.@SurreyPolice consider this a public order offence and wish to arrest the person who posted it.

Please retweet if you disagree this is a public order offence and that the police should have better things to do.
Even if this met the evidential requirements for a public order offence - and we really don’t see how it does - how is it in the public interest for the police to be investigating this?
First step is surely to make complaint to the social media site on which the picture was posted. If the site finds it does not breach terms and conditions of its use, then surely that is an end to if.
We can see that euphoria after Miller v CoP was short lived. There is an ingrained and harmful response now hard baked into police forces - that the feelings of offence from one particular minority group overwhelm the actual law or any common sense application of it.
2022 will therefore be the year of injunctions and damages, over and over again until lessons are finally learned.
Seriously. Tell us how this is a public order offence. It’s clearly a joke. What ‘intent’ do they think they can prove here?
Or how does it fall within section 5? How is any of this ‘threatening or abusive’?
We spoke with the investigating Constable. He is being directed by a Detective Inspector who is on a mission to find a crime. The suspect is now under threat of arrest for refusing to turn himself in voluntarily. For a retweet.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with WeAreFairCop

WeAreFairCop Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @WeAreFairCop

20 Dec 21
Today we find out if the insane rants of my anonymised trans accuser (the victim) is legitimised by the police. Here is a small sample (I have pages of it) of the history of police informer Mrs B. @CollegeofPolice and @CCLeeFreeman withheld it from the High Court. Wonder why?
“My partner is a Hells Angel… what’s it like to have sex with your sister?” Says anonymised police informer Mrs B…. The trans woman @CCLeeFreeman granted anonymity to.
Cannot imagine why they hid this, can you?
Read 4 tweets
7 Dec 21
Starting to read through the Law Commission Report. Interesting to note this.

s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prod-st…
And this
And this
Read 53 tweets
3 Oct 21
This is the Chief whose force was compared to the Stasi, who says ‘Common sense is not appropriate for the police’ & who spent over 100k defending the right to criminalise women for saying they know the difference between lads and lasses. @Humberbeat @HumbersidePCC
This is the Chief who resolutely stands by @stonewalluk, who refuses to accept that Pride is political, and who flies this flag outside its new £14 million custody suite…
This is the Chief who covered up the history of his star witness in order to dupe the High Court into granting an anonymity order to a lunatic with a long history of threatening VaWG (sic). Watch this space.
Read 5 tweets
17 Sep 21
1. Police excel at recording themselves as victims of hate but give themselves a pass when the boot’s on the other foot. ‘We investigated ourselves and our motives were found to be pure’ says @leicspolice in relation to its riot shield investigation.
2. Despite notching up 120,000 NCHIs against individual members of the public for saying stuff like ‘My cat is a Methodist’ or whistling Bob The Builder, @leicspolice have decided the rules do not apply to them.
3. That’s odd. Because @CollegeofPolice guidance insists that the police do NOT check for motive and must believe the perception of the victim. Hence @HarryTheOwl101 and @SVPhillimore both have NCHIs attached to their names for 6 years, with no possibility of appeal.
Read 6 tweets
9 Sep 21
1. Had a call from @leicspolice yesterday re the riot shield. Where to start? So, our complaint was recorded as a Non Crime Hate Incident (NCHI) on the basis that I perceived the shield as hateful. So far so good.
2. However, the NCHI was not recorded against an officer’s name… which is in contrast to the standard practice of labelling a person as ‘suspect’ & ruining their job prospects for the next 6 years. Convenient.
3. The reason for this is as follows: the police judge their own actions to be pure and hate free. Political colours on a riot shield are an act of solidarity and support - not an act of antagonism and hostility. So they are free to continue with the deployment.
Read 7 tweets
10 Jun 21
At a webinar about hate crime in Scotland! Now listening to a 'tactical hate crime adviser' from Glasgow who is talking about role of police Scotland.
Interestingly and worrying, they are going to talk about impact of hate crime on CHILDREN. And urge all questions to be 'respectful'. This is an emotive topic which you may find upsetting.
Learning objectives - for attendees to define a hate crime, to name the protected characteristics and identify different types of crime that can be motivated by prejudice and guide you through the hate crime form.
Read 41 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(