HOME Secretary Suella Braverman last night blasted a police force after it defended the human rights of a vicious transgender paedophile.
Sussex Police issued a warning to Twitter users over “hateful comments” about a sex-change woman jailed for 20 years after abusing seven children while she was a man.
Suella Braverman blasted a police force after it defended the human rights of a vicious transgender paedophile
Dixon was convicted of 30 indecent assaults on five girls and two boys aged six to 15
But “common sense policing” champion Ms Braverman denounced the force for “denying biology” and told them: “Focus on catching criminals, not policing pronouns.”
Cops came under attack by social media users for referring to Sally Ann Dixon as a woman after the monster was convicted of 30 indecent assaults on five girls and two boys aged six to 15.
The attacks were carried out between 1989 and 1996 when the 58-year-old paedophile was a man named John Stephen Dixon before transitioning to a woman in 2004.
Dixon, of Havant, Hants, was jailed for 18 years at Lewes crown court this month with an extended period of two years to be served on licence when released from a female prison.
Sussex Police described the case on Twitter as a “woman convicted of historic offences against children in Sussex”.
Clare King, who describes herself as a mother and school governor on the social media site, replied: “No Sussex Police. This is not a female crime.”
Police dished out a warning, urging critics to “familiarise yourself” with the force hate crime policy and express “gender-critical views” on other platforms.
But Ms Braverman later tweeted: “Sussex police have done well to put a dangerous criminal behind bars.
“But they’ve got it wrong by playing identity politics and denying biology. Focus on catching criminals, not policing pronouns.”
She signed off “#commonsensepolicing”.
Ms Braverman last week sent a letter to police chiefs telling them to spend less time on diversity and more on catching criminals.
Last night, the force said: “An earlier reply to a comment on Twitter was inconsistent with our usual style of engagement; we apologise for this and have removed the comment.
“We recognise the rights of the public to express themselves freely within the boundaries of the law.”
