Essex police try to intimidate the public

Here's some legal questions you can ask them should you wish.....

Gender depends on amateur hour intimidation and none are more captured than the police. The seamless transition from historical institutional homophobia, misogyny and racism naturally found a second wind with biology denial leading to the following pretty disgusting and thuggish threat from a police force. I’m not on twitter but I’ve come up with some legal questions you are perfectly free to copy paste and ask the officers should you wish…..

The tweet should you need it is here

Some Questions if we may officer……

1/ How do you reconcile the final sentence of this tweet with the decision in Forstater v GCD? Is it your position that dissent from what the flag represents contravene article 17 of the ECHR? If that is the case how do you reconcile that with Choudhury J's judgment on the issue?

2/ Each officer swears an oath to police to discharge the duties of a constable "with fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights including the right to free speech according equal respect to all people according to law" - how is your warning here you will police speech consistent with that oath?

3/ Miller v College of Policing approved Redmond v DPP ruling that free speech included the "contentious" warning that free speech which does not occasionally offend is not free speech worth having. Does your final sentence indicate you will investigate as a criminal matter contentious free speech?

4/ The criminal offence of misconduct on a public office (such as constable) encompasses via case law on the subject improper application of a state power for ideological ends. You are promoting an ideology here. How is this promotion not an example of such an offence?

5/ It is a criminal offence for an officer to discharge a police power on an improper basis, "the corrupt or otherwise improper exercise of police powers" offence (s.26 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015) - this criminalises the improper exercise of a constable's powers (such as investigation) which could cause a "detriment" - please note "detriment" is defined widely in subsection 9 and not confined to money or property.

Are you not here threatening an investigation (a detriment) based on ideological disagreement (the improper motive)?

If this is correct should it not be any constable exercising this power who ought to be reported?

6/ Actions by public bodies are be subject to a Human Rights 1998/Equality Act 2010 assessment /liability. Can you please explain how your threat to investigate any dissent from your ideological position also protects the protected characteristics of belief/religion/biological female sex/same-sex attraction please.

7/ Are you saying that the voicing of gender critical views in this thread will result in police investigation? If so have you confirmed with the EHRC that such a statement can be made without exposing you to civil liability for breach of the Equality Act 2010?

8/ When you say "all actions will be reported" what do you mean? Reported by you to you? Are you saying you will record a non-hate crime incident? If so, please set out how you will do so consistent with the Court of Appeal's ruling in Miller v College of Policing and explain how this is complaint with the Equality Act/authority on this point.

9/ Please provide your definition of "hate crime", are you referring to Malicious Communications/Public Order Act offences and if so, which ones and how do you square that proposal with free speech case law on the point such as Miller v College of Policing and Redmond v DPP

10/ I remind you that the oath of any constable (see /2 above) includes an oath to protect the human right of freedom of speech. How do you reconcile that undertaking in the constable's oath with a pre-emptive threat to investigate dissent?

11/ The flag you are raising is regarded by many people, particularly women and same sex attracted people generally to be one embodying homophobic and misogynist attitudes which have historically been issues for police forces and frankly appear ongoing. Will you commit to listening to gender critical/biological reality observing people to end the ideological capture of your organisation and the sinister thought-policing tweets it inevitably generates?

I might add to the above officers that in fighting for gay rights I’ve never had the need to threaten opponents with criminal investigation for simply disagreeing with me politically. But then I did gay rights.

This is anything but.

Enjoy your twitter storm and your ratio, you’ve rather earned it with this sinister and unpleasant threat.