Police participation in Pride march ruled 'unlawful'
 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...eg?imwidth=420

A police force failed to act impartially when it allowed officers to take part in
a Gay Pride and transgender rights march, a court has ruled.

Linzi Smith, 34, a gender-critical lesbian, brought a case against Northumbria
Police after officers, including Vanessa Jardine, the head of the force, took
part in last year’s parade in Newcastle.

Ms Smith argued that it was wrong to allow uniformed officers to actively
participate in an event that promoted gender ideology and was supported by
transgender activists.

Responding to the ruling, Ms Smith said: “I am delighted with the judgment
of the court. It is terrifying to live in a community where the police have
abandoned their duty of impartiality and embraced a highly controversial
political cause.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/...eg?imwidth=460

In the legal claim, officers were accused of joining in the march; stationing a
police van decked out in Pride colours at the event and associating with
messaging that supported gender ideology.

The hearing was told there was also a Northumbria Police static display
staffed by uniformed officers and a transgender Pride flag incorporating the
force’s insignia.

Ms Smith argued that while she accepted it was necessary for the Pride
march to be policed it was wrong for officers to actively participate because it
breached their professional oath to operate with impartiality.

The court also heard how during the march there were pro-Palestinian
protesters chanting slogans such as: “From the River To The Sea, Palestine
Will Be Free”, “No Pride in Genocide” and “Toute le monde deteste la police”.



“Pride is political in the same way that any protest is political. Police
engagement should therefore be solely operational. No lanyards, flags,
whistles or painted cars. Just good, honest bobbies remaining polite and
keeping the peace.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...h-judge-rules/

Makes sense

It's giving Turkeys voting for Christmas.

Sad to see now that Linzi has a foot on the acceptance ladders she's pulling it up for those who don't. Seek help.

The police have historically been instrumental in oppressing LGBT people, so visibility at supporting them is simply readdressing the balance.

another victory for common sense and thankfully a precedent now that will be upheld

no more pathetic rainbow police cars or embarrassing displays at "pride marches"

I am sure police officers will be relieved and delighted by this

Makes perfect sense. I hate seeing the publicly funded police join in with any protest or parade, like seeing them do the macarena at Notting Hill. If you want to take part, wait till you're off duty then you can do what you like.

…how so much has become so divisive and regressing in recent/current times…almost a decade ago at London Pride a Met officer proposed to his partner and that ‘impartiality’ was viewed in a completely positive way…it’s very sad how isolated, some society mindsets appear to be leaning…

Tbh I don't really understand the issue here?

Linzi 🖤🤍@RightNUFC

🚨 Further Statement Regarding My High Court Victory VS CC Vanessa
Jardine And Northumbria Police 🚨

Today I have instructed my solicitors to write to the Chief Constable of
Northumbria Police to threaten further legal action if she authorises officers
to visibly participate in Northern Pride 2025. Despite a clear and damning
judgment of her decision to authorise officers to participate in Pride 2024 she
has authorised off-duty officers wearing T-shirts that show they are officers to
participate in Pride 2025. This is plainly unlawful and I will take legal action if
she does not rescind that authorisation. Her public statements in the light of
the ruling show a complete absence of reflection on a judgement that was
highly critical of her deeply flawed decision regarding Pride 2024 – a decision
that caused her and her officers to breach their professional duties. It would
appear that she and the Northumbria force have been completely captured by
a controversial political campaign.

The Police are NOT above the law.

The police are funded by the public. They should not be joining in with ANY parade or march they are being paid, by the public, to police.

You can guarantee if they joined in on an anti-immigration march the same folks would be congratulating them for being ‘brave’, some people just won’t be happy until society gets back to openly accepted hostility towards gay people

You have imagined two situations that have not occurred and then got angry about both of them

:shrug:

I want the police impartial. They should not take part in any marches. Ever.

Yes

It seems obvious tbh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm assuming that they are there primarily to Police tbf.

I would understand it more if the Police were openly taking sides in the Israel vs. Palestine protests (which I know has happened tbf,) because the Police need to de-escalate situations like those, and the UK Police have sometimes failed at that.

But it's a Pride event, it's not really harming anyone.

There is no difference. They're there to police the event, same as any other event they police. They can be friendly, supportive, approachable... But they have a job to do. If they want to take part, fine. But not while they're on duty.

So no women have been harmed recently Mock, you can't think of a single case where a woman has been suspended or worse lost her job for being gender critical?

It’s harming the bigots to see lgbt people so openly accepted

the legal action was taken by a Lesbian


:facepalm:

at least read the opening post!!

LGBT people can also be bigots. Internalised homophobia is a thing, and some LGB folks are anti trans. Hope that helps.

Lesbians have suffered with the trans madness but hey, they're just women. It seems to me that trans ideology is heavily supported by gay men.

almost exclusively

and by 20 odd year old middle class white straight women, it seems

lol the biggest support for trans people comes from women.

Yeah, right.

In his ruling at the High Court in Leeds, Mr Justice Linden agreed and said it
was ‘contrary to the uniformed officers’ duties of impartiality’, as well as the
chief constable Vanessa Jardine’s ‘own duty of impartiality, to participate in the
2024 march in the way that they did’

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2025/07...2684372696.jpg

Thank you for confirming.

The latest polling suggests that while overall support for trans people is decreasing across the board, women are consistently, and always have been, more supportive than men.

I was stating my opinion, you were suggesting something was fact. There is a difference...

"Latest polling suggests". Can't argue with facts like that.

We use statistics to get a pulse on public opinion for many things, Livia.

It's certainly a better benchmark for public opinion than "it seems to me" (aka based on my limited experience on a Big Brother forum).

You haven't used statistics! You said "latest polling suggests". But you didn't produce the results of that poll. This place is for opinions (so people say things like, it seems to me...), but you can back up those opinions with evidence. Or, you can say things like "latest polling suggests" and imagine that's enough to prove your flimsy point.

You say "on a Big Brother Forum" like it's an insult. And yet here you are.


Of course, we could go back to us not conversing. That would suit me down to the ground.

Last time I provided links to unbiased, non-partisan stats your only contribution was to say there was a lot of "generalisations and shaky stats" and then when I said I was open to my mind being changed if other stats could be provided, I didn't hear from you.

Unfortunately, you have proven time and time again you don't care about stats that go against your opinion, so I am not wasting my time linking sources that will be there if you Google.

My claim was based of statistics I've read from polling of the general public, your claim was based off your experience on a forum that is one of the biggest echo chambers I've ever come across. One is not the same as the other.

Happy to stop conversing, sounds like a plan.

I don't recall you ever providing valid stats for anything.

If this forum is such an echo chamber, if you have so little respect for it and people who use it, why do you keep coming back? Why?

Have the last word, I know it'll be important to you, then let's go back to ignoring each other.

the police are not there primarily to police the event, that is their sole duty

why are so many police at this "family-friendly event" anyroad??

Because it draws immense crowds and police need to ensure safety - just like literally any event large crowds are drawn to.

Often you'll also get conclaves of people who stand on the side of the parade shouting at the people who are enjoying their day that they are going to hell for loving someone of the same sex and so the police are there to ensure nothing kicks off.

I said that the Police officers celebrating Pride isn't harming anyone.

Not that there haven't been cases of Transwomen thinking that it's okay to (for example) take part in Martial Arts against women.

It’s common sense no?
To think police would police large scale crowds like that. A crazy concept huh?

No one is saying police should be excluded from Pride. In their own time.

But they're already there.

Why can't they multitask and celebrate Pride while also doing their job?

Going by Ammi's post, the Police were able to do it back in 2016.

The argument is Police are supposed to be and look impartial. I would question the intentions of anyone who wants to look 'impartial' on the subject of LGBT existing, tbh, but hey ho.

The issue stems from Pride being a politically motivated 'movement', and therefore Police need to be neutral. However, Pride is only political because people in power, the majority of whom are straight, make the existence of LGBT people political.

The vast majority of LGBT people would rather their existence wasn't up for political debate, in the same way straight people's existence hasn't ever been (for their identity). However, this is where we are and always have been, and so Pride will continue to be political.

My opinion is the police force have a checkered history with the LGBT community, they were instrumental in upholding discriminatory laws, often with force and violence. The police are not a very trusted collective within the community due to this history. Police involvement in pride not only goes ways to bridge that, for the sake of community, peace, trust and mutual respect, but it also creates a visual for any LGBT person who wants to join the Police force that perhaps it's now a viable workplace for them to exist in without prejudice.

I think often people, when suggesting X, Y and Z shouldn't "be political and get involved in pride" forget that gay people exist within those corporations and for many it's a way to show they're a company that accepts and supports you regardless of your sexuality.

Maybe that's the difference then.

Because to me I don't see Pride as the same as Just Stop Oil for example.

And I do want to say that I personally believe that some of society want to take our Humanity away in certain situations, and make us more robotic.

It seems like crying is the only form of emotion that's deemed acceptable nowadays.

Just going on a bit of a tangent, sorry about that.:laugh: