This all seems to be a ploy to link IP addresses and online activity directly to an identifiable person to make them easier to catch and track down. The government falsely assumed that everyone watches porn and they thought they would get everyone that way. It obviously did not work as well as they were hoping so they are now expanding it. (I have always said that initial laws are just a foot in the door, those laws will always be expanding after the fact into their true original intended purpose).
So their plan now is if you want to use any social media or much of the internet in any way, you will need to prove that you are over 18 which means submitting an ID. This will require far far more ID submissions which will massively expand the government database, which was the real plan all along, not the safety of children.
The funniest thing about this is after all the fuss about the Online Safety Act, this blanket ban on kids using social media pretty much renders the entire act pointless and made it a giant waste of time. Which to be honest, proves that the act was never about protecting children but was really about building a giant database that links all online activity directly to a person.
This database would then be constantly poured over by AI to flag "citizens of concern" to the government who may be potential political dissidents, saying naughty anti-government things etc so the government can pre-emptively act against them.
Minority Report. This is literally the plot of Minority Report.
@archer_rs Tell that to the poor bastards in Dublin.
You don't have any deeper reds? I'm not scared enough yet, maybe if you add some flickering flame effect?
On 18 January 2022, ACC Owen Weatherill issued correspondence to Chief Constables indicating that although a crime reference number had been issued for allegations relating to the UK vaccine programme, โthis is not an indication that an investigation is under wayโ and that officers were merely โreviewingโ documents.
That proposition does not survive scrutiny.
In R (Miller) v College of Policing [2020] EWHC 225 (Admin), the High Court held that the recording of a crime is not a neutral administrative act. It carries legal consequences, including a duty to investigate.
The Court was explicit: โIt is not open to the police to record a crime and yet treat the matter as if no investigation has begun.โ
The distinction drawn by Weatherill between recording an allegation and commencing an investigation does not exist in law.
Tasking officers, reviewing evidence and assessing material are investigative acts.
This authority is now central to understanding not only the evident misstatement made in by ACC Wetherill in January 2022, but also the later refusal of judicial scrutiny in relation to CRN 6029679/21 in 2023.