The CPS have fallen

What are the implications for the rest of the criminal justice system?

Faint warning bells began to ring for me in June 2022 when I saw the Director of Public Prosecutions Max Hill KC tweet out his congratulations to trans identifying man ‘Sophie Cook’ as the newly appointed ‘Speak Out Champion’ at the CPS. Cook’s remit is to ‘embed’ Diversity, Inclusion and Equality into the work force. I questioned Mr Hill via Twitter at the time regarding the effectiveness of a white middle aged man in this role, particularly one not coy about expressing his distaste for women who believe that sex is real and it matters. What would become of the ‘gender critical’ CPS employees? Answer came there none, and I added it to the (now mountainous) pile marked ‘Troubling’.

Over the months that followed Fair Cop received more information from those worried about ideological capture in the CPS. This culminated in our open letter to Max Hill of July 8^th 2023, requesting reassurance that the CPS was not an ideologically captured public institution.

We set out in detail the worrying information we had received, not just about the activities of Sophie Cook, but other trans rights activists who formed part of CPS hate crimes advisory panels and the May and June ‘hate crimes’ newsletters which thought it appropriate to declare two live criminal proceedings as involving ‘transphobic hate’.

But the issue that we complained about which really caught public attention was Annex D to their Domestic Abuse guidance for prosecutors which they revised in December 2022.

This not only referred to women under the heading ‘gender identity’ but gave examples of potentially criminal coercive control as ‘threatening or sharing pre-transition images’ and ‘withholding money for transitioning’.

The crime of coercive control can be committed against any one that you are having or have had an intimate personal relationship with. This includes your children. So what would happen to a parent who found testosterone in their 12 year olds bedroom and destroyed it, and the child called the police? The guidance is certainly pointing to this as a factor in favour of prosecution. There is no attempt to recognise that coercive control cuts both ways – the transitioning husband demanding removal of all wedding photos or the angry child wanting access to medical transition, are both capable of being abusive and aggressive and causing harm in their demands upon spouse or parent.

Its genesis is also curious. The CPS claimed that the public were consulted but we did not find out about the guidance until late June, 7 months after its publication. I find it hard to accept that the public were consulted in any meaningful way, given the outrage the guidance provoked when finally exposed to a wider audience.

I can see clearly now. The appointment of Sophie Cook was an announcement that the CPS was casting off the annoying shackles of its Public Sector Equality duty and its internal checks and balances to ensure that it did not discriminate against its gender critical employees OR gender critical defendants. It’s ideological capture was complete.

And this really matters. The CPS is our independent prosecuting authority. It has to be impartial and it has to treat everyone fairly. Otherwise, as one criminal barrister Dennis Kavanagh suggested, if instructed to cross examine a weeping spouse who has been told her inability to call her husband of 20 years by pronouns ‘she’ and ‘her’ makes her criminally abusive, he would return the brief as offensive to our Code of Conduct. Prosecutions should take place by operation of the law, not the ideological bent of the prosecutor.

And if the CPS has fallen, this infects the entire criminal justice system. We already had a taste of this on Sunday 9th July when the Metropolitan police initially refused to investigate complaints that trans identifying man, trans rights activist, kidnapper, torturer and attempted murderer, Sarah Jane Baker had breached the most basic terms of his release from prison on licence for life, by encouraging a crowd of about 2,500 in Central London to punch ‘Terfs’ in the face. Happily we saw a fairly swift U turn from the Met after 100s of women, now incandescent with rage, complained. A video circulated shortly thereafter of Baker being handcuffed and taken away by the police - who behaved with exemplary calm and compassion.

But of course this isn’t good enough. The criminal justice system should not require a kick up its collective arse by social media or pressure from politicians before it acts. I’m organising a ‘gender critical’ event in Manchester on 22^nd July 2023. Baker tweeted at me in June asking for a free ticket and if I would buy him dinner. Following Saturday’s video, I reported this to the Manchester Police and the Probation Service but have yet to receive any formal confirmation that Baker has been recalled.

I emailed again today

I have asked for urgent information about whether or not Sarah Jane BAKER is to be recalled to prison following serious breach of his licence conditions, following encouraging a crowd of approximately 2,500 people to ‘punch Terfs’ in the face on 8^th July 2023. I am directly impacted by this man who has contacted me directly via social media about an event I am organising in Manchester on 22^nd July and has posted photographs of himself in Manchester in or around 9^th July. Baker has encouraged violence against women like me who believe that sex is real and immutable.

The impact of his public encouragement can be seen in social media comments such as this by a man who has previously attempted to assault a woman with ‘gender critical views’ 

Sarah Jane Baker was arrested because she voiced the only real solution to transphobia in this country. I hope a significant number of the 30,000 at Trans Pride on Saturday will turn their gesture into action to defend her now. https://archive.li/Vf08D#selection-579.0-579.228

There are comments on social media that Baker has now been recalled but I have not had the courtesy of any acknowledgment of my emails from the Probation Service, let alone a substantial reply. I am further informed by the police that details of an offender on licence are not available on the PNC which is a further significant cause for concern and I would be grateful for clarification on that point also.

My event on 22^nd July is now sold out. I consider I am responsible for the safety of the 100+ attendees and organisers. The police have responded helpfully and promptly but I need to know if Baker is going to be at large  on that day so I can consider what further steps I need to protect those attending. I have already organised and paid for additional private security. This is not a sentence that any woman in 2023 should have to write about a meeting to discuss her lawful and protected views about sex and gender. 

Please will you reply to me as soon as possible and in any event by Friday 21^st July 2023.

No woman should have pay for private security at an event to discuss her lawful and protected views. We should be protected without question by those public bodies who are set up and funded to protect us. I should not have to feel tearful relief when the criminal justice system does the basic minimum to protect women from violent men. But this is how low the fallen institutions have brought us.

The CPS have recently confirmed they will reply to Fair Cop’s letter by 8th August 2023 and we will consider what further action we can take once this is received. This is time, energy and money which should never have to be spent but with a toothless EHRC and politicians generally too afraid or too brainwashed to say that 100% of women don’t have penises, it falls upon the individual once again, to protect the fundamental human rights of all.

The consequences of failing to stop this rot are all around us; those refusing to condemn Baker were sending me a video where women’s rights activist Kellie Jay Keen suggests that ‘men who carry’ (I assume guns) should start claiming to be women and go into women’s toilets - I can only assume to shoot trans-identifying men they find there. I condemn such suggestions with as much vigour as I condemn the encouragement to violence of Sarah Jane Baker. If Ms Keen was out on licence following her conviction for attempted murder, I would expect her to be instantly recalled to prison as well. I accept that frightened and angry people do not always behave rationally. But what we are seeing here is predominantly a male problem, of male violence and the criminal justice system cannot just look the other way when that man is wearing a dress.