A piece published today in The Times. James, a supporter, emailed this to me, after reading the piece:

Confounding serious and extreme examples with innocuous behaviour is a typical tactic of the radical left-wing feminists that are seeking to give every man and boy older than 16 years old that they can get their hands on a criminal record. Fight back.

Domestic abuse is not a serious crime and is not in the same category as rape. Domestic abuse can include door slamming, according to CAFCASS. This is not in the equivalent of rape.The new definition of domestic abuse being pushed through in the DA Bill 2019 includes “psychological, emotional or other abuse.” Saying mean things in the midst of an argument is not the equivalent to rape.The new definition also includes “Economic abuse.” Objecting to a wife’s out-of-control spending is not the equivalent of rape.

The presumption of guilt, which is what Priti Patel is pushing, is unlawful. Sack Priti Patel, slash funding for the police and CPS, and take control away from these Marxist feminist groups such as Centre for Women’s Justice.

Genuine domestic violence is rare. However, bail conditions set by the police (who receive training sessions by government-funded Women’s Aid) on a mere allegation of Domestic Abuse typically do two things to a man, both of which are designed by radfem groups to break him:

Bail conditions being in place longer than 28 days are yet another weapon introduced by radical feminists to subvert due process, continue the presumption of guilt and to destroy innocent men going through acrimonious divorces. Consider:

The article in The Times:

Bail laws are set to change after the government caved in to criticism from women’s groups that their relaxation two years ago had allowed dangerous suspects to be released without any restrictions.

Reforms were introduced in 2017 to limit restricted bail to 28 days, except under exceptional circumstances, after several cases of people spending long periods on bail before being cleared of allegations. Suspects were instead released “under investigation” without conditions.

Five months later The Times reported that alleged perpetrators of domestic violence, rape and sexual assault were being released without restrictions.

The Home Office announced yesterday that it would launch a review which would focus on prioritising the safety of victims and ensuring that pre-charge bail is used when appropriate, including when conditions are needed to protect victims and witnesses, particularly in domestic abuse cases.

Priti Patel, the home secretary, said: “I’m committed to giving the police the support they need to protect the public from harm, as well as supporting victims and witnesses. This review will ensure we put the needs of victims first.”

The review will be followed by a consultation early next year. Changes to the law could be introduced by secondary legislation.

Last year Kay Richardson, 49, from Sunderland, was murdered by her estranged husband Alan Martin after police released him under investigation. He had a history of domestic abuse and she had reported him for rape.

Figures released under freedom of information laws show that the use of bail has plummeted. In Thames Valley the number of suspects released on bail in 2016-17 was 13,768. By 2017-18, it had fallen to 379, as the number released under investigation rose to 11,053.

In Nottinghamshire 7,932 people were released on bail in 2016-17 but the number dropped to 562 in 2017-18. The number of suspects released under investigation was 4,728 in the same year.

The Centre for Women’s Justice made a super-complaint to the police watchdog, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, in April accusing forces of failing to use protective measures in cases of violence against women.

A month later the “unintended consequences” of the reforms led the National Police Chiefs’ Council to issue fresh guidance to forces.

Nogah Ofer, of the Centre for Women’s Justice, said it had been calling for an urgent review of pre-charge bail to ensure that bail conditions were used in all domestic abuse and sexual offences cases, where at present many women are left exposed with nothing to prevent them from being contacted by men they have reported to the police.

How did this come about?

In 2017 the government changed the rules so that police forces could keep a suspect on pre-charge bail for a maximum of 28 days in all but exceptional cases. It followed several widely reported cases in which people languished on bail for long periods before being released without charge. The broadcaster Paul Gambaccini, for example, spent a year on police bail after being arrested over allegations of historical sexual offences before being released without charge in 2015.

What has happened since?

The use of police bail, under which suspects can be released with restrictions, has plummeted. Release under investigation, where restrictions cannot be imposed, has risen. In many cases suspects are spending longer in limbo, waiting for their case to be resolved, than people were spending on bail.

Police chiefs have told forces to review suspects who are “under investigation” every 30 days until they are charged or the case is dropped. Campaigners say that suspected rapists and domestic abusers have been released without conditions, putting victims at risk of intimidation.

What changes could be made?

The rules may be clarified to ensure that bail must be used for serious crimes such as rape and domestic abuse.