Thread by @netpol

1/ Met Deputy Chief Stephen House today criticised @SistersUncut and the #SarahEverard vigil for sharing what to do when faced with police oppression.

House basically has a problem with tweets like this (so you defo should RT it):

https://twitter.com/SistersUncut/status/1371115000442585098

@SistersUncut 2/ House said the tweet was a “typical preparatory tweet before a demonstration, but not before a vigil”.

There is so much wrong with this arguement it is staggering. *Takes a deep breath.*

@SistersUncut 3/ Those preparing for the vigil were right to share information about what to do when faced with police repression. The Met had clearly indicated that they were going to crack down on the vigil.

No magic crystal balls needed.

https://twitter.com/netpol/status/1370127264751480845

@SistersUncut 4/ Despite legal advice telling them they did not have to crack down, they were determined to do so.

https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1369917786936516614

@SistersUncut 5/ Despite National @policechiefs Council telling the Parliamentery Committee on Human Rights that even protests were specifically allowed:

https://twitter.com/netpol/status/1370687452122394630

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs 6/ Does it matter that it was a demostration or a vigil? We cannot see why. Neither should have been stopped.

This is a classic case of the police trying to present some protest as bad or undesirable.

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs 7/ The police have a legal duty to facilate protest and vigils.

Though they do seem to forget this quite a bit.

We say forget. Wilful / deliberate ignorance might be more on the mark.

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs 8/ @sistersuncut & others were right to share @gbclegal advice.

We all saw what happened at the #SarahEverard vigil.

We have since spoken to many who were at that and subsequent events who were glad they knew their rights.

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs @GBCLegal 9/ So what do we learn from House's comments?

Firstly the police that saw the #SarahEverard vigil as a protest criticising the police. So of course they were going to try and disrupt it.

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs @GBCLegal 10/ The police almost always crack down on any public express of criticism of the police. Just ask @UFFCampaign who have decades of experience of this.

Saturday's events are not an isolated incident but a deeply predicatble pattern of behaviour from the police.

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs @GBCLegal @UFFCampaign 11/ Secondly we learn that the police know the power of people knowing their rights. Here @netpol agrees!

The police often rely on ignorance and fear to act unaccountably. The work that @gbclegal @blkprotestlegal @haltACAB and others do is so effective.

greenandblackcross.org/action/know-yo…

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs @GBCLegal @UFFCampaign @blkprotestlegal @haltACAB 12/ House does not know his rights. He said the tweet was:

"basically saying … don’t bring any identification, make sure you have your solicitor’s phone number to hand and do not talk to the police."

Only 3/5 of the key messages. Must try harder: greenandblackcross.org/guides/key-adv…

@SistersUncut @PoliceChiefs @GBCLegal @UFFCampaign @blkprotestlegal @haltACAB 13/ There is a lot more wrong with what House said today. But we are a tiny grassroots organisation and opposing the #PoliceCrackdownBill has us quite stretched so we are going to leave it there for now. Feel free to add points.

#KillTheBill!