1%er
Well-Known Member
The results of a judicial review into police training guidance should be published soon (it was meant to have been published in January, but I can't find it anywhere, so I guess it hasn't been published yet). It could make interesting reading and have a massive effect on what you can and can't post on social media without having the police keep a file on you. A file that is currently disclosed in a DBS check even if you have committed no crime (according to the online harms white paper, public discussion forums, such as Urban75 are classed as "Social Media" like Twitter, Facebook, along with other social media platforms, file hosting sites, messaging services, and search engines.
Why is this important to YOU! Well if someone doesn't like something you have posted they can report it to the police as a "hate crime" and according to the Hate Crime Operational Guidance issued by the College Of Policing, it must be recorded irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element. Since this catch-all guidance was released, police forces have recorded at least 87,000 non-crime hate incidents, none of which break the law.
What you have posted doesn't need to be aimed at an individual for someone to make the complaint, anyone who reads its can complain to their local "hate crime unit" and say they think it is hateful, even if they are unable to identify the hate element to the police. If the police decide to investigate their compliant and visit you or send a different police force to visit you if you live in a different area you could find yourself the subject of a Non-crime report for a hate incident.
What will happen if the police decide to take no legal action against you, they will record the visit as a Non-crime hate incident and it could well show up on a standard DBS check as "Crime Non-Crime" followed by the words Hate incident, if you are going for a job that needs an enhanced DBS check, such as teacher, nurse, doctor or any jobs where you could be in contact with children or venerable people etc. this record will 100% show up.
Under the current system, the "victim" of this Non-Crime has the legal right to remain anonymous and doesn't have to show the police any evidence that there was or is a hate element, just that they believe there is a hate element. The judicial review is aimed at changing the Hate Crime Operational Guidance issued by the College Of Policing to ensure there is a hate element and therefore a crime.
Full disclosure; The guy who is bring this case is called Harry Miller, he is an ex-copper and from what I have read about him seems a bit of a wanker, but ex-coppers who are wankers can sometimes do a good thing and bringing this judicial review is a good thing in my view. If the current Operational Guidance isn't found to be wrong then 1000's of people who just retweet something they thought was funny without thinking it through, or someone posting on this very forum could find themselves banned from loads of jobs because they have the words "hate incident" on a DBS check. A quick search on this forum brings up thousands of posts where one person has claimed another poster has been racist, misogynist, islamophobic etc etc
Why is this important to YOU! Well if someone doesn't like something you have posted they can report it to the police as a "hate crime" and according to the Hate Crime Operational Guidance issued by the College Of Policing, it must be recorded irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element. Since this catch-all guidance was released, police forces have recorded at least 87,000 non-crime hate incidents, none of which break the law.
What you have posted doesn't need to be aimed at an individual for someone to make the complaint, anyone who reads its can complain to their local "hate crime unit" and say they think it is hateful, even if they are unable to identify the hate element to the police. If the police decide to investigate their compliant and visit you or send a different police force to visit you if you live in a different area you could find yourself the subject of a Non-crime report for a hate incident.
What will happen if the police decide to take no legal action against you, they will record the visit as a Non-crime hate incident and it could well show up on a standard DBS check as "Crime Non-Crime" followed by the words Hate incident, if you are going for a job that needs an enhanced DBS check, such as teacher, nurse, doctor or any jobs where you could be in contact with children or venerable people etc. this record will 100% show up.
Under the current system, the "victim" of this Non-Crime has the legal right to remain anonymous and doesn't have to show the police any evidence that there was or is a hate element, just that they believe there is a hate element. The judicial review is aimed at changing the Hate Crime Operational Guidance issued by the College Of Policing to ensure there is a hate element and therefore a crime.
Full disclosure; The guy who is bring this case is called Harry Miller, he is an ex-copper and from what I have read about him seems a bit of a wanker, but ex-coppers who are wankers can sometimes do a good thing and bringing this judicial review is a good thing in my view. If the current Operational Guidance isn't found to be wrong then 1000's of people who just retweet something they thought was funny without thinking it through, or someone posting on this very forum could find themselves banned from loads of jobs because they have the words "hate incident" on a DBS check. A quick search on this forum brings up thousands of posts where one person has claimed another poster has been racist, misogynist, islamophobic etc etc
