JKR vs Police Scotland?

[IcakethereforeIam]

Tras are trying to get JKR arrested.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/10/trans-activists-scottish-police-arrest-jk-rowling-crime/

https://archive.ph/5TEU4 highland fling yourself over the paywall, cos Scottish!

Thought to give IW a break.

The Hate Crime...crime(?) comes into force on 1st April, according to the article. The SNP has not engaged with any of the organisations who have expressed concerns and no-one knows what, if any, training the Police have been given.

Well, yes. But it could be literally anything. There are no criteria, no requirement for evidence, perception is all.

The alleged victim doesn't need to have said protected characteristic and it doesn't need to be the alleged victim who reports. It just needs for the act to be perceived as being motivated by 'hate' towards an assumed characteristic.

So anyone can anonymously report anyone else for any act, if they consider it motivated by hate.

'Isobel Gowdie gave a person in the street a dirty look motivated by racism/transphobia/ageism/ableism/sectarianism'

Police are duty bound to record and report that.

And as I've just read, police can ascertain a motivation even if the reporter doesn't.

I have to keep thinking it through myself, because it's so fucking mad.

Again, I'm not a lawyer or police, this is just what I can glean from the Bill and police guidance. I'd be very very happy to be told I'm wrong!

There was a thread on this ages ago as people were musing that you can say anything that has happened is actually a hate incident.

Eg my neighbour has applied for planning permission for an extension. I perceive this to be motivated by hate towards me. I am not gay/trans/disabled but I perceive that he perceives me to be.

You don't need anything to back up the "perception" that any action is hateful nor why anyone would perceive you to have any "hate" characteristic. As I understand it, no evidence is gathered or test of reasonability is applied - a hate incident is someone recording what someone says has happened.

I thought this had been updated in England so happy to be corrected, but that was the situation at some point.

A cafe didn't let me use an out of date voucher. I perceive this to be motivated by hate because they perceive that I'm of X race, or gay, etc.

Yes. In E&W 'Non crime hate incidents' are still an outrage - see the jKR news last week.

This is Scotlands new Hate Crime Bill, specifically 'stirring up hatred' offences. No criteria, no threshhold, no evidence needed.

and while a NCHI is by definition not a crime, 'stirring up hatred' will be punishable by jail time.

The “stirring up hatred” test has been used since 1986 for race and they are adding other protected characteristics to the list. It uses the “reasonable person” criterion, not the perception of the victim. There are defences based on circumstance and free speech.

The 2021 Act maintains the existing stirring up of racial hatred offence, with some minor modifications.
The test for the offence remains the same as it is under the Public Order Act 1986, so that for a stirring up racial hatred offence to be committed, a person must behave in a manner that:

• a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, or communicates to another person material that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, and
• either–
• in doing so, the person intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons based on the group being defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins, or
• a reasonable person would consider the behaviour or the communication of the material to be likely to result in hatred being stirred up against such a group.

There is a defence to all offences of stirring up hatred where a person can show the behaviour or communication of material was, in the particular circumstances, reasonable. There are protections for individuals’ rights in respect to freedom of expression for the operation of the stirring up hatred.

I am very much against the idea of recording non-crime hate incidents, which have personal data attached. Ostensibly, it’s for statistical purposes - but if that’s the case, why is the incident attached to a particular person? There are better ways to get this data than this without tagging people for “non-crimes.” It’s not illegal per se to be a shitty human being.

Luckily

🤣

I'd suggest a public campaign of as many Scots citizens as possible drowning the police in drivel about he said/she looked at me funny, using the anonymous reporting, until the police capacity implodes and they consider possibly setting some standards and gatekeeping of definitions.

Well, that totally explains why the boy backtracked from "putrid cunt" to "i apologise profusely, I was mean and had a breakdown" within 12 hours. I had assumed someone in his family had pointed out his language/spat wasn't a good look if he wanted to continue interviewing people as a career but no... it was his bosses.

Touché!

You can look at the other way though.

presumably recording every incident means, for example, that JKR decides she’s had enough and wants to report harassment. If every incident is recorded the CPS may decide that 50+ (again for example) reports of “hate” crime is in fact harassment.

not recorded, it is he said she said and no actual evidence that someone has been maliciously recording crimes to get someone else into trouble.

Oh dearie dear.

Mind you, it gave an excellent opportunity for those in possession of a grip to compare JKR's graceful acceptance of an apology compared to the hair shirt/total prostration/never forgiven shame and penance required of a heretic attempting to apologise to the political TQ+ lobby.

This what a reasonable person considers criteria seems awfully subjective.
Ask a million people if they think they are a reasonable person, I bet almosr all will say yes, and in there will be representatives of the very worst of humanity.

Person A and Person B are having a minor spat online. Both are behaving badly towards each other. Person A takes offense and tries to get it prosecuted by the police. Person A announces this loudly online. All person A's followers support person A and write online about how offensive what person B wrote was, and how much hatered it stirred up.
Person A uses the volume of this support from their followers as evidence that what person B wrote stirred up hatred as evidenced by a large number of reasonable people.

Person A is using the number of their followers who support whatever they say as "reasonable people".

Personally I think everyone who asks the police to record an NCHI against another person should also have that record of reporting against themselves. The police should consider if the reporter is a serial reporter using the police as a weapon against people they disagree with in thier considerations.
Disclose it to employers doing vetting too. This person recorded 200 NCHIs against other people last year. Hummmmmmmm.........

I've totally forgotten which site I found this article on, possibly the Times? Buried in the Scottish section

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-scotland-will-log-hate-incidents-even-if-no-crime-is-committed-6mw6hs9hn

Yup, the Times

https://archive.ph/SkZCq/again?url Tell Hadrian what to do with his paywall

The quote from Humza seems at odds with that from the Community Safety bod, which also seems to be internally contradictory.

And while Police Scotland (that really should be spelled 'Police Scotland!?') and ScotGov are spaffing money on this, this is being considered

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/plan-for-only-two-patrol-cars-to-cover-all-roads-in-scotland-c560xlbjs

https://archive.ph/QfFA2 jump the paywall in the wee small hours, they'll be no one to stop you

The article says that
“Under the new process, <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/QfFA2/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-scotland-to-stop-investigating-every-crime-pw6v0hfjh%23:~:text=Police%20will%20no%20longer%20investigate,was%20hailed%20as%20a%20success." rel="nofollow" target="_blank">a crime will not investigated if there are no lines of inquiry — such as CCTV and witnesses — and no concern about “threat, harm, vulnerability or risk” to the caller.”
I’m guessing thought crimes which “harm” the complainant will still be officiously pursued, other more difficult crimes can be forgotten about.

I’m guessing thought crimes which “harm” the complainant will still be officiously pursued, other more difficult crimes can be forgotten about.

That will allow amazing stats tho'. People report, no investigation required, no tedious speaking to the person at the heart of the allegation, just record it as a NCHI.

An article about a change in Scottish law being in the Scotland section isn't 'burying' it, and the times (unlike many others) allows easy sharing despite its paywall. (My browser doesn't seem to let me get to the archive sites for telegraph etc)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/db21b67e-a557-4753-93aa-36cda91515ac?shareToken=5a1ac0206da3ff713cc7e7a95764fd17

Not a dig at the Times (although they've not covered the wpath leaks yet) or Scotland. I have to scroll all the way to the bottom of the site to get to the Scottish section. Copy the link, post it into archive, etc. Then do the same again if there's another article to read. It gets a bit tiresome.

My tablet, like me, is getting a bit old and slow. Money being as it is, I can't justify a new one or a Times subscription 😢

Or perhaps I'm just lazy 😁

You can collect evidence of a pattern of harassment without noting every single one as a NCHI which goes on the record of the person who has done it. It should not show up in an Enhanced Crime Report, for example. Much as I despise many transphobic commentators, I don't think the police should be involved unless they are investigating a crime. A whole bunch of people piling on you, with horrible but legal comments is not a crime.

The police won't go near JKR for this, and a civil action for defamation is almost impossible without huge pockets. IW has been prodding JKR for months to prompt her transphobic outburst. IW is an attention seeker.

IW has a pinned tweet calling JKR transphobic.

I hope IW has the receipts and, indeed, huge pockets.

Would a civil action for defamation -
Excuse interruption, but libel/slander has to be a falsehood. You cannot commit libel/slander with the truth. Is defamation not the same? Can the truth defame?
Anyway back to my original point - would a civil action for defamation not open the door to discovery? Or is that a US only thing? Discovery could be a huge issue for IW.

IW has been prodding JKR for months to prompt her transphobic outburst.

What "transphobic outburst" would that be, @DadJoke ?

...and "prodding" - nice bit of minimising there. Do you really think we won't notice this stuff? Words are important.