David Craig, on November 4th, 2017(weekend blog) My thanks to a reader for making the following comment in reaction to my blog about how the police seem to be making up laws to crush whatever they classify as ‘hate’ or ‘hostility’ or even ‘dislike’:
But surely, if it hasn’t gone through Parliament and been set down as a law, then we’ve nothing to fear? Although some liberal idiot policeman might arrest you, it’s never going to make it to court, as there isn’t a law covering it as long as you don’t ‘threaten’. Do I have that right? Surely, it’s like ‘suspicion’, the police might arrest you for it, but you aren’t going to be in court unless you have actually committed a crime.
The reader quite rightly asks: why are the police making up new laws and new interpretations of existing laws if these have no chance of standing up in court?
Good point, Mr Reader.
Let me start to answer that by giving you a statistic: at the moment approximately 75% of alleged hate crimes result in a guilty plea, according to the CPS themselves:
This is extraordinary, is it not? There can’t be that many other ‘crimes’ where the supposed ‘criminals’ confess in 75% of cases.
How can the police achieve such an amazing success rate, you might wonder.
This is what’s really happening:
The police have deliberately and cynically redefined a criminal act – ‘hate crimes’ – so they can arrest people who haven’t actually broken any law and who have probably never broken any law in their lives. The police can then handcuff them, cart them down the police station and then threaten them with the maximum sentence (seven years imprisonment) in order to get them to break down and admit they’re guilty. Moreover, they’re told they’ll only be given a caution if they do plead guilty without having to go to court.
In those circumstances – isolated from your family and friends, surrounded by threatening plods, being told you’ll probably lose your job and that they’ll ruin your life if you’re obstinate enough to claim innocence, given a choice of a caution or a ruinous court case – what would you do? Naturally 75% confess and are relieved to just get a caution.
This is a wonderful result for the police for four reasons:
- They don’t need to go to court and have their ludicrously unjustifiable interpretation of the law tested before a magistrate, judge or jury
- Your confession counts as a conviction in their annual crime statistics, simultaneously adding weight to the idea that hate crimes are constantly on the rise
- This supposed ‘rise’ in hate crimes then justifies the Plods’ increasingly ridiculous expenditure on policing the internet while all but ignoring real crime
- The Plods can all pat each other on the back for a job well done. Another supposed ‘crime’ detected, another supposed ‘criminal’ admitting the fault of their evil ways and promising to reform.
In the meantime, the police can turn a blind eye to thousands of white children being systematically gang-raped, gang-sodomised and tortured in anti-white hate crimes across the country because the police have been instructed to overlook these real crimes to hide the disastrous effects of diversity and multiculturalism.
I hope this casts a light on how our rulers are able to use ‘fake laws’ to crush freedom of speech and impose thought control.
We might expect such repression of free speech in a totalitarian country – but it’s incredible that we’ve allowed this to happen in Britain.
Category: 
Thank you for your explanation. We’ve allowed our country to fall to this, so we are to blame. And when I say ‘we’ I do mean us, not our useless politicians or our police. Far too many prefer to say nothing when challenged. I know of many people who refuse to listen to the news because they just don’t want to know. So it’s WE who have sleep-walked into this grotesque chaos.
Gangs (of what may turn out to be little older than children) roam London’s streets in search of easy targets to steal mopeds. They inflict terrible, life-changing injuries to someone trying to make something of their life. The gangs of feral garbage know they’re unlikely to get caught, but even if they do, they KNOW for an absolute certainty that they will get a light sentence. Get four years and you’re out in less than a year. Again, we are to blame for allowing this – because we might protest on a newspaper forum, but we don’t even bother to contact our MP.
Similarly, we are to blame for allowing our police to descend to their present level. I still hold street-beat policemen with high regard. It isn’t a job I would do. While we’re all running away, they will run forward. It’s easy for me to say it, but I would not be a party to the jelly-like behaviour which you describe. I would not admit guilt. A few months back, on a national newspaper forum, I stated exactly what I think of Islam. I did this because it’s my opinion. But more, what I stated was/is factual. If an individual (anyone, even in office) should even attempt to ruin my life in any way, then he/she would have made a terrible mistake. I’m a very mild man on the surface.
So although we have descended to farcical levels in the ‘West’ now (Canada, Australia equally pathetic) it is our own doing. Don’t be cowed. Don’t be bullied. Urge as many people as you can to understand what is going on – explain – as you do so well on this forum. We must get people to understand that all that is wrong is OUR fault, for doing nothing as it progressed. The alternative future is too depressing to contemplate. We desperately need a new political movement in this country to counter the liberalism that has allowed a man to be attacked in our capital city and left blind…for a moped. Again, the crass, inane and inept performance from our judges is our doing – for doing nothing in the past.
Everything you say is correct Barry, with the exception of your reference to street-beat police. It is my experience, and that of thousands of law-abiding UK citizens, that street-beat police no longer exist. They certainly do not in the small South Coast town where I live. The local police station is now permanently closed and the streets are open season for criminals, from drug-dealers and shop-breakers to drunken drivers and local louts on a night out who round off their evening’s entertainment by smashing the odd plate-glass window or vandalising the bus shelter. Like you, I was utterly appalled at yesterday’s news about the delivery man who has been blinded by a “child” who was trying to steal his moped. That “child’s” second attempt of the day, it is believed. I suppose that, IF he is considered guilty, he will be sent to some young offenders’ institution where he will be fed and watered and psychoanalysed at the taxpayers’ expense, possibly even treated to the odd holiday, until he is released back into the community after a couple of years, older and, thanks to his fellow-young criminals, having gained further criminal expertise. I like to think that I, too, would not be a party to jelly-like behaviour, but until one is actually confronted with the potential consequences not only to self but to family too, it is hard to say for certain. More generally, there is no doubt that the vast mass of the law-abiding indigenous population of the UK is all for a quiet life and reluctant to do anything to rock the boat. Apathetic, in short! Three times in the past 25 years I have tried to lead from the front on issues about which not only I, but large numbers of fellow law-abiding citizens, were of the same opinion. “We are behind you,” they say, “Yes, we will back you.” So you go ahead, get things moving – a petition, representations to the MPs, letters to the press, even in one case TV interviews. Then when things heat up a bit and you have to make a stand on a matter of principle, and making that stand could bring uncomfortable consequences in terms of conflict with “Authority”, you turn to rally the troops and find your followers have deserted and you’re on your own. The future is indeed depressing, it IS indeed our fault and we certainly need some politicians with cohones to counter what is happening. (And in light of the current welter of non-stories about male MPs’ sexual predations, no comments, please, about their being too occupied elsewhere to have time or energy!)
Keep it up David.