Thread by @JolyonMaugham

As we wonder quite how bad was the Met's policing last night it is worth looking back at the sequence of events on Friday night when the Judgment came out.

At or around 18.46 the Judge gives his decision, anticipating a discussion between the Met and @reclaimts about whether the vigil can take place.

https://twitter.com/BBCDomC/status/1370446224537624579?s=19

At 19.35 @ReclaimTS says: "We are now in discussions with the Met to confirm how the event can proceed in a way that is proportionate and safe."

https://twitter.com/ReclaimTS/status/1370458551362187272?s=19

Only 20 minutes later, 19.55, whilst those discussions are ongoing, the Met says the vigil cannot lawfully take place:

"stay at home or find a lawful and safer way to express your views."

mynewsdesk.com/uk/metpoliceuk…

Which is odd because at 22.45 @ReclaimTS still understand the discussions with the Met to be continuing.

https://twitter.com/ReclaimTS/status/1370506143148212224?s=19

It's not until the next morning at 7.17 that @ReclaimTS does its best to cancel the vigil "in light of the lack of constructive engagement" from the Met.

https://twitter.com/ReclaimTS/status/1370635152863399937?s=19

It looks like the Met pre-empted the discussion anticipated by the Judge and, in the middle of it, brought it to a close. With predictable consequences.

Hard to disagree with this from @ReclaimTS last night: the Met's intransigence "created a risky and unsafe situation."

If the vigils continue, the Met must return to the table and work with @ReclaimTS to ensure the right of women to be heard - safely. Otherwise the Met will bear real responsible for harming community relationships and public health outcomes.

The vigils can take place lawfully.