Essex Police Heads Must Roll

Essex Police heads must roll

and NCHIs must go

 

govfs
Home Office Website

 

TOM ARMSTRONG

All ‘hate crime’ laws should be abolished for obvious reasons, they are too open to abuse, often being based on subjective emotions and, worse, political spite. But the non-crime hate incident nonsense, fit only for the worst of totalitarian tyrannies, must be halted now. They are a tool of oppression used to stifle free speech and nothing else.

Following the sinister visit by Essex police to journalist Alison Pearson’s home for posting something on line a year ago, we asked you to write to your MP urging them to ban this sinister practice.  Some said it’s a waste of time, but we disagree.  Even the normally mute MSM is getting in on the act, now that one of their own has felt the heat.

Preposterously, even some Tories are speaking out, with the ridiculous Boris Johnson, forgetful that the practice was in full swing when he was PM, has attacked the growing scourge of ‘thought police’ in Sir Keir Starmer’s Britain, comparing it – correctly – to ‘the Soviet Union at its worst’.

There must have been a significant backlash against the police intimidation of the estimable Allison Pearson, so join in folks, write that letter, post it on social media, your local rag, send it your friends, do all you can to keep the pressure on – and demand that senior Essex police heads roll.

Essex police has devoted a ridiculous amount of resources on this trivia, even to the extent of setting up a set up terror-style incident group. Three police forces were involved: the Met and Sussex as well as Essex. The absurdity of it all is shocking – and this isn’t what we pay our taxes for. The non-crime hate incident (NCHI) powers misused by the police have no democratic mandate and have not been debated or approved in parliament. It is quite possible that they are illegal under both common law and the European Human Rights treaty.

And they are being misused. The Home Office website reproduced above says that the “police will prioritise freedom of speech under new hate incident guidance. The guidance means personal data will only be recorded for incidents motivated by intentional hostility and where there is a real risk of significant harm.”  (But note that sinister warning: ‘This was published under the 2022 to 2024 Sunak Conservative government.’ Clearly, Labour thinks that prioritising free speech is a very bad thing.)

Even this is intolerable in a free society – and note it is guidance only – but plainly Essex police have ignored it, paid no regard to free speech and have harassed a (tellingly, conservative) journalist after an unnamed ‘victim’ had their feelings hurt by a quickly deleted tweet a year ago.

I say again, this is not what we pay our taxes for, and not what the public wants of its it police.  A couple of years ago we were outraged when the thugs of BLM demanded that the police be de-funded. I’m beginning to think they were right.

We all know that there is two-tier justice in this country, but now we know that there is also two-tier non-crime! While the Essex police were spending a year investigating Allison Pearson’s tweet, a Jewish woman in Essex made a complaint of a tweet claiming that ”Your Prime Minister does not work for you. He works for a handful of genocidal Jewish supremacists.” Now we support free speech, and do not think that this is a police matter, but it does match the criteria used by Essex police when bullying Allison Pearson. And yet the Essex Police refused to investigate, saying that “this comment may offend some individuals, being offended does not make a person a victim of crime”, concluding that the comment did “not constitute a crime and that referring to genocidal Jewish supremacists” does not stir up racial hatred”.

So, when a Jewish woman complains of what she perceives as an anti-Jewish hate crime reports her hurt feelings she is dismissed, rightly in my view, as no crime has been committed. But when, as reported in the DT today, somebody complains of the use of the word Islamist in the following post ““Everyone, better safe than sorry: before you go to bed, nip down and check you haven’t inadvertently got a death cult of Islamist murderers and rapists running their operations downstairs. It’s easily done” the writer was visited by the police and had a NHCI lodged against him.  How is that not two-tier policing?

Chief Superintendent Waheed Khan, Essex Police’s hate crime lead, and one of those whose heads should roll, is on record as saying “Everyone in Essex has the right to be safe and on behalf of the force, I want to reaffirm our commitment to tackling all forms of hate crime and to encourage victims to come forward to report incidents.” Obviously, some have more right to be safe than others.

Another Essex police head that deserves to roll is that of Chief Constable BJ (sic) Harrison, who clearly places much more emphasis on woke policing than on real policing.  Even as Chief Constable, he “continues to lead, endorse, and enhance the Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion Strategy within Essex Police” and acts as the lead and ally for the LGBTQ+ forum. Worryingly, this woke wonder is also the Police National Lead for Public Order and Public Safety and is a member of the panel for the Joint Committee of Human Rights.

espol

No wonder Essex police have an abysmal record in solving real crime. As the graph shows, they solved a mere 12.2% of violent crimes, 6.3% of burglaries and 9.6% of sex crimes, but 15.9% of hate crimes and 18.6% of race/religion offenses – making it clear where their priorities lie.

The NCHI insanity has become endemic, with 13,200 recorded by the UK’s 45 police forces over the year ending in June. Children as young as nine are being investigated by police for calling each other names, with numbskull police logging them against a primary school child who called a classmate a “retard”. Two secondary school girls who said that another pupil smelled “like fish” were also recorded as having committed a NCHI.

This should not be happening, it is against the previous government’s code of practice forbidding the recording an NCHI unless there is a real risk of significant harm or future crime, but more so it is idiotic, contrary to everything this country is supposed to stand for and highly detrimental to free expression. It needs to be stopped now, and we urge you to do your best to help get it stopped.

Here’s the letter we suggest you write to you MP to demand that parliament act to end the use of the ‘sinister non-crime hate incidents’ to inhibit free speech. Please take action before it is too late.

Subject: Urgent Call to End the Use of Non-Crime Hate Incidents and Protect Free Speech

“I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the use of non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) by law enforcement and other authorities, which I believe is intended to have a chilling effect on free speech in our country. As a constituent, I urge you to take immediate action in Parliament to address this issue and ensure that the fundamental right to free expression is protected.

The recording of NCHIs can have serious consequences for individuals, including damage to their reputation, career prospects, and mental well-being. Moreover, the subjective nature of what constitutes a non-crime hate incident means that individuals may be unfairly targeted for expressing opinions that are controversial or unpopular but nonetheless lawful.

The right to free speech is a cornerstone of our democratic society, enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is essential that we maintain a balance between protecting individuals from genuine harm and preserving the freedom to express diverse viewpoints. The current practice of recording NCHIs, however, risks tipping this balance in favour of censorship and fearful self-censorship.

I respectfully request that you raise this issue in Parliament and advocate for a complete ban on the use of non-crime hate incidents.

The recording of NCHIs can have serious consequences for individuals, including damage to their reputation, career prospects, and mental well-being. Moreover, the subjective nature of what constitutes a non-crime hate incident means that individuals may be unfairly targeted for expressing opinions that are controversial or unpopular but nonetheless lawful.

The right to free speech is a cornerstone of our democratic society, enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is essential that we maintain a balance between protecting individuals from genuine harm and preserving the freedom to express diverse viewpoints. The current practice of recording NCHIs, however, risks tipping this balance in favour of censorship and self-censorship.

I request that you raise this issue in Parliament and advocate for a complete, total and immediate ban on the use of non-crime hate incidents.

Yours”

This article (Essex Police heads must roll) was created and published by Free Speech Backlash and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Tom Armstrong

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*