Today an image circulated on Social Media purportedly showing a police officer giving a speech about hate crimes, or “hostility” as he termed it, even going so far as to include the idea they don’t need to “prove hatred”. Yes, after nearly a millennia of proof being required the British Police have decided they no longer need proof to accuse someone of being a criminal. It’s almost laughable, except these people are a large, armed gang of political-correctness-loving thugs and they have the right to kick in your door, arrest you, and generally make your life hell.
This is a totalitarian attempt to move away from the real definition of so called hate crimes in the UK, and a deliberate attempt to fraudulently invent crimes and inflate their crime statistics.
The most widely applied definition of a hate crime in the UK is still from the Public Order Act 1986
“A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
- (a) they intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
- (b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.”
Furthermore the Criminal Justice Act 2008 added sexual orientation and religion but also clarified that:
“In the circumstances of hatred based on religious belief or on sexual orientation, the relevant act (namely, words, behaviour, written material, or recordings, or programme) must be threatening and not just abusive or insulting.”
Calling someone a slur is not a criminal offense, it’s not threatening, it’s merely abusive. There has been a clear distinction for years, and one which by and large the police were supposedly abiding by. The CPS even published a handy picture showing what a hate crime actually is
Even though intimidation, harassment, damaging property and violence sounds rather all encompassing it’s hard to argue that a single case of a slur could ever really be considered harassment, the vast majority of negative interactions on social media, short of threatening violence can never be classed as a hate crime. Calling someone a monkey, making fun of their mental illness or being unfriendly are not hate crimes. They never have been. The police have no more right to define hostility or unfriendliness as criminal acts than they do to outlaw toasters, and kick in the door of every person they suspect is harbouring a toaster. Without relevant legislation it’s completely illegal for them to do so.
By redefining hate crimes as mere “hostility” and saying “we do not need to prove hatred” or even that “unfriendliness” can be classed as a hate crime the police are attempting to rewrite statute and enforce laws they themselves have invented. This is a clear breach of the behavioural code they themselves should abide by, an attempt by our Orwellian Thought Police to become not only Judge, Jury and Executioner but the legislator as well. It’s insanity, but it begs the question of why they would decide to break the law in this manner?
This is why; approximately 75% of alleged hate crimes result in a guilty plea, according to the CPS themselves:
The police have deliberately and cynically redefined a criminal act so they can arrest people who haven’t broken any law, handcuff them, cart them down the station and then threaten them with the maximum sentence (Seven years imprisonment) in order to get them to break down and admit they’re guilty (75% do, and the statistics are probably far higher if they’re told they will be given a caution if they do plead guilty). Then it’s a simple matter of giving them the caution, which counts as a conviction in their annual crime statistics, simultaneously adding weight to the idea that hate crimes are constantly on the rise, justifies their increasingly ridiculous expenditure on policing the internet and they all pat each other on the back for a job well done. Another non-crime detected, whilst they can ignore White children being systematically gang raped in anti-White hate crimes across the country in the name of diversity and multiculturalism.
If you are arrested by the British Stasi for so called hate crimes such as calling someone a mean name, then follow these simple rules to deal with them and ensure you don’t end up with a criminal record for not being a criminal:
- Do not talk. Do not say anything other than your name. Do not admit to having social media, do not say A SINGLE WORD until your solicitor arrives.
- The police will lie, they’ll tell you it isn’t a big deal and that all you need to do is admit it and they’ll give you a caution, THEY ARE LYING. That caution can and will follow you for life, and can have an effect on job prospects forever. Do not listen to them, they are not trying to help you, merely inflate their own crime statistics with an easy target. Do not help them.
- When your solicitor arrives, tell them what exactly happened, if you didn’t threaten anyone they will know no crime has been committed and will instruct you on what to tell the police.
- Theoretically, the Police should listen to a solicitor who understands what laws are and release you “pending inquiries” then you’ll receive a “No further action” letter within a few weeks. This means it’s over.
- They may still try and charge you if what you did could be constituted as harassment, i.e repeatedly going after one individual, if this is the case, I’m not a lawyer talk to your solicitor, but the CPS’s own statistics showed that 3/4 of people who plead not guilty are cleared of any wrong doing, so the odds are still stacked in your favour.
If you follow the above, and the police are attempting to arrest you for a non-crime, this should be enough to get them to back down.
*Please note, I am not a lawyer, the above is not legal advice, just wisdom gained from several interactions with bureaucratic jobsworth “police officers”.