort of thing. It enables it even more. Yet he may well be the next PM of the U.K. Despicable.

He's an ex barrister and I’d expect him to understand the truth.

What an unhinged backwards society we’re becoming. What a mess.

I couldn't see this but for those who don't have subs for the Telegraph here's a link

Archived in the Wayback Machine at: web.archive.org/web/20240229050608/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/28/trans-cat-killer-scarlet-blake-crimes-will-recorded/

What is also wrong is that mumsnet keeps shunting these things to feminist / Sex and Gender chat. Which means we’re all discussing these issues in some sort of echo chamber.

Last time I complained to them about doing that, they deleted the thread I’d first started on ‘AIBU’ (they’d initially moved it).

This means that women on here that are really aware of the issues, remain unaware of the issues. It could be a source of education. But sadly not.

There's a Telegraph article this morning on how crimes are overwhelmingly skewed male except crimes of poverty and child care

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/29/men-commit-more-crimes-than-women-data-jk-rowling/

https://archive.ph/Um2az archive link to jump the paywall

I think it's a good piece except for the final paragraph on transpeople being more likely to be the victims of violent crime. Aside from mentioning the data is from Californian stats., there's no link. I very much doubt it's true for transpeople in this country.

I think it's a good piece except for the final paragraph on transpeople being more likely to be the victims of violent crime. Aside from mentioning the data is from Californian stats., there's no link. I very much doubt it's true for transpeople in this country.

Given that there's such confusion on recording the gender/sex of criminals, is there even any meaningful data for victims in the U.K.? (If there is then it implies double standards)

Precisely

That's a good point @ErrolTheDragon I've seen it mentioned on this or one of the other Scarlet threads. The rule is, if the victim is trans it's in the headline. If the perpetrator is trans, it's not mentioned.

I'm sorry to say that I think the latest petition linked on the thread is problematic to push forward with.

It suggests that trans crimes should be recorded by sex at birth not self ID gender (and I totally agree ) but again we will end up stuck in an infinite loop of who decides who is trans and who "is a woman" etc. It could also be argued that it discriminates against trans people by singling them out and again the arguing goes on.

Much more straight forward to put forward that ALL crimes are recorded by the perpetrators sex at birth. Self Gender ID could also be recorded separately but would have to be optional I would think as you are going to struggle to force someone to choose a self ID and of course there is no way you can tell by looking at someone - it's what they choose.

If the powers that be won't record sex not self ID gender then we need all our statistical outlets to be honest that they cannot report and we cannot analyse crime by men versus women but only by "people that identify as female at the time of the arrest" versus "people who identify as male at the time of arrest".

Someone stated in a thread earlier that women's domestic violence has increased. If it has increased is this increase caused by biological women or "women" that were born male? I guess we will never know.

Much more straight forward to put forward that ALL crimes are recorded by the perpetrators sex at birth.

This would be a step in the right direction.

However, GRC holders can get a birth certificate which shows them as having been born in the acquired sex.

What can we do about falsified official ID?

No need for any shoehorning. They are either Male or Female.

from the telegraph article linked above:
Quote "Across 281 commonly committed crimes recorded by the Ministry of Justice, men are responsible in at least 95 per cent of cases in 68 of them.
These include some of the most heinous crimes, including 99 per cent of rape cases."

..am I right in thinking that the other 1 % of rapes (that men did not commit) were carried out by women with penises?

To answer my own question it seems so - so even though a penis is required to rape it is not a category 100% owned by men. I suppose a woman that was trans and had a penis created in theory could have raped - but I guess we don't have the reliable statistics by sex at birth rather than self ID gender to know.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law
Rape is a statutory offence in England and Wales. The offence is created by section 1[1] of the Sexual Offences Act 2003:
(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

It suggests that trans crimes should be recorded by sex at birth not self ID gender (and I totally agree ) but again we will end up stuck in an infinite loop of who decides who is trans and who "is a woman" etc.

While it'd probably be clearer and simpler to just say ' all people', I don't see why this would cause any confusion re decision because no one who isn't trans is going to be recorded as anything other than birth sex anyway.

..am I right in thinking that the other 1 % of rapes (that men did not commit) were carried out by women with penises?

There may be the odd one where a woman was an accomplice of a rapist, I think thats classified as rape too.

am I right in thinking that the other 1 % of rapes (that men did not commit) were carried out by women with penises?

The only other possibility is joint enterprise.

It is very hard to link the sex of criminals and the sex or gender of their victims. Hence why KIS and Jess Phillips keep the "femicide" census.
Personally I think that's more to do with patriarchy and wanting the blinkers on regarding male violence but it certainly suits trans rights activists as it makes finding accurate data very hard

I think it is an easy derailment though for example "I have my gender reassignment certificate so I am not trans - I AM a woman - and this record sex at birth applies to trans people and not to me".

A relevant aside - does anyone know can birth certificates be changed to alter the gender when someone transitions?

I heard this is the case but I assume it cannot be true as that is truly re-writing history whether a woman gave birth to a girl or a boy.

I think it is an easy derailment though for example "I have my gender reassignment certificate so I am not trans - I AM a woman - and this record sex at birth applies to trans people and not to me".

If they're a convicted criminal who has had their dna sampled then there's no decision to make. It's a matter of recording a verifiable fact.

so if we are in agreement that sex at birth should be recorded for all people in crime statistics why muddy the waters by saying that it should be done for trans people.

Saying this should be done for trans people immediately has a flip side of the coin of non-trans people. All people is all people.

This really annoyed me as DH & I watched this on the news & I commented to him that it was very unusual for a woman to commit a random murder. Of course it was a bloody man that did it! The reporting should make it clear that the perpetrator was trans.