Change Law so We Can Stop Policing Tweets, Demands Met Chief

Met chief Sir Mark Rowley wants the law changed so police can use common sense and stop policing tweets that pose no real-world threat. The Telegraph has more.

He wants Shabana Mahmood, the new Home Secretary, to change the rules so police officers are not required to record or investigate complaints when there’s no evidence the suspect intended real-world harm.

The changes could also significantly reduce the requirement for police to record and attend non-crime hate incidents, which have included cases such as a nine year-old calling a primary school classmate a “retard”.

Sir Mark’s proposals to protect free speech are being drawn up with other senior officers and follow the row last week over the arrest at Heathrow of comedy writer Graham Linehan, after a complaint about his tweet threatening to kick a trans-identified male “in the balls” if they were in a female-only space. …

A source close to Sir Mark said: “Regulations that were understandably intended to improve policing and laws that were intended to protect the vulnerable, are now tying officers’ hands, removing appropriate professional discretion – which some call common sense – and risk losing public confidence.

“The Met is working with wider policing to rapidly develop solid proposals for where reform is possible – either in policy and guidance or the law – which could be ready within weeks.” …

A senior police source said that officers were being dragged into taking action on “culture war issues” because they were obliged by the law to record and investigate such complaints. The source argued that the threshold needed to be raised either in law or in guidance or both. 

They said: “When it is low level and much more ambiguous, there should be more latitude for officers to make sensible decisions as to whether it carries a real-world threat and remove the legal requirement on them to record and investigate it as a crime.”

More than 13,200 non-crime hate incidents were recorded by police in the 12 months to June 2024, a similar number to the previous year, despite new guidelines requiring police to investigate only “when it is absolutely necessary and proportionate and not simply because someone is offended.”

Worth reading in full.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

39 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
transmissionofflame
7 months ago

“Regulations that were understandably intended to improve policing and laws that were intended to protect the vulnerable, are now tying officers’ hands, removing appropriate professional discretion – which some call common sense – and risk losing public confidence.”

How naive can you get?

JXB
JXB
7 months ago

“… to protect the vulnerable…”

Wilting weeds and delicate flowers, freaks and grotesques.

But the “vulnerable” really are in fact the shyte-bags in the political midden who keep getting caught out in their lies, corruption and malintent.

EppingBlogger
7 months ago

It is not naivety but dishonesty.

transmissionofflame
7 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

Quite probably

Jack the dog
Jack the dog
7 months ago

My understanding was that the obsession with NCHIs came from the college of Policing not the government and so he could simply order his lads to stop recording them and bin all records.

I’m calling bullshit on him.

transmissionofflame
7 months ago
Reply to  Jack the dog

I agree

MajorMajor
MajorMajor
7 months ago
Reply to  Jack the dog

Yes, I think you are right.
This guy is hiding behind legislation – “you see, it’s not us, no, it’s the law!”
Funnily enough, when BLM vandalized town centers and the extinction rebellion nutters brought traffic to a standstill, the police exercised maximum understanding.
He knows that he could stop all this hate crime arrest nonsense but it’s far more expedient to keep doing it and use a convenient excuse.

Purpleone
7 months ago
Reply to  Jack the dog

I agree – so what power does the college of policing actually have? If it’s advisory, but not law, then ignore it and just do your job, and POLICE THE LAW

huxleypiggles
7 months ago

It’s like a production line with these Chiefs of Police and the Met has its own variation – truly, utterly stupid people. And as soon as this plank is booted his replacement will appear and just as bloody useless.

transmissionofflame
7 months ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

100%

mickie
mickie
7 months ago

As the final paragraph clearly states, there is already guidance in place to stop overreach by the police.

JXB
JXB
7 months ago

Is he or is he not in charge of the police in London? The climate of any organisation is set by the top. Are we to believe he had no idea what was going on? Yes the idiot legislation needs to be scrapped going back to the 1963 Race Baiting Act, but the police won’t police Tweets if the man at the top tells them not to do so and makes sure that message is understood right down the chain of command. If officers are not understanding the legislation and being over-zealous then that is poor supervision and management and poor staff selection. There has always been discretion about how misdemeanours are policed – a quiet word, or doesn’t look serious enough to warrant police time. But in any case free speech is not a matter for the police. How is it the police can use their discretion about whether to investigate theft from a car, or a burglary, or umpteen other things but not Tweets? It’s just bovine fæces – the absurdity and corruption of “modern” policing has finally had the full glare of publicity turned on it. And the mealy-mouthed, slithy toves are crawling out of the woodwork… Read more »

1eftfield
1eftfield
7 months ago
Reply to  JXB

Easier to blame the law…

EppingBlogger
7 months ago
Reply to  JXB

Police priorities are set by the Police Commissioner. In London that is Khan. If the head of the Met has a problem with Khan’s instructions he should raise the issues with him and not grandstand. Has he raised this with Khan and what answer did he get.

Has this guy got a bonus appraisal coming up. Why go public now.

JDee
JDee
7 months ago
Reply to  JXB

Isn’t the problem that there is no argument allowed to defeat a full fleged trans complaint, which this case was an example of . Also the various powers that be do not want to publicly get stuck on the wrong side of such a complaint. In spite of the supreme court ruling, the blob is still actively undermining things, in the same way they undermined Brexit. Basically we need a doge like management retraining or clear out from most branches of the civil service .

Marque1
7 months ago

He did not threaten to kick a trans-identified male “in the balls” if they were in a female-only space. …His tweet said this, “If a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act. Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.” Fact are important; stick to them.

Marcus Aurelius knew
7 months ago
Reply to  Marque1

Thank you, saved me the effort.

DiscoveredJoys
DiscoveredJoys
7 months ago

Defund the police, as urged by activists, is a loony idea. But defunding the wrong sort of police to replace them with more apolitical police sounds sounds better. And make a start with the top bosses and colleges that appear to have cemented attitudes against ‘wrongthink’ in place.

Gezza England
Gezza England
7 months ago
Reply to  DiscoveredJoys

Parishes should stop funding their local police force and set up their own new force to replace them, perhaps basing them somewhere that we could call a police station.

EppingBlogger
7 months ago

His image shows he has been around for some time. He snd his ilk have never knowingly spoken out about censorship or woke rules when it mattered. The Met had trained its people in wokery and censorship.

Whst is he worried about now or is he doing a favour to the left. Did Starmer call him and ask for help on this issue.

Kone Wone
Kone Wone
7 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

If it looks like a prat, walks like a prat, talks like a prat, it’s a prat (with apologies to ducks).

SteveHoffmanUK
SteveHoffmanUK
7 months ago

The problem started when our not-very-bright MPs passed the first law that made words spoken or written a crime. The whole lot of “hate crime” legislation needs repealing, so we can return to the heady days of only actions being prosecutable as crimes. Libel and slander can remain as civil law violations, with no police involvement.

Fat chance of that happening, I know.

Heretic
Heretic
7 months ago

Well done to Sir Mark Rowley, throwing it back to the politicians who have forced this nonsense upon the police and the people, in total violation of the democratic will of the people who pay the salaries of both politicians and police.

The whole idea of “Hate Speech” and “Hate Crime” is an utterly alien concept originating in a desert tribe from the Middle East, which has no place in a western democracy. All such “laws” must be abolished.

Andy A
7 months ago

Use your initiative, and tell your officers to prioritize everything but policing tweets. It’s not rocket science. If you can’t do that, you’re in the wrong job. Resign.

Heretic
Heretic
7 months ago

I just found this wonderful music video featuring the people and flags of all four nations of the UK, just to cheer everyone up:

Scottish Dundee Axe Girl Strikes Back – AI Braveheart Parody/Tribute Song

RTSC
RTSC
7 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

Fabulous ….. let’s spread the link far and wide 🙂

Heretic
Heretic
7 months ago
Reply to  RTSC

Yes!!! And here’s another really good one with the flags of all four nations, shown with the words:

“England’s Cross and Scotland’s Blue, Wales and Ulster Standing True!”

Spot our own Lord Toby and Lucy’s husband Ray Connolly in one image:

Raise The Colours (Make Britain Great Again)

Dickie Hart
Dickie Hart
7 months ago

“Change Law so We Can Stop Policing Tweets, Demands Met Chief”
Bullsh*t.

GroundhogDayAgain
7 months ago

I don’t believe him.

The law doesn’t oblige the recording of NCHI, that’s an invention of the Police College. Nor does it require the investigation of brexity-things.

Sure, badly written legislation allows wiggle room in its interpretation, but it doesn’t prohibit the application of common sense. In the case of Graham Linehan, it also doesn’t stop you recognising the complainant as being a vexatious activist scrote with an axe to grind.

Guidance isn’t law, ignore it.

Nicktor
Nicktor
7 months ago

Time for Mark Rowley to put on his Big Boy Pants and make an executive decision. Isn’t that what he’s paid the big bucks for?

Bill Bailey
Bill Bailey
7 months ago

It may be a good idea to charge the people who make these frivolous claims with wasting police time. Or at least name the individuals so that the people being investigated have the ability to sue.
The problem is these stupid laws are designed to cause disruption so that real criminals can go about their business robbing the innocent public and shop keepers and generally destabilise and fragment society even more than it is already.
The country is fast becoming a basket case on the world stage and people worry about Putin!

NeilParkin
7 months ago

Can’t they just ignore it, like they do if your shed has been broken into and your tools nicked. If someone reports a hate crime, give them a crime number and send them a box of tissues.

Kone Wone
Kone Wone
7 months ago

Somebody who embodies the Peter Principle.

NubOfTheMatter
NubOfTheMatter
7 months ago

So who in the apparently increasingly non-public serving, police hierarchy used “discretion” and decided that investigating burglary, shoplifting and criminal damage should be lower priority than policing tweets?

Spiv
Spiv
7 months ago

What an absolute disingenuous cop-out (pardon the pun). The Chief Officers, including successive Met Commissioners have chosen not to investigate what they consider to be petty crime e.g. bike thefts, shoplifting, criminal damage to a large degree.
Phone the police to report that someone’s just stolen £200 quids worth of razor blades from your shop and the bloke is stood outside on the pavement, you will be lucky to get a disinterested ‘Meh’ from the call handler.
You say that he refused to use the correct pro-nouns when demanding money from the till, or whilst outside the shop he is tweeting disrespectful comments about trans women, how many armed officers do you think would turn up to that ideological crime wave?

RTSC
RTSC
7 months ago

Isn’t it funny how it’s the MET which is “forced” to investigate Tweets so enthusiastically against anyone who isn’t a rabid lefty?

Anything to do with the Police and Crime Kommissar …. Saddiq Khunt, I wonder?

JeremyP99
7 months ago

They don’t police ordinary crime – so why not do what we pay them to do, and don’t police free speech?

coviture2020
coviture2020
7 months ago

They seem to be able to avoid burgalry and shop lifting easily enough

Gezza England
Gezza England
7 months ago

What pathetic man.