Free speech

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

AndyRM

Elder Goth
The police often won't tell the accused of what exactly caused them to come knocking, until the point of being charged.

I suspect she will not roll over so easily.

There is specific advice now online as what to say and do if the rozzers come knocking

It's pretty simple, and has been for years.

Tell them nowt.

I'll warn you now that I'm going to post something controversial, so that y'all snowflakey b*tches don't wet your knickers...

ACAB.
 

icowden

Shaman
It's a pity she didn't take any questions, as I still have no idea exactly what she said to interest the police. At least with Linehan it was clear.

There is an interesting article in this week's Private Eye suggesting that Linehan's arrest might be the result of pressure on the Police through Judicial Reviews. In particular a former copper called Lynsey Watson (formerly Alex Horwood) is a serial litigant. At Linehan's trial for harrassment of Sophia Brooks Watson encouraged her to threaten a Judicial Review. Horwood took Greater Manchester Police to a Judicial Review for refusing to pursue a case against Wings over Scotland - he lost but it was expensive for the Police. He has also persecuted Helen Joyce (Sex Matters) who had a potential criminal case for harrassment added to her police record - although she wasn't told about it or prosecuted.

Watson herself was sacked from the Police after sending over 1200 messages under pseudonyms. She also pretended online when asked about her hate campaign that she was called Paula and had an MA in legal studies.

The Police still seem to leap into action when Paula / Lynsey / Alex make a complaint.
 

AuroraSaab

Pharaoh
There is an interesting article in this week's Private Eye suggesting that Linehan's arrest might be the result of pressure on the Police through Judicial Reviews.

The police initially declined to take it further. It's in the trial notes that the complainant threatened a judicial review:

Screenshot_20250922_072428_Chrome.jpg


This is your right of course but considering what some people say/do and the police don't act, it appears that they act differently when faced with a judicial review.
 
The police initially declined to take it further. It's in the trial notes that the complainant threatened a judicial review:

This is your right of course but considering what some people say/do and the police don't act, it appears that they act differently when faced with a judicial review.

In shocking news public authority changes its stance on an issue, and it can be any issue, after possibility of JR taps it on the shoulder
 

CXRAndy

Squire
Ah, bless.

My sweet summer child.

You've never been lifted.

No I play ever so nicely. :biggrin:
 
But that's not whipping up hatred, that's stating facts.
That's exactly what any extremist's left right and center say to legitimate whatever. It's an opinion your opinion and whilst on the subject off Trump i don't disagree,(as many other left right an center) doesn't make claiming your opinion is an fact correct.
 
Alltough i haven't read the whole verdict i read a headline that someone who attacked an peacefull anti-islam activist with an knife getting nu punishment at all.
It sounds pretty worrying to me. He was allowed his protest at the time, and then someone who ignores his democratic right and attacks them gets away with it? doesn't sit right.
 

C R

Guru
Alltough i haven't read the whole verdict i read a headline that someone who attacked an peacefull anti-islam activist with an knife getting nu punishment at all.
It sounds pretty worrying to me. He was allowed his protest at the time, and then someone who ignores his democratic right and attacks them gets away with it? doesn't sit right.

Link or it didn't happen.
 
Top Bottom