The case for the West Yorks Police
West Yorkshire Police have issued a statement.
West Yorkshire Police Assistant Chief Constable Oz Khan said: “We are aware of a video circulating on social media which, as is often the case, only provides a very limited snapshot of the circumstances of this incident.
“Officers had their body-worn video cameras activated during their wider involvement with this young girl which provides additional context to their actions.”
Ok so it could be that she was verbally abusive as the police were taking her home along with her older sister. But we know she wasn’t arrest-level abusive on the way home because the police didn’t arrest her, they took her home. They presumably didn’t take her home in order to show her to her mother before they dragged her off to the cells.
But anyway they say themselves that she didn’t say anything to annoy them until the lesbian remark.
“We have received a complaint in relation to this incident which is currently being assessed by West Yorkshire Professional Standards Directorate. While that ongoing process and the active criminal investigation limit our ability to fully discuss the incident in detail, we feel it is important for people to have some context about the circumstances.
“From 12.12am on Monday, August 7, police received calls from a family member of a 16-year-old girl who was reportedly intoxicated and putting herself at risk in Leeds city centre. Officers attended at about 1am and drove the teenager to her home so she could be appropriately looked after. Upon returning her to the address, comments were made which resulted in the girl being arrested on suspicion of a homophobic public order offence. The nature of the comments made was fully captured on body-worn video.”
The office staffer who wrote this flubbed the most important item. “Comments were made.” BY WHOM? Staffer doesn’t even have the brains to remember that the issue is this particular girl making these alleged comments. It could be the Angel Gabriel suddenly popping in to make comments, which resulted in the girl being arrested, which makes no sense. What the staffer needed to type was “the girl made comments, and the police arrested her because of the comments.”
But anyway. The girl made comments. So what??? These are grown-ass adult non-autistic adults who are trained to deal with disruptive people because that’s much of what their job is. A teenage autistic girl, even a rude or sweary one, is not the equivalent of a massive drunk man threatening violence.
Anyway what is a “homophobic public order offence” when it’s in her own house? (And she’s a minor, and autistic?) They were inside her front door; it wasn’t public.
“When the girl was eventually fit to be interviewed, that interview took place with an appropriate adult. She was later released on bail pending further enquiries and advice from the Crown Prosecution Service.
“West Yorkshire Police takes its responsibilities around the welfare of young people taken into custody and around neurodiversity very seriously. We also maintain that our officers and staff should not have to face abuse while working to keep our communities safe.”
Nope, I just can’t see it. Of course officers shouldn’t have to face abuse, but they also shouldn’t over-react to one autistic 16-year-old girl. Even if she had shouted “That’s one fugly bull-dyke right there!” they should have risen above. They could urge the mother to teach her better manners, but I cannot see the need to assault and arrest the daughter.
This is horrible.
Exactly; so what? She’s at home, in the custody of her mother, she said something, so what? Maybe a “You’d better watch your mouth” or “Teach your daughter better manners”, but six officers dragging her bodily out of her home to go down to the station? Why why why why why?
What the heck is a “homophobic public order offense”, anyway?
At around the 1:10 mark in the video a male officer says something like “If you wanna bully people you (unintelligible) that’s what you do…” Apparently they’re accusing the drunk autistic young girl of being a “bully.”
Back in the 90’s and 00’s I was in favor of anti-bullying campaigns in the public schools, and to an extent I still am. But I don’t know if they birthed a monster or tapped into a toxic culture of victimhood already present. Central to overreactions like this is the idea that LGBTQ+ people are very, very fragile. Think of them as children whimpering in a closet and hitting themselves in fear. We do not expect them to “toughen up.” We go after the culprit.
If the culprit looks like a child whimpering in a closet hitting themselves in fear, that’s deceptive. They’re really a bully suddenly realizing they’re caught and can’t get away with their abuse. Music to our ears, that is.
Could be that the police were out to give this young lady a fright. I have read about young people heading for a life of crime being taken to a handy prison, and there with the cooperation of the inmates, given pretty down-to-Earth talks on what will likely happen to them if they land up in confinement there. Like: “I like the look of you, kid. I reckon you’s make a great bunkmate there cold winter nights. I could have a lot of fun with you.”
Reportedly, kids at risk are qonsiderably quieter and more thoughtful on the way home from such experiences.
NB: One of my grandsons get into a bit of shoplifting. While he was on a visit here I took him to see Goulburn Gaol, one of the toughest in NSW, from the outside. The fortress-like building is surrounded by a penitentiary wire fence, and I understand that the guards in the towers are under instructions to shoot anyone they see between that fence and the prison walls.
I am happy to report that the shoplifting career is over..
Only some LGBTQ+ people though. Certainly not L people such as Julie Bindel or Kathleen Stock or G people like Dennis Kavanagh or Fred Sargeant. THEY’RE not very very fragile.
Omar what sense does that make? “Amanda” hadn’t committed any crime; her sister got the police to bring her home for her safety, not because she’d done anything wrong, let alone criminal.
It’s not really a funny subject, so if you’re joking…meh.
“There’s context” they say while telling us exactly what we already knew (or at least reasonably guessed). If they think “she was drunk” is some sort of justification they really have no clue.
@1:
Public Order Act, 1986, Section 5:
“A person is guilty of an offence if he … uses threatening or abusive words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour … within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
“… except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used … by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.”
I take a dim view of this kind of stuff being a crime at all, but if the officers really were determined to charge it, they could easily have just come back the next day when the girl was sober, or otherwise handle it in a calm way that doesn’t involve barging into the house and physically grabbing someone.
Seems like a classic case of a cop going all “you must respect my AUTHORITAI!”
“… except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used … by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.”
Aha! Because not public, just as I said. (“Anyway what is a “homophobic public order offence” when it’s in her own house? (And she’s a minor, and autistic?) They were inside her front door; it wasn’t public.”) Thanks for the confirmation, Coel!
Omar – those scared straight programs have largely been dropped as being ineffective, and were used to curtail delinquent behavior among recidivist teens. Even if that were the proposed treatment here, they were done on schedule and cops didn’t come in to harass and frighten kids, drag them off, and cause them pain in order to get them there.
And anyway we still end up at the same place. She hadn’t committed any crime at all, let alone repeat crimes serious enough to warrant being “scared straight.”
I’ll be interested to see that body camera footage. You’d think the police would have released it right away. (And no I don’t expect it to add any possible justifiable ‘context’ for this behaviour. I hope the family sues them until it hurts. Though unfortunately it’ll be Yorkshire taxpayers paying for it, as usual.)
It’s as if all the cops lost their tempers in unison. Maybe they were grumpy about wasting their time taking a teenager home, but…you’d hope cops would be trained not to let their grumps go over the top like that.
Something that always infuriates me, that I used to hear a lot in the US when people talked about police violence. ‘Well I can understand why they behaved like that (beating someone up, shooting them in the back, torturing them in prison, the usual) – I mean, I’d be afraid/angry too, who can blame them?’ Well yes…but they’re supposed to be trained professionals, sworn to serve and protect. If they find controlling their own behaviour too difficult, or dealing with distressed people too terrifying, maybe they possibly might be in the wrong line of work.
guest @14,
Yes — it reminds me of what Hitchens (I think? Or maybe Steven Fry?) said in response to a Catholic official who said that it was unfair to hold the Church to a higher moral standard than other institutions. “Then what are you good for?”
The common term in the U.S. is “contempt of cop”. Because there are so many laws and so much is left up to ‘officer discretion’, a cop looking for a reason to haul someone in frequently can find it. When I was in college, two of my friends became officers, and they confirmed that this fact is actually part of their training.
OB @#5:
Could be that the police were out to give this young lady a fright. I was not joking; just making an attempt at a rational explanation of the cops’ behaviour. No more than that.
All of those officers should be fired. No pensions, no benefits, and barred from ever working in law enforcement ever again.
@Omar: There is NO reason for police to give ANYONE “a fright”. Period.
Domino: I was not trying to find excuses. Just an explanation. Shit happens.
But as you wish.