Sarah Everard: Three officers to face charges over sharing racist and misogynistic messages with killer Wayne Couzens

17 comments

  3. Wait for the (wannabe) American freedumb of speech fighters try and argue against them being charged stating 1984 and other such works when the UK/Great Britain/England/Scotland has had laws restricting speech since the 1200s at least, and have continued to be in use even if rarely prosecuted until quite recently. I’m sure redditors have a far better understanding of law than those that study it for a large chunk of their life.

    Scotland only recently got rid of their Blasphemy laws under that Hate Crime and Public Order Bill. So people are in reallty getting worked up over a slippery slope fallacy for no reason other than boredom in their lives and a need to feel enraged .

  4. They absolutely should not be police officers, but the action of criminally charging people for the content of a private conversation is… not a small thing. And yes, these are not new laws, but they were badly drafted at the time and this is another reminder that they have an enormously wide potential application.

  5. The Met Federation coming out against Sadiq Khan after Cressida Dick resigned looks ever more ridiculous as the scandals keep on coming.

  6. I was thinking about this the other night. Police officers have to pass an eyesight test before they are able to join. The inability to do so means they would be unable to perform their role effectively.

    I feel that being a racist should fall under this criteria too. If you are a racist, then you would be unable to perform your role to serve the WHOLE public effectively, therefore, on the spot p45 for you. Bye.

  8. > The CPS said it cannot name the trio for “operational reasons”. It is normal for people to be named when they are charged – even if they are police officers.

    You don’t expect them to start acting fairly and impartially now, do you?

  9. Mixed thoughts on this really.

    Disclaimer: I don’t know what they actually sent, just that the media said it is racist.

    I see the recent anger about Jimmy Carr. I think it would be wrong for the state to arrest someone for sharing a joke like that, but a lot of the media is calling that racist.

    If they did this at work then disciplinary action from their employer would not be unreasonable.

    But the government arresting people for a private conversation which presumably all parties involved were fine with it, just doesn’t sit right with me.

    Although maybe I would change my mind if I knew what they said, but I would be more accepting over disciplinary action rather than arrest.

  11. What always gets me about these articles is they are always accompanied by a huge, screen-filling picture of the murderer and then further down the article there is some little picture of the victim(s).

    There is another murder that is common in the UK press, the murderer always gets prime position at the head of the article (and he is as ugly as shit) and further down the page there are tiny pictures of his three female victims, one little more than a child.

    If there is one thing that needs controlling is the sheer prominence given to murderers and the minor value given to their victims.

  13. No action taken by her employer, the authorities, she wasn’t cancelled unlike some others and only weeks later she mumbled half an apology.

  14. They should be punished by the full extent they can in their jobs, because as a police officer you have a higher standard to live by, and they’ve broken that

    But criminally charged? Is this where things are going? That you can be criminally charged for jokes in a private conversation?

    Doesn’t sit well with me.

  16. Wow, the police who are sworn to protect us arn’t just women killers and rapists but racist and misogynists too? *I’m very surprised.*

Leave a Reply