Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Met Police will no longer investigate Non Crime Hate Incidents

143 replies

Ellerby · 20/10/2025 17:30

This is very breaking. Evan Davies just said it on R4 news. Will try and get a link.

Bloody brilliant!!!

OP posts:
HermioneWeasley · 20/10/2025 20:32

It so disgusting that records are made against individuals and show on DBS checks without investigation , trial or even notifying the person that it’s been recorded. I simply don’t understand how this can be lawful.

if police want to make an anonymised record of alleged incidents to help with pattern spotting that’s up to them, but as the process currently stands it is being grossly abused and is not due for purpose

MistyGreenAndBlue · 20/10/2025 20:33

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 20:26

I think we're trying to make cat calling a crime though? Its impact on young women is disgusting

It absolutely should be. It's a public order offence surely? And a hate crime on the protected characteristic of sex

Wibble128 · 20/10/2025 20:34

Hoorah! Waste of time.

spannasaurus · 20/10/2025 20:39

MistyGreenAndBlue · 20/10/2025 20:33

It absolutely should be. It's a public order offence surely? And a hate crime on the protected characteristic of sex

Sex isn't a protected characteristic for hate crime purposes

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 20/10/2025 20:40

I think it was a misstep of FSU to call this a victory, it doesn't seem like it's going to make much difference to what's recorded.

The coppers won't be calling to anyone's houses and inviting them down to the station for a chat, or arresting anyone at gun point in Heathrow Airport, but it seems to me they just ditching practices that have led to them being ridiculed.

They're not actually changing anything for the people who are being accused of Non Crimes, they making sure they don't bring any public attention down on themselves because of it.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 20/10/2025 20:46

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 19:18

If theyre a racist fuck then yes I do

OK so what if someone who just doesn't like you tells the police that you're a racist fuck, and they record a NCHI against your name and you have absolutely no idea they have done this and no opportunity to defend yourself, you just never get another job that requires an enhanced DBS check?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 20/10/2025 20:47

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 19:20

I would expect to be made aware of the nchi that you speak of with the chance to appeal

But otherwise, I would fully think that such a thing is acceptable

You cant just go around being bigoted online and expect no recumpense

That is not how NCHIs work. Which is the point people are making.

crumpet · 20/10/2025 20:47

HermioneWeasley · 20/10/2025 20:32

It so disgusting that records are made against individuals and show on DBS checks without investigation , trial or even notifying the person that it’s been recorded. I simply don’t understand how this can be lawful.

if police want to make an anonymised record of alleged incidents to help with pattern spotting that’s up to them, but as the process currently stands it is being grossly abused and is not due for purpose

I agree. How can they exist on a persons record and potentially affect their job status etc without them being aware of it. The police resources will be spend on FOIA applications if no-one in the population knows if a record exists against their name

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 20/10/2025 20:51

HermioneWeasley · 20/10/2025 20:32

It so disgusting that records are made against individuals and show on DBS checks without investigation , trial or even notifying the person that it’s been recorded. I simply don’t understand how this can be lawful.

if police want to make an anonymised record of alleged incidents to help with pattern spotting that’s up to them, but as the process currently stands it is being grossly abused and is not due for purpose

I think this is probably a human rights issue, now I come to think of it.

Surely it is a clear breach of the right to a fair trial.

There should be no information on a DBS certificate that the person concerned is not aware of themselves.

EasternStandard · 20/10/2025 20:52

GoldThumb · 20/10/2025 20:08

Exactly.
This isn’t a win in any way shape or form imo.

It’s worse, it will probably just blindly be logged now. (Which, Tbf, is probably what they were doing anyway)

It’s really bad, sinister logging stuff.

SionnachRuadh · 20/10/2025 20:54

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 20/10/2025 20:46

OK so what if someone who just doesn't like you tells the police that you're a racist fuck, and they record a NCHI against your name and you have absolutely no idea they have done this and no opportunity to defend yourself, you just never get another job that requires an enhanced DBS check?

We've got historical precedents for this kind of thing. Studies of Gestapo records show that the majority of informers weren't informing on enemies of the regime, they were informing on their annoying neighbours.

The NCHI system provides massive incentives for lazy coppers and malicious complainants, and on that basis alone it should be scrapped.

Dollymylove · 20/10/2025 20:58

Good perhaps rather than harassing people for stating biological facts they might think about actually doing what we pay them for

EsmaCannonball · 20/10/2025 21:08

All this means is that you're even less likely to discover if you have one on your police record until you find out you have failed a DBS check or perhaps have trouble travelling or moving abroad. Sinister.

miraxxx · 20/10/2025 21:10

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 19:04

??

So being racist shouldn't be a crime?

No.

ArabellaSaurus · 20/10/2025 21:12

ILikeDungs · 20/10/2025 17:42

From RTE
No more investigatations into 'non-crime hate incidents'
In a statement, a Metropolitan Police spokesperson said that "we understand the concern around this case. The Commissioner has been clear he doesn't believe officers should be policing toxic culture war debates, with current laws and rules on inciting violence online leaving them in an impossible position.

"As a result, the Met will no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents. We believe this will provide clearer direction for officers, reduce ambiguity and enable them to focus on matters that meet the threshold for criminal investigations.

"These incidents will still be recorded and used as valuable pieces of intelligence to establish potential patterns of behaviour or criminality.
"We will continue to investigate and arrest those who commit hate crimes - allowing us to comply with statutory guidance while focusing our resources on criminality and public protection."

So they can still show up on a police check and potentially affect people's lives.

Fuck that. They need scrapped absolutely and entirely, and the idea of them needs to be expunged from the statute so they can never be countenance again.

ArabellaSaurus · 20/10/2025 21:17

If something is not a crime, the police have absolutely no business recording it.

Are there not data protection issues here, surely to fuck?

NoBinturongsHereMate · 20/10/2025 21:22

This doesn't seem to be an improvement at all. Or indeed a change.

ThatZanyFatball · 20/10/2025 21:28

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 18:33

So... if someone is racist but non violent, nothing will come of it???

How is this cause for celebration?

Depends on what you mean by "being racist." Discrimination - i.e. Not hiring someone for a job bc of the color of their skin even if they are the most qualified candidate - is still illegal I believe. But do remember that goes for judging ANYONE based on the color of their skin as that is the definition of racism.

But sharing a personal opinion, or someone interpretering (or misinterpreting) a non-criminal, non-violence, otherwise perfectly legal (albeit possibly offensive) action , the police will no longer get involved. And this is as it should be.

But don't worry you're still free to try and cancel people using bluesy and reddit all you like.

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 21:40

ThatZanyFatball · 20/10/2025 21:28

Depends on what you mean by "being racist." Discrimination - i.e. Not hiring someone for a job bc of the color of their skin even if they are the most qualified candidate - is still illegal I believe. But do remember that goes for judging ANYONE based on the color of their skin as that is the definition of racism.

But sharing a personal opinion, or someone interpretering (or misinterpreting) a non-criminal, non-violence, otherwise perfectly legal (albeit possibly offensive) action , the police will no longer get involved. And this is as it should be.

But don't worry you're still free to try and cancel people using bluesy and reddit all you like.

So i'm at work

Someone says 'oh shes pissing me off the 'black b*tch' or the 'p- muslim or 'the Jewish -'

To another colleague, about me, and i hear it

I cannot report it to the police????

MistyGreenAndBlue · 20/10/2025 21:42

spannasaurus · 20/10/2025 20:39

Sex isn't a protected characteristic for hate crime purposes

No. I'm saying it SHOULD be. Sorry just reread my post. I wasn't very clear

cramptramp · 20/10/2025 21:43

I bet they are relieved.

GailBlancheViola · 20/10/2025 21:54

ArabellaSaurus · 20/10/2025 21:12

So they can still show up on a police check and potentially affect people's lives.

Fuck that. They need scrapped absolutely and entirely, and the idea of them needs to be expunged from the statute so they can never be countenance again.

I agree they ae sinister and a total infringement on Civil Liberties, or rather Civil Liberties and freedom of speech for some but not others.

Appalling misuse of State powers against citizens.

GoldThumb · 20/10/2025 22:05

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 21:40

So i'm at work

Someone says 'oh shes pissing me off the 'black b*tch' or the 'p- muslim or 'the Jewish -'

To another colleague, about me, and i hear it

I cannot report it to the police????

Again you’re focusing on thresholds of criminality.

That’s not the issue.

Police are recording these black marks against people when no crime has occurred, and the police are fully aware that the ‘incidents’ do not meet the criminal threshold.

If the police thought a crime had been committed, they would investigate them as a crime. You would be brought in for questioning. Be able to offer your side of the story.
Enter a plea if you’re charged. Have legal representation.

These are not being investigated as a crime, and the police are aware from the offset that they are not criminal, and are (were?) investigating non-crime hate incidents.

People are not made aware of them, and have no recourse to appeal them.

ThatZanyFatball · 20/10/2025 22:18

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 18:47

@spannasaurus i'm not trying to be dense, I promise you all

So its okay now to make hate comments re protected characteristics- ie calling a black footballer the n word, the facial characteristics of someone from east Asia?? There will be no consequence??

You're may not trying to be dense but you're clearly being a troll. You know darn well it is impossible to police people's feelings.

So you come here and ask all these troll-y dense questions but let me ask you, what do YOU think should happen to someone who does nothing other than calling a black footballer the n word? They should be put in jail? For how long? They should be fined? How much?

Where I live, some black people call each other the n word as a term of endearment. Go to any rap concert - are you going to arrest everyone who uses the n word there bc they're being racist? What about when a black rapper releases songs that use the n word towards another black person in a mean way, or calls women b-words in their songs? Shouldn't they all be arrested too?

And what about calling women "terfs? Why can't I report someone chanting" kill all terfs" as a hate crime against women? Or using cishet in a derogatory way, shouldn't that person be reported to the police for discriminating against someone's sexual orientation and gender identity? Or people who chant "from the river to the sea" for antisemitism?

So Mr. High and mighty super-superior moral high ground. Pray enlighten us, what's your big concern about all those scenerios?? I'm assuming you believe the same law that would put someone in jail for calling a black footballer the n word should be applied to anyone being derogatory towards someone else based on their culture or characteristics, right? I mean, otherwise we'd be DISCRIMINATING about who gets to say what, or be derogatory to who, or in what specific context - and discrimination is horrible right? Bc you couldn't possibly believe that certain people deserve exceptions if they come from a certain background or skin color bc then wouldn't that make you 😲.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 20/10/2025 22:20

mumofoneAloneandwell · 20/10/2025 21:40

So i'm at work

Someone says 'oh shes pissing me off the 'black b*tch' or the 'p- muslim or 'the Jewish -'

To another colleague, about me, and i hear it

I cannot report it to the police????

Of course you can report it to the police.

You can also report it to the police even if they didn't actually say it, and your colleague may have a NCHI recorded against them, which they are entirely unaware of, and you have just silently wrecked their career and they'll be none the wiser. There will never be any requirement for evidence, none of the burden of proof that applies in actual criminal cases, because the police won't investigate it. They'll just record it.

Meanwhile, other people are out there committing actual crimes with impunity, serious crimes like rape and burglary, and the police can't be arsed to investigate those either, so not only do they get away with it, they don't even get the merest smudge of a black mark on their DBS certificate.