This is Fat Tony, alias Stephen Halliday, alias Stephanie Hayden. A conman using a trans identity to bully and harass people This is Surrey Police, acting on his orders Caroline Farrow has the full story here. Of course, this is only the latest move in a harassment campaign that
But hes a serial lying grifter and has all the public sector working for him? hes claiming benefits but can fly to New York and S. Africa? never ever pays his court fee's claiming poverty and still no one in power can stop him - he makes a mug of all of us who play by the rules.
This gives me chills. Rather similar to my case and the way Norfolk Police have treated me. This cannot go on. The police are being used by men to harass women who stand up for their rights. When will this madness end?
Wow he's a proper bloody psycho! Actually I'm not surprised - any man wearing womanface is already indicating he's unhinged, and has masturbated himself into brain damage (the effects of porn distorting the shape of the brain are greater even than crack cocaine - plenty of imagery online to verify this). Womanface also indicates a high likelihood of comorbidities too.
With his little smirk and innocent head tilt and glass of champagne!
Aarrgghh!!!!!!!!!
Here's a tweet from Caroline Farrow:
"So it’s not time for TRAs to pop the champagne corks yet unless they think it’s hilarious to have a mother arrested in front of their autistic children for something she hasn’t done".
Thank you for covering this Graham. This is another instance and a repeating pattern. Weak and forced police apologies or mysteriously dropping any further action won't cut it. I hope Caroline and family are managing as well as they can. There are several answers needed urgently.
I am also very troubled by her comments on Twitter with the details and on the apparent threat of 'sectioning'. This was towards a woman trying to answer honestly and acknowledging that she is distressed but trying to find the right way to articulate that distress to appease the officer asking. After the experience they had just put her through. Was there anyone in that custody suite representing her welfare in a broader sense (often voluntarily to check things are happening as they should). It sounded like I will punish you if you don't give me the right answer, but it's unclear what that required answer was and I will decide whatever I like, irrelevant of the answer you give. How confusing and stressful. Directing her back to a cell to think about it? That whole section of that interaction needs to be investigated. That is not standard, usual or good police practice and many officers are superb at quickly diffusing potentially sensitive situations with vulnerable people. They made her vulnerable, then more vulnerable, then challenged her not to be. Huh?
This lot appear very heavy-handed and I wonder why.
I am reading about mental health failings and flipping between reports, this article and other sources. Do we need a Panorama into that custody team? (Again).
Here are some bullet points that may help you decide whether or not Caroline Farrow’s arrest was appropriate:
* The power of arrest must be used fairly, responsibly, with respect for people suspected of committing offences and without unlawful discrimination.
* The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for police officers to discriminate against, harass or victimise any person on the grounds of the ‘protected characteristics’ of age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity when using their powers [As a consequence of Forstater the EA protects gender critical beliefs].
* The use of the power [of arrest] must be fully justified and officers exercising the power should consider if the necessary objectives can be met by other, less intrusive means.
* A lawful arrest requires two elements:
A person’s involvement or suspected involvement or attempted involvement in the commission of a criminal offence;
AND
Reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary.
• both elements must be satisfied, and
• it can never be necessary to arrest a person unless there are reasonable
grounds to suspect them of committing an offence Note the comment Mrs Farrow’s tweets that the police had no evidence, just an allegation, and arrested her “to get your side”].
* The arrested person must be informed that they have been arrested, even if this fact is obvious, and of the relevant circumstances of the arrest in relation to both the above elements.
* The power of arrest is only exercisable if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that it is necessary to arrest the person.
* A person who is arrested, or further arrested, must be informed at the time if practicable, or if not, as soon as it becomes practicable thereafter, that they are under arrest and of the grounds and reasons for their arrest…
* The arresting officer is required to record in his pocket book or by other methods used for recording information:
• the nature and circumstances of the offence leading to the arrest;
• the reason or reasons why arrest was necessary;
• the giving of the caution; and
• anything said by the person at the time of arrest.
* For a constable to have reasonable grounds for believing it necessary to arrest, he or she is not required to be satisfied that there is no viable alternative to arrest. However, it does mean that in all cases, the officer should consider that arrest is the practical, sensible and proportionate option in all the circumstances at the time the decision is made.
* Circumstances which suggest that a person’s arrest ‘on the street’ would not be necessary to interview them might be where the officer:
• is satisfied as to their identity and address and that they will attend the police station voluntarily to be interviewed, either immediately or by arrangement at a future date and time; and
• is not aware of any other circumstances which indicate that voluntary attendance would not be a practicable alternative. See paragraph 2.9(e)(i) to (v).
Based upon Mrs Farrow’s tweets, this was an outrageous and unnecessary arrest. She should certainly make a formal complaint and consider suing the police for false arrest (there are solicitors who fund such cases on conditional fee agreements - suing the police is the best way of helping them realise that this nonsense must stop).
The evidence for the arrest had better be good. Indeed it should have been good enough for an immediate charge for Malicious Communication. Arresting someone to ‘help’ with postings from other unknown individuals worldwide isn’t a lawful arrest. Asking Caroline to help as a paid consultant sounds more appropriate.
I think Chief Constable Gavin Stephens might have been unwittingly offered-up to The Home Secretary to be sacked. She’s trying to bag a Chief Constable and I reckon this blunder might be enough.
The Tories may know what a woman is, but this is happening on their watch. Will Suella Braverman actually bloody well do something about it?!?
But hes a serial lying grifter and has all the public sector working for him? hes claiming benefits but can fly to New York and S. Africa? never ever pays his court fee's claiming poverty and still no one in power can stop him - he makes a mug of all of us who play by the rules.
This gives me chills. Rather similar to my case and the way Norfolk Police have treated me. This cannot go on. The police are being used by men to harass women who stand up for their rights. When will this madness end?
its just appalling - I hope that Caroline has good legal advice
Wow he's a proper bloody psycho! Actually I'm not surprised - any man wearing womanface is already indicating he's unhinged, and has masturbated himself into brain damage (the effects of porn distorting the shape of the brain are greater even than crack cocaine - plenty of imagery online to verify this). Womanface also indicates a high likelihood of comorbidities too.
Still say his pronouns are "fee/fie/foe/fum".
With his little smirk and innocent head tilt and glass of champagne!
Aarrgghh!!!!!!!!!
Here's a tweet from Caroline Farrow:
"So it’s not time for TRAs to pop the champagne corks yet unless they think it’s hilarious to have a mother arrested in front of their autistic children for something she hasn’t done".
Thank you for covering this Graham. This is another instance and a repeating pattern. Weak and forced police apologies or mysteriously dropping any further action won't cut it. I hope Caroline and family are managing as well as they can. There are several answers needed urgently.
I am also very troubled by her comments on Twitter with the details and on the apparent threat of 'sectioning'. This was towards a woman trying to answer honestly and acknowledging that she is distressed but trying to find the right way to articulate that distress to appease the officer asking. After the experience they had just put her through. Was there anyone in that custody suite representing her welfare in a broader sense (often voluntarily to check things are happening as they should). It sounded like I will punish you if you don't give me the right answer, but it's unclear what that required answer was and I will decide whatever I like, irrelevant of the answer you give. How confusing and stressful. Directing her back to a cell to think about it? That whole section of that interaction needs to be investigated. That is not standard, usual or good police practice and many officers are superb at quickly diffusing potentially sensitive situations with vulnerable people. They made her vulnerable, then more vulnerable, then challenged her not to be. Huh?
This lot appear very heavy-handed and I wonder why.
I am reading about mental health failings and flipping between reports, this article and other sources. Do we need a Panorama into that custody team? (Again).
This is a 'Fat Tony' tweet from 07/04/2019 re. Caroline Farrow.
“I am starting to get fed up with the accusations, smears and absolute fantasy of the self identified ‘victim".
A textbook case of projection. So damaged and weak, he cannot look within, but must obsessively project his flaws onto his targeted victim.
Classic inability to recognize and address what is within. He's a dangerous man.
Caroline Farrow needs protection, justice, and a big fat compensation cheque from her abusers, and that includes the police.
It's Surrey police isn't it.
Isn't it Surrey police rather than Sussex? I could be wrong.
I also wonder about the wisdom of publishing this (sorry, Graham) - I think Caroline has asked people not to speculate on the identity of her accuser.
Here’s the Code of Practice that governs police arrests: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/903814/pace-code-g-2012.pdf
Here are some bullet points that may help you decide whether or not Caroline Farrow’s arrest was appropriate:
* The power of arrest must be used fairly, responsibly, with respect for people suspected of committing offences and without unlawful discrimination.
* The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for police officers to discriminate against, harass or victimise any person on the grounds of the ‘protected characteristics’ of age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity when using their powers [As a consequence of Forstater the EA protects gender critical beliefs].
* The use of the power [of arrest] must be fully justified and officers exercising the power should consider if the necessary objectives can be met by other, less intrusive means.
* A lawful arrest requires two elements:
A person’s involvement or suspected involvement or attempted involvement in the commission of a criminal offence;
AND
Reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary.
• both elements must be satisfied, and
• it can never be necessary to arrest a person unless there are reasonable
grounds to suspect them of committing an offence Note the comment Mrs Farrow’s tweets that the police had no evidence, just an allegation, and arrested her “to get your side”].
* The arrested person must be informed that they have been arrested, even if this fact is obvious, and of the relevant circumstances of the arrest in relation to both the above elements.
* The power of arrest is only exercisable if the constable has reasonable grounds for believing that it is necessary to arrest the person.
* A person who is arrested, or further arrested, must be informed at the time if practicable, or if not, as soon as it becomes practicable thereafter, that they are under arrest and of the grounds and reasons for their arrest…
* The arresting officer is required to record in his pocket book or by other methods used for recording information:
• the nature and circumstances of the offence leading to the arrest;
• the reason or reasons why arrest was necessary;
• the giving of the caution; and
• anything said by the person at the time of arrest.
* For a constable to have reasonable grounds for believing it necessary to arrest, he or she is not required to be satisfied that there is no viable alternative to arrest. However, it does mean that in all cases, the officer should consider that arrest is the practical, sensible and proportionate option in all the circumstances at the time the decision is made.
* Circumstances which suggest that a person’s arrest ‘on the street’ would not be necessary to interview them might be where the officer:
• is satisfied as to their identity and address and that they will attend the police station voluntarily to be interviewed, either immediately or by arrangement at a future date and time; and
• is not aware of any other circumstances which indicate that voluntary attendance would not be a practicable alternative. See paragraph 2.9(e)(i) to (v).
Based upon Mrs Farrow’s tweets, this was an outrageous and unnecessary arrest. She should certainly make a formal complaint and consider suing the police for false arrest (there are solicitors who fund such cases on conditional fee agreements - suing the police is the best way of helping them realise that this nonsense must stop).
Of course it was him. Surely the courts should stop this continual and persistent harasser. Wasn't he warned by one judge?
DJ Fat Tony will not be pleased if he reads this as it is NOT him.
He doesn’t look anything like his photo.
Suella Braverman please sort this out once and for all!
Poor woman I hope she gets loads of compensation and an apology
A truly vile person, and a shocking indictment of the behaviour of the police.
She mentioned Guildford. Has to be Surrey Police.
The evidence for the arrest had better be good. Indeed it should have been good enough for an immediate charge for Malicious Communication. Arresting someone to ‘help’ with postings from other unknown individuals worldwide isn’t a lawful arrest. Asking Caroline to help as a paid consultant sounds more appropriate.
I think Chief Constable Gavin Stephens might have been unwittingly offered-up to The Home Secretary to be sacked. She’s trying to bag a Chief Constable and I reckon this blunder might be enough.