Hate Crime?

[AJS-]

desolate said:

If he did that then I doubt very much it would lead to a conviction.
And if it did it would be very very wrong.

As his solicitor didn't seem too dismayed with the outcome, I very much doubt it was that.

He plead guilty, so I assume his solicitor was more interested in mitigation than defence.

[Alucidnation]

The UK is a fking joke.




(oops...was that offensive?)






Tough st!

[Northern Munkee]

Talking of hate crime.

It came up on the latest Spectator podcast https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-spectator/...

Orwellian, Kafka-esque, etc, etc 2 guys with a real bee in their bonnets about it. Interesting listen/read particularly the post Brexit spike.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/what-happened-w...
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/the-real-hate-c...

[BlackLabel]

Northern Munkee said:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/the-real-hate-c...

It seems we have gone from one extreme to the other when it comes to 'hate crimes'.

article said:

The police’s ‘Hate Crime Operational Guidance’ now stresses that the victim’s perception is the deciding factor in whether something is measured as a hate crime. No evidence is required. ‘Evidence of… hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime or hate incident,’ the guidance says. ‘[The] perception of the victim, or any other person, is the defining factor… the victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception.’ So you don’t need actual evidence to prove hate crime, just a feeling. The police are discouraged from asking for evidence. This is reflected in the policies of individual constabularies. So the ‘Hate Crime Procedure’ of the Surrey Police says ‘apparent lack of motivation as the cause of an incident is not relevant as it is the perception of the victim or any other person that counts’. No clear hateful motivation? Doesn’t matter. Record it as a hate crime anyway. Indeed, even when nothing hateful was said to the victim of a crime, still the police must record the incident as a hate crime if the victim perceives it to be so. The police guidance gives the example of a gay man being ‘sworn at and threatened’ by an assailant who said absolutely ‘nothing… about his sexual orientation’. If this gay man ‘perceives that he was targeted [because] he is openly gay’ then the police must ‘record this as a hate crime based on sexual orientation’. Think about this. If any gay man is shouted at in the street, by anyone, about anything, with no mention of sexuality, that can be recorded as an anti-gay hate crime. There’s no need for any proof whatsoever that anything anti-gay in sentiment was said or even intimated.

[AJS-]

Northern Munkee said:

Talking of hate crime.

It came up on the latest Spectator podcast https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-spectator/...

Orwellian, Kafka-esque, etc, etc 2 guys with a real bee in their bonnets about it. Interesting listen/read particularly the post Brexit spike.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/what-happened-w...
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/the-real-hate-c...

Seems to cover it pretty well.

If Stephen Bennett's case is indicative of what happens when someone who doesn't have the time, resources and bottle to fight such a case ends up accused of a hate crime, this seems like a very bad thing for a democracy.

[BlackLabel]

It's National Hate Crime Awareness Week.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-launc...

"More than 50 events are taking place across London stations,

Police were on duty informing members of the public that anyone who reports a hate crime will be taken seriously."

One would assume they take all crime reports seriously.

[Smollet]

BlackLabel said:

It's National Hate Crime Awareness Week.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-launc...

"More than 50 events are taking place across London stations,

Police were on duty informing members of the public that anyone who reports a hate crime will be taken seriously."

One would assume they take all crime reports seriously.

Wait until you've been burgled. You might reappraise your last statement.

[Jasandjules]

BlackLabel said:

One would assume they take all crime reports seriously.

That is an assumption not borne out by my experience nor the experiences of many people I know.

[Mr Snrub]

I presume this was taken as they moved in to make arrests

[BigLion]

AJS- said:

I've read this story on multiple sources and can't find anything that I would call hateful

http://www.itv.com/news/granada/2016-08-05/in-the-...

But according to Breitbart police refused to even release what was posted

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/08/uk-man-...

Are they allowed to withold this? If so it seems like an incredibly sinister law, where people can be convicted of a hate crime yet the state does not have to explain to the public what exactly was said that was deemed hateful.

Dad of seven says it all

[Smiler.]

Mr Snrub said:

I presume this was taken as they moved in to make arrests

Is that Elvis at the front holding that banner?

[Bigends]

Mnay of these will be recorded as hate incidents - NOT a crime report.

If the only reason for recording the matter at all is the informants perception that the incident occured as a result of their race / religon,disability etc and theres no information to support their assumption then the matters reported purely as an incident. e.g taxi picks up a white family ahead of an asian family even though the asian family were first in the queue - they may well perceive this happened because they were asian - however the taxi driver may have a valid reason and it would not be an offence to pick the white family up first and the matter will remain recorded as an incident It may well be that a passer by thought the taxi driver was racist and could report the matter themselves


IF the incident reported is actually a crime in law e.g. damage, assault etc and,for example the same taxi driver said told the asian family to F*ck off - whites first' then theres clearly a public order offence -racially aggravated and will be recorded as a crime
These are just two simplified examples
All depends on whats reported and the circumstances surrounding the incident

Edited by Bigends on Saturday 15th October 21:38

[Einion Yrth]

I don't find that particularly reassuring.

[jjlynn27]

Mr Snrub said:

I presume this was taken as they moved in to make arrests

Given that that picture was taken more than 5 years ago, one can hope that police are not as slow as you are.

[Mr Snrub]

jjlynn27 said:

Mr Snrub said:

I presume this was taken as they moved in to make arrests

Given that that picture was taken more than 5 years ago, one can hope that police are not as slow as you are.

Oh yes, I forgot we solved the problem of radical Islam right after the picture was taken

[anonymous-user]

what's illegal about the words on the banners?

[voyds9]

jjlynn27 said:

Given that that picture was taken more than 5 years ago, one can hope that police are not as slow as you are.

And if I commit murder how long before the police will forget about it.

Or if you think that is too extreme what about not paying child support, will that be written off after 5 years.

[DeanR32]

voyds9 said:

jjlynn27 said:

Given that that picture was taken more than 5 years ago, one can hope that police are not as slow as you are.

And if I commit murder how long before the police will forget about it.

Or if you think that is too extreme what about not paying child support, will that be written off after 5 years.

Eh?

Given the recent events (especially since the country voted leave), I'd say hate crime is more prevalent, and suggest the police want to crack down on it nice and early (before more people are attacked, like this pole killed in Harlow).

I'd hazard a guess that the intelligence gathered from these type of rallies is priceless to the authorities. I'm glad they at least put their hatred in front of the police.

[BlackLabel]

Guest house owner claims he suffered 'racial abuse' because of his Hawaiian shirt

|https://thumbsnap.com/zaN5TWbq[/url]

Telegraph said:

A guest house owner suffered a hate crime because of his Hawaiian shirt.

Rich Wilson, 47, claims he was racially abused by a gang of youths because of his colourful top.

Humberside Police are appealing for witnesses to the verbal attack in Hull, East Yorks, at 2am on Tuesday.

Artist Mr Wilson was heading to the Sainsbury store on Princes Avenue when he was approached by the gang on bikes.

Despite having no Asian of African heritage, Mr Wilson was racially abused with one youth calling him a "wannabe P***".

[Murph7355]

If we're all going to call the police when subjected to idiots, we're going to need waaaaay more than 10,000 extra police on £3.52 per annum.

He should be charged with wasting police time and told to MTFU.