What the fuck, Britain.
Autistic 12-year-old with cerebral palsy and autism detained by Kent police under Terrorism Act"
To be fair, the local police authority have apologised to the family concerned and donated a substantial sum to the child in question's school. To continue to be fair, this highlights without any kind of doubt the way in which the Terrorism Act permits and amplifies the unacceptable behaviour and opinions which certain police officers hold. That is to say, this case is perhaps the clearest proof for this legislation allowing an individual's racist opinions (Joshua Maynard is mixed-race, while his mother is white) to translate directly into police action.
Here, the abominable nature of the Terrorism Act's increased police powers is made so clear as to be inarguable. The mere idea of a young disabled boy and his mother arrested on suspicion of child trafficking on the simple fact that they have slightly different skin colours is a horrifying one.
The apology given by the Kent police force clearly demonstrates this - there's just no way to excuse this behaviour in a case as clear-cut as this one. They describe the incident as "inappropriate, unprofessional and lacking in tact". Certainly, in this case, it appears that the prejudice of one officer resulted in inappropriate etcetera behaviour on the part of "at least 10" other members of the police force.
However, the fact that this can happen at all demonstates the extent to which the Terrorism act is open to this kind of abuse. Though the police have apologised extensively in a single case where their apalling behaviour is undeniable, there are any number of cases where bearded and/or non-white men and women have been detained under the Terrorism Act and offered no apology or recompense. It is abundantly clear that these police powers have the primary and overwhelming effect of allowing arrests based upon nothing more than the bigoted preconceptions held by certain police officers.
Again, in the interests of fairness, the police do a very difficult job. Like all people, many of them - many of us in society, have a variety of prejudices. These are a result of cultural and economic trends, and are not our own fault, though it is imporant to strive against them. In stressful situations, it is easy, though unacceptable, to fall back on irrational beliefs and snap-judgements based on race or gender. Therefore, the scope of police powers should aid police officers in doing their difficult and often shitty job impartially, without malice and in a just manner. Both the law and police training need to reflect, prevent and undo the mistakes it is far too easy to make in the heat of the moment.
To be fair, this particular officer may not match up to my assesment of his or her (the report is unclear whether the officer making the arrest is the same as that supervising the questioning) being a well-meaning victim of moronic legislation. The officer or officers in question may well be a set of racist fuckwits actively seeking to abuse their powers. However, you can hardly say that this behaviour is made more difficult by the Terrorism Act. It is a simple fact, for example, that in the receipt form delivered to both the suspect and police superiors in the case of an arrest, the section in which the Reason For Arrest is given can be satisfactorily filled with "Section 41". This being the bit of the 2000 Terrorism Act stating that "a constable may arrest without a warrant a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist".
Essentially, and finally, because the whole thing makes me sick, in the worst-case scenario, police officers can make arrests based on "reasonable suspicion" (which seems to boil down to "racist assumptions" anyway) enabled by moronic and evil-minded legislation, and really fuck up innocent people's lives without actually helping anything. The thing being, that the worst-case scenario happens all the time, and no-one seems to notice or care. Hopefully some good will come out of the unquestionably awful case of Joshua Maynard and Officer Slaughterboard, and the terrible implications of the Terrorism Act will become unavoidably obvious. Because otherwise things will carry on this way.
To be fair, the local police authority have apologised to the family concerned and donated a substantial sum to the child in question's school. To continue to be fair, this highlights without any kind of doubt the way in which the Terrorism Act permits and amplifies the unacceptable behaviour and opinions which certain police officers hold. That is to say, this case is perhaps the clearest proof for this legislation allowing an individual's racist opinions (Joshua Maynard is mixed-race, while his mother is white) to translate directly into police action.
Here, the abominable nature of the Terrorism Act's increased police powers is made so clear as to be inarguable. The mere idea of a young disabled boy and his mother arrested on suspicion of child trafficking on the simple fact that they have slightly different skin colours is a horrifying one.
The apology given by the Kent police force clearly demonstrates this - there's just no way to excuse this behaviour in a case as clear-cut as this one. They describe the incident as "inappropriate, unprofessional and lacking in tact". Certainly, in this case, it appears that the prejudice of one officer resulted in inappropriate etcetera behaviour on the part of "at least 10" other members of the police force.
However, the fact that this can happen at all demonstates the extent to which the Terrorism act is open to this kind of abuse. Though the police have apologised extensively in a single case where their apalling behaviour is undeniable, there are any number of cases where bearded and/or non-white men and women have been detained under the Terrorism Act and offered no apology or recompense. It is abundantly clear that these police powers have the primary and overwhelming effect of allowing arrests based upon nothing more than the bigoted preconceptions held by certain police officers.
Again, in the interests of fairness, the police do a very difficult job. Like all people, many of them - many of us in society, have a variety of prejudices. These are a result of cultural and economic trends, and are not our own fault, though it is imporant to strive against them. In stressful situations, it is easy, though unacceptable, to fall back on irrational beliefs and snap-judgements based on race or gender. Therefore, the scope of police powers should aid police officers in doing their difficult and often shitty job impartially, without malice and in a just manner. Both the law and police training need to reflect, prevent and undo the mistakes it is far too easy to make in the heat of the moment.
To be fair, this particular officer may not match up to my assesment of his or her (the report is unclear whether the officer making the arrest is the same as that supervising the questioning) being a well-meaning victim of moronic legislation. The officer or officers in question may well be a set of racist fuckwits actively seeking to abuse their powers. However, you can hardly say that this behaviour is made more difficult by the Terrorism Act. It is a simple fact, for example, that in the receipt form delivered to both the suspect and police superiors in the case of an arrest, the section in which the Reason For Arrest is given can be satisfactorily filled with "Section 41". This being the bit of the 2000 Terrorism Act stating that "a constable may arrest without a warrant a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist".
Essentially, and finally, because the whole thing makes me sick, in the worst-case scenario, police officers can make arrests based on "reasonable suspicion" (which seems to boil down to "racist assumptions" anyway) enabled by moronic and evil-minded legislation, and really fuck up innocent people's lives without actually helping anything. The thing being, that the worst-case scenario happens all the time, and no-one seems to notice or care. Hopefully some good will come out of the unquestionably awful case of Joshua Maynard and Officer Slaughterboard, and the terrible implications of the Terrorism Act will become unavoidably obvious. Because otherwise things will carry on this way.