Government Revamps Non-Hate Crime Guidelines Amid Rising Controversy

[Social Media]

 

The Home Office is introducing "common sense" reforms to the management of non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) after a series of scandals and public outcry. These reforms, overseen by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, aim to reduce confusion, restore public confidence in policing, and address concerns about free speech.  

 

Under the proposed changes, officers will only record NCHIs when there is a "clear risk" to community tensions, a significant shift from existing practices. The current system, initially designed to gather intelligence on incidents falling short of criminal behavior, has faced criticism for being overly expansive, diverting resources from essential police work, and stifling lawful expression.  

 

The issue recently made headlines when Essex Police investigated journalist Allison Pearson over a year-old tweet she had quickly deleted. Officers visited her home on Remembrance Day, informing her of an investigation into alleged racial hatred but failing to specify the offending post. The inquiry, which was dropped following advice from Crown Prosecution Service lawyers, underscored the system's flaws. Ms. Pearson described the experience as devastating, asserting that her tweet was not racist and expressing frustration over the lack of clarity surrounding the investigation.

 

 

Policy Exchange, a think tank, has highlighted the inefficiency of the NCHI system, estimating that police spend over 60,000 hours annually on such incidents. Their report called for either the abolition of the system or a substantial reduction in recorded cases, emphasizing that policing should focus on addressing crimes like burglary, drug offenses, and violence. Lord Hogan-Howe, former Metropolitan Police Commissioner, supported the report, criticizing the subjective nature of NCHIs and calling for legislative oversight.  

 

Essex Police was singled out for logging a disproportionately high number of NCHIs—21.5 per 100 officers in a year compared to a national average of 8.9. Over 13,000 such incidents were recorded across the UK last year, with examples ranging from personal disputes to trivial insults, sparking public frustration.  

 

The updated guidance will emphasize that only incidents motivated by intentional hostility and posing a real risk of harm or criminal escalation should warrant scrutiny. Home Office sources affirmed that trivial complaints should not be recorded but noted the utility of NCHIs in tracking community tensions to prevent potential conflicts.  

 

Ms. Cooper acknowledged inconsistency in how the 43 police forces in England and Wales apply the current guidance, with some missing cases of antisemitism and Islamophobia. Alongside the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council, the Home Office is drafting the revised guidelines to balance free expression with community safety.  

 

Critics argue that the system unfairly targets lawful opinions, undermining trust in the police. As Ms. Pearson remarked, “Normal people want police to come round when they have been burgled… not this madness.” The Policy Exchange report reiterated the need for reform, concluding that the NCHI regime distracts officers from their core mission of tackling serious crime and damages public perception of policing priorities.  

 

This overhaul reflects a commitment to ensuring that policing remains impartial and effective, focusing on genuine threats to public safety while protecting the fundamental right to free speech.

 

Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-27

 

 

 

 

[JonnyF]

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

Under the proposed changes, officers will only record NCHIs when there is a "clear risk" to community tensions, a significant shift from existing practices.

 

Yes, and we all know which communities this will, and will not protect. 

 

This is simply lip service from an under pressure politician trying to wriggle out of a mess. The police have no business investigating "non crimes". Never have, never will. 

 

Huge thanks for Elon Musk for drawing attention to the (police) state of the UK.

[Foxx]

Once again the site posts articles based upon the UK's right wing (and in this case, tabloid) press.

 

Allison Pearson lied about what had happened.  To quote from Private Eye
 

Quote

Last weekend Essex Police released a transcript from its officers' body-worn cameras that demonstrated that "at no stage during the short interaction between the woman and our officers was she informed that the report being investigated was being treated as a non-crime hate incident. To suggest otherwise is wholly inaccurate and misleading." The force has backed this up with an accuracy complaint to regulator Ipso.

 

The entire article is worth reading.  It reveals what a nasty, deceitful individual Allison Pearson is.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

[JonnyF]

27 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Once again the site posts articles based upon the UK's right wing (and in this case, tabloid) press.

 

Allison Pearson lied about what had happened.  To quote from Private Eye
 

 

The entire article is worth reading.  It reveals what a nasty, deceitful individual Allison Pearson is.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

 

What crime has she committed and been charged with?

 

What crime did the police inform her she had committed?

 

What crime were the police investigating?

[mikeymike100]

29 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Once again the site posts articles based upon the UK's right wing (and in this case, tabloid) press.

 

Allison Pearson lied about what had happened.  To quote from Private Eye
 

 

The entire article is worth reading.  It reveals what a nasty, deceitful individual Allison Pearson is.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

 

 

"Overall, we rate Private Eye Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the promotion of pseudoscience as well as mixing satire and real news that is confusing to the reader."

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/private-eye/

[soalbundy]

Government U-turn after the damage to their reputation has been done, something not uncommon for this travesty of a government

[loong]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

What crime has she committed and been charged with?

 

What crime did the police inform her she had committed?

 

What crime were the police investigating?

 

The clue is "non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) "
It was a hate incident, not a crime. All completely ridiculous as far as I am concerned, a waste of police resources!

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, loong said:

 

The clue is "non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) "
It was a hate incident, not a crime. All completely ridiculous as far as I am concerned, a waste of police resources!

 

Yes that was my point. Hate is a human emotion, you can't ban it any more than you can ban anger, sadness or love. 

 

It seems the latest angle from the pro-censorship/anti free speech lobby is that as long as the police do not mention a "non crime hate incident" using those specific words in that specific order, then they are free to continue knocking on people's doors and intimidating the public about their political beliefs when no actual crime has been committed. 

 

[Foxx]

23 minutes ago, loong said:

The clue is "non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) "

 

But it wasn't an NCHI.  She lied.  The police have provided the transcript of the police officer's body cams.  NCHI was never mentioned.

She's a fantasist.  This is just another of her (many) lies.

Again, read the link I provided previously for a more detailed account of what actually happened, and her poor attachment to the truth.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

[BritManToo]

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

But it wasn't an NCHI.  She lied.  The police have provided the transcript of the police officer's body cams.  NCHI was never mentioned.

She's a fantasist.  This is just another of her (many) lies.

Again, read the link I provided previously for a more detailed account of what actually happened, and her poor attachment to the truth.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

If you believe the police transcript.

I've read police transcripts, and they cut chunks out.

Usually to protect the police officer from prosecution.

(Police tend to get a bit mouthy when they think the public can't hear them)

Without viewing the video, you can be sure they've altered the transcript.

Why don't they release the video? ........ We all know why!

 

I'm guessing you've never read a police transcript.

Edited 7 hours ago by BritManToo

[Thingamabob]

Sadly it was Cameron, nominally a Tory, who brought the hate crime into law. 

[Enoon]

.

 

 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Enoon

[Enoon]

4 hours ago, Foxx said:

Once again the site posts articles based upon the UK's right wing (and in this case, tabloid) press.

 

Allison Pearson lied about what had happened.  To quote from Private Eye
 

 

The entire article is worth reading.  It reveals what a nasty, deceitful individual Allison Pearson is.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

 

She is the Alison Pearson that I used to see regularly on BBC2s "Late Show" in the 90's.

 

That Alison Pearson would have us all gelded in an instant given the opportunity.

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Enoon

[Red Forever]

4 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

 

 

"Overall, we rate Private Eye Left-Center Biased based on editorial positions that favor the left. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the promotion of pseudoscience as well as mixing satire and real news that is confusing to the reader."

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/private-eye/

Yes indeed. The excellent Private Eye magazine is biased but that bias is toward exposing corrupt politicians, lying journalists, dodgy business people (check out Tees Freeport shenanigans) of all political colours.

Private Eye were at the forefront of the exposure of Post Office sub postmaster's scandal.

That a larger percentage of those exposed were far right inclined is not bias. It's fact.

Even the Daily Wail gets some things right occasionally.

This Pearson woman has form.

[Bkk Brian]

15 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Yes indeed. The excellent Private Eye magazine is biased but that bias is toward exposing corrupt politicians, lying journalists, dodgy business people (check out Tees Freeport shenanigans) of all political colours.

Private Eye were at the forefront of the exposure of Post Office sub postmaster's scandal.

That a larger percentage of those exposed were far right inclined is not bias. It's fact.

Even the Daily Wail gets some things right occasionally.

This Pearson woman has form.

An old article from the Private Eye. The case against her was dropped and the police are reviewing their own procedures as a result. Read the OP

[Jaggg88]

3 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Sadly it was Cameron, nominally a Tory, who brought the hate crime into law. 

In 2014, the College of Policing came up with the concept of the NCHI in its Hate Crime Operational Guidance (HCOG). Nothing to do with any government

[soalbundy]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes that was my point. Hate is a human emotion, you can't ban it any more than you can ban anger, sadness or love. 

 

It seems the latest angle from the pro-censorship/anti free speech lobby is that as long as the police do not mention a "non crime hate incident" using those specific words in that specific order, then they are free to continue knocking on people's doors and intimidating the public about their political beliefs when no actual crime has been committed. 

 

If ever there was a need for a pit bull.....

[blazes]

7 hours ago, Foxx said:

Once again the site posts articles based upon the UK's right wing (and in this case, tabloid) press.

 

Allison Pearson lied about what had happened.  To quote from Private Eye
 

 

The entire article is worth reading.  It reveals what a nasty, deceitful individual Allison Pearson is.

https://www.private-eye.co.uk/street-of-shame

 

Is she as "nasty" and "deceitful" as the hags on The View? 

 

Note the last paragraph of the Eye comment:

So why, as with the shocking overreaction to the vigils for Sarah Everard in 2021, do the police appear to reserve their most heavy-handed action for cases in which they themselves are the ones being criticised?

 

Whatever you may think about Pearson (is the implication) it seems that the police only get "serious" when they (the police) are the objects of complaint.

 

[Thingamabob]

1 hour ago, Jaggg88 said:

In 2014, the College of Policing came up with the concept of the NCHI in its Hate Crime Operational Guidance (HCOG). Nothing to do with any government

Yes indeed, while Cameron was in office and was consulted on the issue.