Police OVER-REACTION yet again.

[old'un]

13 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

You actually believe that? 🙂

That's why I asked.

[Gordon R]

🙂

 

[Rim Fire]

Is it a crime to call a police officer a lesbian?

The arrest of a 16-year-old autistic girl for a ‘homophobic public-order offence’ raises some troubling questions.

TOM SLATER
EDITOR

11th August 2023

Share

TopicsFREE SPEECHPOLITICSUK

Is it a crime to call a police officer a lesbian? Now there’s a question I never thought I’d have to pose. But following the release of shocking footage, showing a 16-year-old autistic girl being arrested by seven police officers over a ‘homophobic public-order offence’, it’s one that desperately needs to be answered.

Over the past 48 hours, a TikTok video has gone viral showing a distressed girl from Leeds being manhandled and taken away by police. In the clip, the child’s mother, who filmed and released the video, is heard arguing with the officers who have entered her home, pleading with them to leave her daughter alone, who she says is both autistic and suffers with scoliosis.

The mother claims that her daughter said to one of the officers, a blonde woman with short hair, that she ‘looked like her lesbian nana’. ‘You’re going to remove her for what, she said the word lesbian? Her nana is a lesbian, she’s married to a woman. She’s not homophobic’, the mother says in the clip.

 

She tries, in vain, to explain the distress this is all causing her daughter, who is hiding under the stairs, screaming and hitting herself. ‘She’s autistic’, the mother repeats, to which the allegedly offended cop responds: ‘I don’t care.’ A male officer intervenes, insisting the child made a ‘homophobic’ comment towards his colleague. The girl is then taken away, screaming and crying. She was released on bail without charge the next day.

There are two sides to every story, of course. In a statement released yesterday, West Yorkshire Police assistant chief constable Oz Khan said the video ‘only provides a very limited snapshot of the circumstances of this incident’, and that the officers’ bodycams provide ‘additional context’ about the encounter. He asked that ‘people avoid reaching any conclusions about [the incident] solely on the basis of the social-media video’.

RECOMMENDED

EVENT: Michael Shellenberger and Brendan O’Neill live

SPIKED

But the details police have provided so far will do little to dispel the impression across social media that this was an outrageous abuse of power:

‘From 12.12am on Monday, 7 August, police received calls from a family member of a 16-year-old girl who was reportedly intoxicated and putting herself at risk in Leeds city centre. Officers attended at about 1am and drove the teenager to her home so she could be appropriately looked after. Upon returning her to the address, comments were made which resulted in the girl being arrested on suspicion of a homophobic public-order offence. The nature of the comments made was fully captured on body-worn video… She was later released on bail pending further enquiries and advice from the Crown Prosecution Service.’

 

So many questions are left dangling here. If this ‘additional context’ exists, why haven’t we been provided with it? If the alleged offence took place ‘upon returning her to the address’, then how has she committed a public-order offence? (The Public Order Act has a so-called ‘dwelling defence’ to stop people being criminalised for comments made in their own homes.) Did the girl say anything other than what her mother has claimed? Surely, saying a cop resembles a lesbian is not an arrestable offence, even under Britain’s ridiculously censorious speech laws?

I put some of these questions to West Yorkshire Police today. ‘We’ve nothing to add to our existing statement at this stage’, a spokesman told me, adding that investigations were ongoing.

PODCAST

Why we should leave the ECHR

SPIKED

They would do well to be a lot less cagey, given the plunging public trust in police when it comes to free speech. In recent years, we’ve seen veterans have their collars felt for posting anti-woke memes on social media, and gender-critical feminists dragged through the courts because trans activists took wilful offence to their posts.

Autistic people seem particularly vulnerable to plod’s apparent crusade to stop people – including their own officers – having their feelings hurt. In 2020, a Welsh 19-year-old, who suffers with Asperger’s, anxiety and depression, was convicted of a hate crime for shouting ‘Is it a boy or is it a girl?’ at a transgender community-support officer. He was given a 12-week curfew and ordered to pay £590. West Yorkshire Police were also hauled over the coals earlier this year for recording a ‘non-crime hate incident’ against an autistic schoolboy from Wakefield, who brought a Koran to school and dropped it on the floor, scuffing it slightly. Even though the boy was sent death threats, after news of the ‘desecration’ got out on social media, he was the one who ended up being formally investigated by the police.

 

All these examples and more point to something deeply sinister. The police have become the armed wing of offence culture. So desperate are they to find some new moral mission, to cleanse themselves of past sins and contemporary bad PR, that they’ve become obsessed with punishing wrongthinkers – even vulnerable young people whose only ‘crime’ is to offend the delicate sensibilities of a cop.

We shouldn’t rush to judgement about the case of Leeds’ alleged autistic hate criminal. That elusive ‘additional context’ may yet surface. But unless this girl is also accused of a serious crime, one of those old-fashioned ones involving actions and deeds rather than words and feelings, it is impossible to see what she could have said, in her own home no less, that would have justified this outrageous response.

 

A police force that locks up autistic kids for offending its officers has lost the moral plot. West Yorkshire Police desperately need to provide some proper answers.

Tom Slater is editor of spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_

MICHAEL SHELLENBERGER AND BRENDAN O'NEILL – LIVE AND IN CONVERSATION

ZOOM EVENT

Tuesday 29 August – 7pm to 8pm

This is a free event, exclusively for spiked supporters.

SIGN UP

Picture by: TikTok.

[Pushkin]

Very much at odds with this whole incident.  Why was she being driven home?  16 year old out at that time of night? Attending the said gay rave, non judgemental on the gay aspect of it but- I imagine she went with mummy dear's full support and consent - and pocket money.? 18 year old sister tried phoning mum but got no response, was the siter with the 16 year old?  Why did police give her a lift home?  Was it in a minibus departing from covering the Rave so could explain the number of officers?   Unavailable on the phone Mummy dear ready at the door with reasons for and excuses as to why not to take her.  What is the wider history of the girl/family/area?

Vince Green

•  
• Members
• •  13.8k
• From:NW London and now Cornwall

 

Posted 3 hours ago

They were saying on the radio this morning that it wasn't an arrest able offence in any circumstances and the police had no legal right to enter the house.

Who would want to be a police officer? Their problem now is that everyone has a mobile phone with a camera.

____________

Vince, WHO was saying on the radio???? Police? or the useless reporters who always sell the story they want YOU to take on board.  Have they got legal support to give this comment?

My understanding of the law is that: If an officer enters a preemises then it should only be done if they believe a crime has been committed which it had (Check the law relating to hate speech!) or that a crime is in the process of being committed, I think refusing to accept the direct order of a police officer makes that grade or, is someone able to better educate me on this aspect?

As regards the officers of the Law - we all tend to think they are idiots who don't know the law and when best to apply it.  However, they are trained officers and have passed through their training and been on the road with more seasoned officers, but even then they will still make mistakes - that does not excuse them but hey- I woild look to an officer of the law before rushing to the nearest individual that passed by - unless it was to ask if they witnessed or would witness what happens next in a case.

Police only try to apply what the LAWMAKERS tell them is appropriate and illegal or legal.  The same group then default on what the oficers try to apply.  Better written laws lead to better understanding of what is  acrime and when Police can act accordingly.  The current soft justice system comes I think from the political representatives of all the political groups they then lean on the Law Lords to achieve what suits their political views best.  Sorry folks this has become more of a rant than my simple comment started out to be.

 

PS VInce : I agree; who would want to be a law officer these days!

😁

image.webp

Edited August 13, 2023 by Pushkin

[Rem260]

42 minutes ago, Rim Fire said:

Is it a crime to call a police officer a lesbian?

The arrest of a 16-year-old autistic girl for a ‘homophobic public-order offence’ raises some troubling questions.

TOM SLATER
EDITOR

11th August 2023

Share

TopicsFREE SPEECHPOLITICSUK

Is it a crime to call a police officer a lesbian? Now there’s a question I never thought I’d have to pose. But following the release of shocking footage, showing a 16-year-old autistic girl being arrested by seven police officers over a ‘homophobic public-order offence’, it’s one that desperately needs to be answered.

Over the past 48 hours, a TikTok video has gone viral showing a distressed girl from Leeds being manhandled and taken away by police. In the clip, the child’s mother, who filmed and released the video, is heard arguing with the officers who have entered her home, pleading with them to leave her daughter alone, who she says is both autistic and suffers with scoliosis.

The mother claims that her daughter said to one of the officers, a blonde woman with short hair, that she ‘looked like her lesbian nana’. ‘You’re going to remove her for what, she said the word lesbian? Her nana is a lesbian, she’s married to a woman. She’s not homophobic’, the mother says in the clip.

 

She tries, in vain, to explain the distress this is all causing her daughter, who is hiding under the stairs, screaming and hitting herself. ‘She’s autistic’, the mother repeats, to which the allegedly offended cop responds: ‘I don’t care.’ A male officer intervenes, insisting the child made a ‘homophobic’ comment towards his colleague. The girl is then taken away, screaming and crying. She was released on bail without charge the next day.

There are two sides to every story, of course. In a statement released yesterday, West Yorkshire Police assistant chief constable Oz Khan said the video ‘only provides a very limited snapshot of the circumstances of this incident’, and that the officers’ bodycams provide ‘additional context’ about the encounter. He asked that ‘people avoid reaching any conclusions about [the incident] solely on the basis of the social-media video’.

RECOMMENDED

EVENT: Michael Shellenberger and Brendan O’Neill live

SPIKED

But the details police have provided so far will do little to dispel the impression across social media that this was an outrageous abuse of power:

‘From 12.12am on Monday, 7 August, police received calls from a family member of a 16-year-old girl who was reportedly intoxicated and putting herself at risk in Leeds city centre. Officers attended at about 1am and drove the teenager to her home so she could be appropriately looked after. Upon returning her to the address, comments were made which resulted in the girl being arrested on suspicion of a homophobic public-order offence. The nature of the comments made was fully captured on body-worn video… She was later released on bail pending further enquiries and advice from the Crown Prosecution Service.’

 

So many questions are left dangling here. If this ‘additional context’ exists, why haven’t we been provided with it? If the alleged offence took place ‘upon returning her to the address’, then how has she committed a public-order offence? (The Public Order Act has a so-called ‘dwelling defence’ to stop people being criminalised for comments made in their own homes.) Did the girl say anything other than what her mother has claimed? Surely, saying a cop resembles a lesbian is not an arrestable offence, even under Britain’s ridiculously censorious speech laws?

I put some of these questions to West Yorkshire Police today. ‘We’ve nothing to add to our existing statement at this stage’, a spokesman told me, adding that investigations were ongoing.

PODCAST

Why we should leave the ECHR

SPIKED

They would do well to be a lot less cagey, given the plunging public trust in police when it comes to free speech. In recent years, we’ve seen veterans have their collars felt for posting anti-woke memes on social media, and gender-critical feminists dragged through the courts because trans activists took wilful offence to their posts.

Autistic people seem particularly vulnerable to plod’s apparent crusade to stop people – including their own officers – having their feelings hurt. In 2020, a Welsh 19-year-old, who suffers with Asperger’s, anxiety and depression, was convicted of a hate crime for shouting ‘Is it a boy or is it a girl?’ at a transgender community-support officer. He was given a 12-week curfew and ordered to pay £590. West Yorkshire Police were also hauled over the coals earlier this year for recording a ‘non-crime hate incident’ against an autistic schoolboy from Wakefield, who brought a Koran to school and dropped it on the floor, scuffing it slightly. Even though the boy was sent death threats, after news of the ‘desecration’ got out on social media, he was the one who ended up being formally investigated by the police.

 

All these examples and more point to something deeply sinister. The police have become the armed wing of offence culture. So desperate are they to find some new moral mission, to cleanse themselves of past sins and contemporary bad PR, that they’ve become obsessed with punishing wrongthinkers – even vulnerable young people whose only ‘crime’ is to offend the delicate sensibilities of a cop.

We shouldn’t rush to judgement about the case of Leeds’ alleged autistic hate criminal. That elusive ‘additional context’ may yet surface. But unless this girl is also accused of a serious crime, one of those old-fashioned ones involving actions and deeds rather than words and feelings, it is impossible to see what she could have said, in her own home no less, that would have justified this outrageous response.

 

A police force that locks up autistic kids for offending its officers has lost the moral plot. West Yorkshire Police desperately need to provide some proper answers.

Tom Slater is editor of spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_

MICHAEL SHELLENBERGER AND BRENDAN O'NEILL – LIVE AND IN CONVERSATION

ZOOM EVENT

Tuesday 29 August – 7pm to 8pm

This is a free event, exclusively for spiked supporters.

SIGN UP

Picture by: TikTok.

Not sure what your point is here. Or is it not to trust what Tom Slater has to say as he doesn't listen to the actual reported fact but picks and chooses the bits he wants to.

Edited August 13, 2023 by Rem260

[ditchman]

if she was my daughter this would not have happened........

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Pushkin said:

My understanding of the law is that: If an officer enters a preemises then it should only be done if they believe a crime has been committed which it had (Check the law relating to hate speech!) or that a crime is in the process of being committed, I think refusing to accept the direct order of a police officer makes that grade or, is someone able to better educate me on this aspect

The law recognises five types of hate crime on the basis of:

• Race
• Religion 
• Disability
• Sexual orientation 
• Transgender identity

Any crime can be prosecuted as a hate crime if the offender has either:

• demonstrated hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Or

• been motivated by hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Someone can be a victim of more than one type of hate crime

1 hour ago, Pushkin said:

As regards the officers of the Law - we all tend to think they are idiots who don't know the law and when best to apply it.  However, they are trained officers and have passed through their training and been on the road with more seasoned officers

I don't think police officers are idiots, but they do regularly misinterpret the law, as they see it. 

Forcing people who have done nothing wrong, to ID is a good example. 

Detaining people when no suspicion of a crime is another. 

Getting involved in civil trespass, or assisting bailiffs when no breach of the peace.

And in this case, arresting a vulnerable child when the definition of a hate crime is not satisfied, due to no hostile intent. 

They are going to be sued, and solicitors will be lining up to take the case. 

You might not agree, but one officer being mildly offended does not a case make unfortunately. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Oh and of course the question has to be asked, Why was the female Officer quite so offended?

[Yellow Bear]

29 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Why was the female Officer quite so offended?

As said earlier we do not know what had been said/done before or during filming before they edited the film. 

we will see if/when the various bodycam films are issued.

IMHO this stinks of money grabbing stich up.

[Rem260]

3 hours ago, Rewulf said:

The law recognises five types of hate crime on the basis of:

• Race
• Religion 
• Disability
• Sexual orientation 
• Transgender identity

Any crime can be prosecuted as a hate crime if the offender has either:

• demonstrated hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Or

• been motivated by hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Someone can be a victim of more than one type of hate crime

I don't think police officers are idiots, but they do regularly misinterpret the law, as they see it. 

Forcing people who have done nothing wrong, to ID is a good example. 

Detaining people when no suspicion of a crime is another. 

Getting involved in civil trespass, or assisting bailiffs when no breach of the peace.

And in this case, arresting a vulnerable child when the definition of a hate crime is not satisfied, due to no hostile intent. 

They are going to be sued, and solicitors will be lining up to take the case. 

You might not agree, but one officer being mildly offended does not a case make unfortunately. 

Do you know what the interaction with the female officer was prior to her remark that she looked like her lesbian nana. Have you considered that the female officer may have been the officer dealing with her in the high street and that this vulnerable child had previously expressed hostile intent towards her by words or actions.  The Lesbian remark may have been the last straw.

I can not say that is the case as I was not there so I will have to bow to your greater knowledge of the circumstances. I just offer an alternative for consideration.

[Rewulf]

4 hours ago, Rem260 said:

Do you know what the interaction with the female officer was prior to her remark that she looked like her lesbian nana. Have you considered that the female officer may have been the officer dealing with her in the high street and that this vulnerable child had previously expressed hostile intent towards her by words or actions.  The Lesbian remark may have been the last straw

You don't get arrested for 'the last straw' you get arrested when there is clear evidence you have broken the law. 

You can surmise all you like about what the girl may have done previously, but she wasn't arrested for anything else except a homophic hate crime, a crime so terrible, that the CPS dropped it like a hot stone within 24 hours. 

Draw your conclusions from that alone. 

[Rim Fire]

4 hours ago, Rewulf said:

You don't get arrested for 'the last straw' you get arrested when there is clear evidence you have broken the law. 

You can surmise all you like about what the girl may have done previously, but she wasn't arrested for anything else except a homophic hate crime, a crime so terrible, that the CPS dropped it like a hot stone within 24 hours. 

Draw your conclusions from that alone. 

This 👆 She was taken home to her family so no crime was bad enough to be arrested for as Rewulf has said until she made the remark nothing was done 

[Mice!]

6 hours ago, Rewulf said:

You don't get arrested for 'the last straw' you get arrested when there is clear evidence you have broken the law. 

You can surmise all you like about what the girl may have done previously, but she wasn't arrested for anything else except a homophic hate crime, a crime so terrible, that the CPS dropped it like a hot stone within 24 hours. 

Draw your conclusions from that alone. 

They'd never prosecute someone for this, but the same as swearing at the police you'll get warned to quit it, before being arrested,  it happens on every police program out there when someone drunk mouths off.

The important thing that no one has mentioned is the safeguarding issue of a 16 year old girl being out drunk, did the police bring her home because it's a regular occurrence?

As for the cop get her knickers in a twist for a comment?? Get a grip

[Rem260]

7 hours ago, Rewulf said:

You don't get arrested for 'the last straw' you get arrested when there is clear evidence you have broken the law. 

You can surmise all you like about what the girl may have done previously, but she wasn't arrested for anything else except a homophic hate crime, a crime so terrible, that the CPS dropped it like a hot stone within 24 hours. 

Draw your conclusions from that alone. 

You have no idea how wrong you are, especially with public order offences. If people were arrested as soon as the offence was made out. Then there would be no police officers left policing the streets on a Friday and Saturday night. 

There are many who are released after having been arrested on a Fri/Sat night without charge where the offence was complete.

As Mice says try watching some police programmes to get an idea of how far people push it. The cps drop many offences that could be prosecuted. Especially when social media becomes involved.

3 hours ago, Rim Fire said:

This 👆 She was taken home to her family so no crime was bad enough to be arrested for as Rewulf has said until she made the remark nothing was done 

As above.  A lot of times it is easier to just take a drunk home as opposed to spending hours in the custody unit waiting to book them in. Especially if its a juvenile.

The only caveat to that is the police are seen a taxi service for drunks.

[discobob]

On 13/08/2023 at 10:26, 12gauge82 said:

I've had exactly the same experience, saw someone drink all day until they could barley stand up and couldn't believe it when they raced off in a 4x4 knocking a wheel bin over that someone had put out moments before. Called the police and told them they'd obviously be arriving home within the next 30mins. I later enquired the outcome, they told me they were too busy and had a rant at me that I should understand how busy they are. It beggars belief, although I did see in the local paper he was charged with drink driving over a year later, thankfully before killing someone.

We had a fella near us - quite a number of near/minor incidents - No insurance etc... I contacted the police numerous times out him - they never done anything.

He moved on a while later - then there was a large spread in the local press apparently (from my Councilor at the time) and police was looking for him as he had had an accident, people injured quite badly and he had done a runner....

[12gauge82]

37 minutes ago, discobob said:

We had a fella near us - quite a number of near/minor incidents - No insurance etc... I contacted the police numerous times out him - they never done anything.

He moved on a while later - then there was a large spread in the local press apparently (from my Councilor at the time) and police was looking for him as he had had an accident, people injured quite badly and he had done a runner....

I can believe it.

I used to defend the police when people criticised them, something ordnance can attest to as we had several debates on this forum in the past. But my experiences over the last few years has found them to be worse than useless. I believe they are lacking on so many levels policing needs a complete restart. With root and branch change to laws, recruitment, management and implementation of their code of ethics, targets need to go in the bin.

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Rem260 said:

If people were arrested as soon as the offence was made out. Then there would be no police officers left policing the streets on a Friday and Saturday night. 

What offences are we talking about ?
Drunk and disorderly ? Abusive behaviour ? Then yes , they would need a few thousand more cops on an average night out !

2 hours ago, Rem260 said:

There are many who are released after having been arrested on a Fri/Sat night without charge where the offence was complete.

I think you mix up the essence of arrest, once the suspected crime has been investigated, details taken ect, then its decided if A. A crime has been committed, and B. Whether its in the public interest to charge.
After that , its up to the CPS to prosecute, or not.

2 hours ago, Rem260 said:

The cps drop many offences that could be prosecuted.

As above, is it worthwhile ? Are there mitigating circumstances ? There are many reasons why they get dropped.

2 hours ago, Rem260 said:

Especially when social media becomes involved.

Are you actually saying if it gets put on social media , there is less chance of prosecution ?
Thats bizarre.

2 hours ago, Rem260 said:

As Mice says try watching some police programmes to get an idea of how far people push it.

I know how far people 'push it'  Trust me , I dont need to watch any police programmes to know that.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Next time I need a lift home I will call the nearest Policeman a lesbian  in the hope of getting a"blue light taxi" home! 

 

[Rewulf]

Just now, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Next time I need a lift home I will call the nearest Policeman a lesbian  in the hope of getting a"blue light taxi" home! 

 

You dont even need to do that , just tell them their hair looks 'funny' 

[Rem260]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

What offences are we talking about ?
Drunk and disorderly ? Abusive behaviour ? Then yes , they would need a few thousand more cops on an average night out !

I think you mix up the essence of arrest, once the suspected crime has been investigated, details taken ect, then its decided if A. A crime has been committed, and B. Whether its in the public interest to charge.
After that , its up to the CPS to prosecute, or not.

As above, is it worthwhile ? Are there mitigating circumstances ? There are many reasons why they get dropped.

Are you actually saying if it gets put on social media , there is less chance of prosecution ?
Thats bizarre.

I know how far people 'push it'  Trust me , I dont need to watch any police programmes to know that.

Again you prove you don't actually have a clue. You have a basic at best understanding of how the judicial system works and even less on how and when the cps are consulted. 

[Bigbob]

I'm sorry but that's the police at there best when i was working and dealing with students 2 or 3 cars so 4 or 6 officers would turn up for trivial things < but call 999 i am sorry we are busy but will attend when we can that means two days later 

[Rewulf]

26 minutes ago, Rem260 said:

Again you prove you don't actually have a clue. You have a basic at best understanding of how the judicial system works and even less on how and when the cps are consulted. 

Ah , so the police can just arrest anyone without good reason, and they dont need  CPS approval to prosecute ?

Thanks for clearing that up 😆

https://www.ppsni.gov.uk/prosecution-process#:~:text=The police are responsible for,to the Public Prosecution Service.

But you carry on watching police programs.

[Rem260]

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ah , so the police can just arrest anyone without good reason, and they dont need  CPS approval to prosecute ?

Thanks for clearing that up 😆

Where did I say the police could arrest anyone without good reason? 

Yes the police can charge certain offences without getting cps approval. 

I don't know your legal background but I suggest it is more out of date than mine is. Going by what you have said possibly not even in England or Wales.

 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Rem260 said:

Where did I say the police could arrest anyone without good reason? 

Yes the police can charge certain offences without getting cps approval. 

I don't know your legal background but I suggest it is more out of date than mine is. Going by what you have said possibly not even in England or Wales.

 

You said I didnt have a clue, yet failed to point out where I was wrong ?

You said I would educate myself watching police programs 
Is that where your legal background comes from ?

[Rim Fire]

29 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

You said I would educate myself watching police programs 

Maybe watching iron side now i am showing my age ditchy will know who i am on about  😂