How can you defend yourself when the police will not tell you what you did?

So, a Journalist from the telegraph got woken up by the cops on Remembrance day who accused her of "Stirring up Racial Hatred" in a social media post from the previous year.
They would not tell her what post.
They would not identify the accuser either, but insisted that this person should be known as the victim.

link to X

Honestly it would be funny (in a farcical way) if it wasn't so awful.
Welcome to the Orwellian Nightmare of Starmer's Britain in 2024.

It’s the classic show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.

The system makes it so everyone at anytime is considered criminal they need only to come calling.

a reply to: SprocketUK

a reply to: Athetos

It just makes a mockery out of any idea that there is justice in the land.

a reply to: SprocketUK

if it's any consolation, this is usually just about the point where the people snap, and the evil idiots get their comeuppance. At least that's how it worked in the movies. Good luck, ya'll are going to need it.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: SprocketUK

if it's any consolation, this is usually just about the point where the people snap, and the evil idiots get their comeuppance. At least that's how it worked in the movies. Good luck, ya'll are going to need it.

Indeed mate, thanks for pointing out the silver lining in this big, dark cloud

a reply to: SprocketUK
Entirely Kafkaesque.
The Telegraph article is behind a paywall so cannot discern what police force are dealing nor the content of the supposed offending post/tweet. The 'victim', able to remain anon is truly alarming.

a reply to: covent

Yeah I tried to find another link but the X one was the best I could manage. I don't normally like sharing paywall stuff cos so many can't view it. Not much choice here though.

a reply to: SprocketUK

The Daily Mail is running the article, too.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

A journalist is facing a 'Kafkaesque' probe after she allegedly stirred up racial hatred in a post on social media in 2023.

Allison Pearson, 64, claimed two police officers turned up at her door at 9.40am on Remembrance Sunday to inform her she was being investigated over a post on X from last year.

The award-winning writer told The Telegraph that one officer said 'I was accused of a non-crime hate incident. It was to do with something I had posted on X a year ago. A YEAR ago? Yes. Stirring up racial hatred apparently'.

The officer allegedly then said he was not allowed to disclose what Ms Pearson had said in the post.

But at the time of the alleged tweet last year, the journalist was regularly posting about Hamas's October 7 attacks on Israel, as well as pro-Palestine demonstrations happening in London.

Last night, Essex Police said officers had opened an investigation under section 17 of the Public Order Act 1986 relating to material allegedly 'likely or intended to cause racial hatred'.

A police spokesman said: 'We're investigating a report passed to us by another force. The report relates to a social media post which was subsequently removed. An investigation is now being carried out under section 17 of the Public Order Act.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: SprocketUK

if it's any consolation, this is usually just about the point where the people snap, and the evil idiots get their comeuppance. At least that's how it worked in the movies. Good luck, ya'll are going to need it.

a reply to: Encia22

Good spot!

I am really concerned about what is going on over there, with free speech. You guys are going down hill very fast.

a reply to: chiefsmom

The way its going I am too.

a reply to: SprocketUK
The "accused" should get a lawyer who could then demand proof of a crime-if the cops cannot state the actual crime what can be proved?

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

a reply to: onestonemonkey

In more serious "crimes" in the US, only the intent of the infraction is necessary for a charge to be leveled.

Make Tommy Robinson a bad word and say it enough times people believe it. This is what you end up with, the same system employed by the Bolsheviks where people could anonymously turn in the Kulaks for owning a cow.

Getting hemmed up for an anonymous accusation in which you cannot properly defend yourself is scary #.
This is like the old Soviet republic or East Germany type stuff.
Only difference is the accused aren’t disappearing, yet.
Is this new there or par for the course?
Either way it’s chilling.
It always amazes me how the police or anybody in charge would defend this or even go along with it considering it can be done to them as well.
Eric Arthur Blair was a Brit, and quite the prophet.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

This is just wrong but do you know that TR has some serious criminal convictions including mortgage fraud?

a reply to: SprocketUK

Has she been charged with anything?

a reply to: SprocketUK

She could make a complaint to the IPCC:

www.gov.uk...

a reply to: SprocketUK

In this case and likely many others-it appears as though the cops may be abusing their powers.
I highly doubt they are doing this for kicks,and I suspect they are being told to do so by...someone.
No wonder the cops morale is about as close to the gutter as the rest of the public.
I am guessing none of them signed up to be ideological enforcement agents.



I have learned alot from Blackbelt Barrister since I found his channel.
Big respect to him.