Misogyny to become a hate crime

Nottinghamshire Police will record and investigate misogyny as a hate crime



Nottinghamshire Police have decided to classify any behaviour perceived to be misogynistic as hate crimes. This includes such things as wolf-whistles, unwanted texts, taking an unwanted photograph and sexual harassment.

A spokeswoman for Nottinghamshire Police said that categorising misogynistic behaviour as a hate crime and highlighting the issue would lead to increased reports and therefore a higher number of charges. This is interesting since the police also admit that they will be applying the label “hate crime” and investigating allegations that “do not reach the charging threshold” – or to put it another way, things that are not crimes and thus cannot result in a higher number of charges.

Wolf-whistles and the taking of unwanted photographs are not currently criminal offences unless they go beyond a one-off incident and become harassment. So far as I am aware, there are no plans to criminalise these behaviours, although I read in the Times that they are offences in other countries. Unwanted text messages is a very broad label – I get them all the time from my local pizza shop – but there is a point where sending unwanted messages becomes a crime, usually harassment although other offences could be committed depending on the content of the message. The police already investigate these and have done for many years

Interestingly, the Times reports that “[g]roping a woman will be classed as a hate crime for the first time and may result in a criminal charge.” I hate to break it to you guys at the Times but groping a man or a woman has been a crime for a very long time and I would hope Nottinghamshire Police have always taken that type of thing seriously.

Just to put this decision into context, Nottinghamshire Police is dealing with £54 million budget cuts over the past 4 years and £12 million of budget cuts to come. The force has been looking to make cuts, most notably by axing the forces city division and, potentially cutting 400 officers over three years. The Chief Constable of Nottingham Police has recently quit and his deputy has delayed her retirement to become temporary Chief Constable for eight-months until April 2017. 

All these leaves me wondering whether Nottinghamshire Police actually have the resources to take on investigations into matters that are clearly never going to result in criminal charges and how they’d go about such an investigation.

Will police officers be sent to speak to builders accused of wolf-whistling? Will they expend resources tracking the man responsible down? What if he doesn’t wish to speak to the police, will they arrest him? Would such an arrest even be lawful? Section 24 of Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 would suggest not since an officer can have no grounds for suspecting that somebody has committed an offence when they know the thing they are investigating is not an offence. True they could dress it up as harassment but all that will do is waste time and money not to mention open the force up to wrongful detention lawsuits!

I think the reality is that despite the force’s claim that all reports will be investigated, the reality is that the police are unlikely to have the resources or the powers to investigate the trivial incidents at which this new policy is aimed. Serious incidents will continue to be investigated as always. So, when all is said and done, this policy looks like a paper exercise designed to record incidents rather than tackle them. It also looks rather like a publicity stunt for a new Chief Constable in the first few weeks of her job and looking to make a mark.
Location: Red Lion St, Richmond TW9 1RB, UK

Comments

  1. Andrew T24 July 2016 at 15:33

    I would have to assume that Nottinghamshire is completely free of serious crime so that its Boys and Girls in Blue have time to inbestigate silly acts such as wolf-whistles.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are items referred to in s.9’s as exhibits bound to be served?

  Background - CPS served a witness statement on me that exhibited two BWV clips that are potentially relevant to the Crown’s case and may have some relevance to the defence case insofar as they are likely to show the lighting and weather at the time events happened. Somebody has listed the clips as unused material rather than putting them in the exhibits folder that accompanies the served evidence. This raised an interesting (to me anyway) question about whether a party who exhibits an item in a statement is bound to serve it on their opponent. At court the judge took the view that the Crown were at liberty to classify items exhibited in s9s as unused material if they chose not to rely upon them in evidence. I took the view that if they are exhibited then they must be served along with the witness statement that exhibits the item and that the solution to a situation where the Crown say they are now unused is to edit the witness statement to remove the reference, by agreement with the
More gibberish >>

Driving without insurance

Image
Insurance is a contract that remains in force until it expires or is cancelled As you may, or may not, know I specialise in motoring law and most of my work involves defending people accused of drink driving . With the drink driving often come other road traffic offences such as driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. It’s driving without insurance I want to talk about today because I think far too many police officers, solicitors, barristers and judges miss a key legal point when looking at these cases. I’ve received prosecution papers today for somebody accused of driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. The no insurance element is claim that the suspect did not tell the insurer about the disqualification. In his statement, the police officers says, “ [I] contacted [the insurer] who called me back informing me they would not consider the insurance policy valid as there were no convictions disclosed.” Looks like an open an
More gibberish >>

National Identity Cards

Image
A mock up of a British National Identity Card Following the Second World War, Britain called for help from the people of the Commonwealth to come and fill thousands of job vacancies. Many answered the call and came to be known as the Windrush Generation after named the MV Empire Windrush, which docked in Tilbury on the 22 nd June 1948 bringing the first workers from Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago. The Home Office inevitably screwed up and caused a huge number of problems for members of the Windrush Generation. But their story is not the subject of this blog. Instead, I want to look at a side issue that has raised its weary head once again: ID cards. Alan Johnson and Charles Clarke, both former Home Secretaries, have begun a call for ID cards as the solution to the troubles of undocumented British citizens who have not had their status regularised. ID cards pop up every few years and I’ve no doubt that eventually we’ll have a compulsory piece of plastic foisted upon us that
More gibberish >>