The Defuse Podcast - VAWG, Stalking, Harassment and Personal Safety featuring Suky Bhaker

This hugely important podcast with Suky Bhaker, the CEO of the Suzy Lamplugh Trust (https://www.suzylamplugh.org/) discusses the real issues about violence against women and girls (VAWG) in the 21st century. We discuss harassment, street harassment and stalking and follow the evidence of how this impacts all females, and some men. 

We discuss the shocking evidence of hugely improved successful prosecutions for stalking when supported by an advocate and look at the new bystander training that the SLT are now delivering and why all men are part of the solution. (https://www.suzylamplugh.org/News/loreal-paris-and-the-suzy-lamplugh-trust-partner-to-educate-the-uk-on-street-harassment-through-bystander-intervention-training)
 

Suky Bhaker – CEO Suzy Lamplugh Trust

https://www.suzylamplugh.org/chief-executive-officer

Suky has been with the Trust for over seven years, holding the positions of Head of Policy and Development, and more recently CEO. 

During her time with the Trust, Suky has overseen the growth and development of its helpline and advocacy services, led its policy and campaigns team, and designed and delivered a number of complex national projects. 

Notably she has been the Programme Director for the world’s first multi-agency stalking intervention programme (MASIP) and overseen the ongoing campaign for national minimum standards for taxis and private hire vehicles.

Suky was also seconded for over 12 months from Suzy Lamplugh Trust as an adviser to the Parliamentary Security Department following the tragic death of Jo Cox MP, supporting and advising MPs and their staff in issues relating to personal safety.

Alongside her experience in frontline services, Suky has worked in policy, research and development capacities, with areas of speciality in the Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) sector including trafficking, honour-based violence, domestic and sexual violence, in addition to stalking. Suky was heavily involved in the successful coercive control campaign, which brought law change to domestic violence in the UK.

Transcript

Philip Grindell: 0:03

Hello, and welcome again to the online bodyguard podcast. And I'm absolutely delighted today to introduce a good friend of mine and we both work together and met God five years ago or more than that, probably now, when we were both working in Parliament, so I'd like to introduce Susie Becker, but I pronounce your surname correctly. Never. Is that correct? Okay. Okay. Susie Barca Susie Barker. So Susie is the chief executive of the

Unknown: 0:31

just call me, Susie. Sookie, a lot of people don't

Philip Grindell: 0:35

go ahead. No, no, we will have to wait at this. Tell you what we're gonna do. We're gonna start again, like we just talked about, right? Here we go. It's a common thing. And it's because you're the Suzy Lamplugh trust. Right, we're gonna start again then. So I get it right. Hello again. And welcome to the online bodyguard podcast. It's my great pleasure today to introduce a good friend of mine and we met a few years ago when we were both working in the house of the parliament in the UK, following the assassination of Joe Cox MP. So I'd like to introduce Sookie Baker of The Suzy Lamplugh trust. She's the Chief Executive of the suit the luxury trust now Suki has been with us for over seven years holding the position of Head of policy and development and more recently, the chief executive during her time, Sookie has overseen the growth and the development of its helpline and its advocacy services, led its policy and campaign teams and designed and delivered a number of complex national projects. Notably, she has been the programme director for the world's first multi agency stalking Intervention Programme called mass IP or may sit and overseeing the ongoing campaign for the national minimum standards for taxis and private hire vehicles. Suki was also seconded for over 12 months from the Suzy Lamplugh trust as an adviser to the parliamentary Security Department following the death of Joe Cox, where she supported advises MPs and their staff in issues relating to personal safety. And I can expand on that because he also helped train my team in the police, which was the parliamentary liaison investigation team around the more complex issues around stalking. And we'll touch on this because it's really relevant that that I set up this team in parliament with no expertise and no training whatsoever in stalking. And thankfully, Sookie and her team were able to change that and give us the training that we needed. But that's that's the subject we're going to come back to. Alongside her experience in frontline services, Sookie has also worked on policy research and developmental caper capacities with areas of specialty in the violence against women and girls sector, including trafficking on a base violence, domestic and sexual violence. In addition to stalking. She was heavily involved in the successful coercive control campaign, which brought law changes to domestic violence in the UK. Welcome seeking that was a big introduction, big introduction, but quite rightly, to bear in mind all your expertise. So let's start because because chief executive of the Suzy Lamplugh trust. So for those that don't know who Suzy Lamplugh was or what the trust is, Can you can you tell us more about it?

Unknown: 3:28

Yeah, absolutely. So actually, we just had our 36th anniversary two days ago. So the trust was set up by Paul and Dinah Lampe, who in 1986, following the disappearance of Suzy Lamplugh, so she was an estate agent and 25 real estate agent. She was working in London in Fulham, and she went missing during the working day. And it's the person who is referred to as a Mr. kippers which she wrote in her diary she was going to see a Mr. Cooper on a visit. She took her bag her her keys. But the vehicle was sort of left as if she had intended to come back to it, but she was never seen again after that visit. So Paul and Dinah Lamplugh set up the trust's to really work to make personal safety a public policy priority. And they work tirelessly to campaign on issues of harassment of stalking, and actually they believe that Susie had been stalked and that's really what led our long history in campaigning in this area. And today, we we've got three key objectives. So campaigning is one of those we campaigned for the harassment legislation to come into force in 1997. Subsequently, the 2012 stalking legislation that came into place and now we're going to touch on that a little bit more in the podcast. We've got a huge education function with a lot of training and consultancy around personal safety, stalking harassment, and we've got our fantastic frontline services. So the national stalking helpline and advocacy service, we have a trauma advocacy component there We've recently piloted, and as you mentioned our perpetrator intervention programmes as well. So a huge amount of developments occurred over the last sort of 36 years. And through all our frontline services, in fact, we support over 14,000 individuals every year. It's a tremendous amount of work that the team do and a fantastic amount of expertise. But actually the tip of the iceberg when we look at the number of individuals we know who are experiencing these sorts of crimes every year,

Philip Grindell: 5:30

and is it purely directed toward women or or you know, men came to you who have been victims of harassment or stalking, whether whether whether straight men or gay men or whatever, would you help them? Or is it just women? Absolutely no, we

Unknown: 5:46

work with men with women. With anyone who identifies as a whatever sexuality and gender they identify, as we do recognise, however, that the majority of individuals coming through our doors are women. 80% of people who will experience stalking are women. And we know that their experiences tend to differ from those from from from men's experience, they tend to experience more threats to life, essentially. And we know through our research that we've done with others, like Professor J. Mountain Smith, that the correlation between stalking and femicide is really high. In fact, in a three year period of research that she undertook, she found that in 94%, of all cases, smoking was prevalent in the antecedent history. So we know that it sits within the violence against women and girls framework stalking has to be seen within that framework. And we need to understand the risks that are associated with that. So we can ensure the proper mechanisms are in place to support those victims through that process.

Philip Grindell: 6:52

But it's important to recognise I think, that Professor Martin Smith's research was was taught was looking at domestic relationships, particularly in terms of the femicides. It tended to be, you know, those people that were known to each other in terms of in terms of terms of the rate of murders, that technique went on from stalking.

Unknown: 7:13

The femicide actually looked at a broad range, so those in an intimate and non intimate relationship setting, but we do know that over half of those cases of those women who come to us are being stalked by an ex intimate partner. And that is true for sort of the general statistics across the board across the, across the UK with numbers of other services and the sorts of reporting that you're seeing coming through the criminal justice system as well proximately, half of those people are being stalked by an ex intimate partner. But what I would say with that other half, that doesn't necessarily mean that the risk is less, because what we're often seeing is either a desire for a relationship or a delusion, that there is a relationship. And that therefore means that the same risk factors that play out in the next intimate setting, play out in those other typologies of stalking cases. So it's really important that professionals are vigilant to that and understand the specific risks and motivations with those different typologies of stalker, genuinely speaking, stalking, is that a fixation about obsession, it's a repeated unwanted behaviour behaviour, but the motivations of of different stalkers need to be understood to have the right support mechanisms in places, as you well know from your background. And I

Philip Grindell: 8:29

think that's, that's a really important issue, because I think, my own experience when I was in the police, and you know, bear in mind, I did 30 years in the police, and most of it as a detective, and I worked on domestic violence teams and hate crime teams and everything. It wasn't Intel, I actually obviously met yourself and then went on some other courses that I learned about the we use the term stalking as a kind of group, or we use it as a as a term that we think just most people just think, Oh, it's just stalking it's one thing, a homogenous group. But actually, we know that there are different types of stalkers. And they post different threats. And that's a really important piece, which I don't think is very well understand even within placing.

Unknown: 9:19

Yeah, yeah, no, absolutely. And it is far more far more complex than just saying yes, everybody is, is still coming. If we take it just even a step back. You know, the system and professionals tend to struggle with what's the difference between harassment and stalking. What's the difference between malicious comms and harassment and stalking, coercive controlled harassment, stalking and really trying to understand the nuances between that but what we'd really argue is try to strip that away and have a look at the behaviours what's occurring what what what what are if we if we just tried to look at the incidents that are occurring, and is there more than two incidents occurring? So you know, you behaviours include things like following watching, loitering, spying on someone. It can include things like physical violence, sexual violence, cyber stalking, you've got two or more of those incidents, usually, a person will experience over 100 before they're reporting to the police. So you're missing multiple instance. Is it unwanted to the victim? Is it repeated and unwanted? If it is, and it's underpinned by that fixation obsession, then yes, you've seen stalking. But absolutely, you're right, then you've got those typologies. That's it across those. So as I mentioned, half of them are being stored top of individuals being stalked by Nick's intimate partner. So we'd call those rejected stalkers. They, they will, they will feel a rejection because the person has has has left them. And often, they're motivated by wanting to either reconcile that relationship, or it's that sort of love hate to destroy that person. Then we have what we would refer to as resentful stalkers. So there are stalkers who feel that they've been mistreated by the system. And often, they might target somebody who represents a particular issue as a particular political allegiance. Or they might represent a certain group. We have intimacy seekers, they emerge out of the context of loneliness. So there'll be a desire for relationship, it may not necessarily be a sexual relationship, unlike incompetent suitors, where they are looking for that sort of relationship, often short term, sexual contact, and then we have predatory stalkers. And they're the hardest group to identify, because often we'll know the predatory stalker at the point of attack. And that is, we believe may have been Susie stole, because there's someone who identified her who may have been watching loitering spying, and the motivation is very much the end game that that that attack, and as I said, often they may only come to the attention of Criminal Justice Services at at that point.

Philip Grindell: 12:09

So let's go back to a point you made earlier on about legislation. Because I've always felt that it's the legislation that causes a lot of these issues. If we look at the legislation around stalking, it doesn't define more stalking is and it constantly refers to harassment. And, you know, I think, well, I mean, you know, talk talk to me about about, about that, and where you think we might be to improve that.

Unknown: 12:35

Yeah, yeah. Definitely not a perfect piece of legislation. long stretch, certainly, what it did do so the reason that campaign in 2012 took place is because we recognise that the harassment legislation didn't capture the fixation of session didn't quite capture the impact the day to day impact on the individual the alarm and distress. So I don't know if you if you're familiar with the with the famous Skittles case in the US with the perpetrator left to scuttle everywhere that he went on, you know, on her bedside table on her dining table, on her desk at work. And she had a complete nervous breakdown. When she comes to get on the passenger seat in her car. How did he get into this car, what he was saying to her is, I can infiltrate any part of your life. I can access it. I know your movements, I know where you are, and the psychological terror that has created. But you've got to remember, there's no physical violence there. And what we were finding under the harassment legislation and those sorts of crimes, were there for coming out with a minimum of a few months in terms of sentencing because there was an absence of physical violence, but it doesn't capture the sheer terror that those crimes create and the impact it has. So what the legislation did by recognising the alarm and distress is it really brought that into into focus. So that was really welcomed. But absolutely right, the legislation doesn't have a legal definition of what stalking is. It does mirror the harassment legislation and certain parts you have to prove harassment to to prove stalking. So it is not. It is not a simple piece of legislation to understand. Having said that, however, we also find in our experience, we do a lot of training with criminal justice professionals, particularly with the police. As you know, we've worked with yourselves. When professionals understand the basic concepts of stalking, they're able to apply the legislation far more effectively. And so it often comes down to training. And we've seen that impulses across the UK where there's been an investment in the training, we see better prosecution rates, better reporting better conviction. So so it isn't a perfect piece of legislation. But I think it also goes hand in hand with a lack of understanding and and training as well. We could still get better prosecution, even from the existing piece of legislation, if we even at this stage had marginally better training in lots of places, as you will know from your experience. It's almost non existent across the UK.

Philip Grindell: 14:58

So So do you think it's been Success, that the, you know, the introduction of stalking legislation?

Unknown: 15:07

Oh, I mean, it's a good question.

Philip Grindell: 15:10

what success is, I suppose, but

Unknown: 15:11

yes, exactly. in being able to name the crime in being able to validate victims experiences and being able to say, No, this isn't just ministry, and it's not just harassment, you're actually talking about a fixated individual. And we have seen successful prosecutions, you know, be alive. So we haven't, and we have seen them, the maximum sentencing is 10 years, 14 exaggerated features. And we have seen very rarely, sentencing pushing in that direction, but very rarely, the average sentence is still around 18 months. And in fact, when we look at conviction rates, they still sit suddenly, at about 1.1%. If we're looking at the comparison between the number of individuals we know who experienced stalking, that's about 1.5 million people will experience stalking a year, according to the Office of National Statistics. And if we look at the conviction figures just ending in March 2020, was that 1.1%. So something isn't working? And something just isn't working? And that process?

Philip Grindell: 16:09

Is that part of the wider issue around, you know, violence against women and girls, and also going on to sort of the rape prosecutions and everything around reading around where females are victims of violence, you know, very often, not exclusively, but very, very often perpetrated by men. We seem to struggle with successfully prosecuting those. And I know there's, I mean, I've, I've investigated them. I know, there's complexes and it's not easy, and there's challenges. But but that's a pretty appalling prosecution rate, you know, less than one or less than 2%, for something that we know, causes so many murders amongst women.

Unknown: 16:55

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I think we do have to ask ourselves some serious questions. What is happening here in terms of the culture and the environment? Absolutely. Because you're right. This isn't the only violence against women and girls crime that has that low prosecution rates, it's probably one of the lowest. And I'm not saying that the others are particularly high, they're still sitting around that, you know, 123 4%, it's all appalling. And as they said, there is about there is something about understanding about training and recognising that experience the impact risk. That actually I think we do need to ask ourselves the questions about the culture, what is happening here, if we look at the criminal justice journey, the attrition rates through that whole process from report through to, through to prosecution, through to conviction, it it, it, it dramatically falls off through that whole process through the whole criminal justice journey. So what what is happening here, and Suzy Lamplugh trust is calling for a national task force, in fact, to really look at and understand the specifics of why those figures so dramatically drop at that various point through the through the journey. As you say, the rape review, very rightly so looked at the culture, and is there a culture of misogyny that perhaps needs to be addressed 50% of victims have come through to us on our frontline services have already been to the police and said that they've had they're unsatisfied or deeply unsatisfied with the police response. They've not been believed, they've not been heard. And therefore they're not getting the right response. And we need to ask ourselves the question, what is that about? Why are they not being heard? Why they're not being believed? why they've gone through multiple professionals before someone's validating their experiences.

Philip Grindell: 18:38

And what what, what makes it more shocking for me, if that's possible, is that you know, we've had in this country, to female prime ministers, a number of female home secretaries, at least one female DPP, we've got lots of female prosecutors, lots of female judges. And yet, despite all that, presence of women in very, very key political and criminal justice roles, we're still failing women in what is an incredibly crucial part of life. And I know that my own when I look at myself, and I remember, you know, when you and I were working together, I came home one day to say to my wife and said, we've had this, this load of abuse at one of the MPs. And, you know, I said what it was, and my wife was awful, and I was gonna, is it. She said, God, yeah, that would terrify me. And I kind of recognise two things. One, I recognise as a as a man. Well, I've probably didn't understand that necessarily, in terms of because I've never been, I've ever experienced that. And secondly, as a criminal justice professional, my, my kind of threshold to bad stuff, if you like, was too high. And so when women or you know, people coming to us and saying, I think you know, I've been treated in this way A and the law is kind of grossly offensive, etc. We were having issues where we thought grossly offensive was different to what the public thought it was. Yeah, so I recognise it was a huge issue around around terminology. And the police's, and I was part of that there are understanding and thresholds that, you know, that we, we understand, but what's what's in other than training? We've just seen the lady, the England ladies win, you know, tremendous football competition 90,000 people want what in the stadium, etc. You know, what else can we do around around violence and women with girls? What is it just literally, we can have to start training children at that age to change the whole culture?

Unknown: 20:45

I mean, I think I think this, this is a much broader, wider systemic issue. And you're absolutely right, we need to look at the education piece, we need to look at our culture, our institutions, our infrastructure, yes. It is fantastic to have those women, as you've just said, in those in those senior positions, we have to remind ourselves that actually it is still predominantly a male structure, it is still predominantly those roles are still predominantly held by men. And as you say, do we actually really understand what we're hearing when a victim comes forward? Can we actually really empathise? Can we really appreciate the impact that that's having on the individual the fear that that may be creating, I mean, if we just have a think about what happens when we lose our wallet, and just the chaos, it might cause in your your day that day, and it's not, we're not even talking about risk here, in terms of fear, or the or the rest of it. Now have a think about if you've got a stalker, and they're turning up at your workplace, they're potentially loitering around your children's school, you're afraid of whether they can access your home, they may indeed have access to your home, they're potentially hacking into your accounts, your email accounts, your Amazon accounts are infiltrating every aspect of your life. And the context of that just simply sometimes, isn't it understood what that means in totality, in terms of the, the experience, but going back to your point, in terms of what do we need to do there does need to be a cultural shift, because I think we have really normalised a lot of those behaviours, if we just looking at street harassment, and Susan actually fosters a huge amount of working in terms of harassment in public spaces. 88% of respondents that we surveyed, found, we found that they experience unwanted violent, aggressive or sexual behaviours on UK public transport in the last five years, and 90% of them had experienced unwanted behaviours, at least once in their lifetime. So the figures are just really harrowing, most women will experience some form of sexual harassment in public spaces, we have to be calling that behaviour out. And that isn't just a job of of women, that that is, as you say, that is men also standing up and calling that behaviour out. So we're breaking down those barriers, we're not allowing it just to be normalised. And that's not just in, in, in, in public spaces. But that's in the in the offline world as well. We've seen a huge amount of misogyny that women experience and it's all a longer continuum of that abuse. If we allow that to normalise, then we start hearing the things that we heard through the Johnny Depp, Amber Heard case or will you know, she wasn't believable. I didn't believe her tears. I mean, just the the narrative that came out was so incredibly toxic, but we need to be challenging that every step of the way. And that is everybody's responsibility that is that is that is in terms of, you know, a direction at a senior level in terms of yes, there are those people who govern the country, but also in terms of Wisener on the street, we need to be we need to be calling it out, it just cannot be acceptable. And the Trust has actually just recently partnered with L'Oreal and an NGO in the in the US called right to be and we are rolling out bystander training. It's really a really simple programme. It's an hour long, it's free training to really encourage you to, to get online, it's, it's delivered online. And it's five basic principles of what you can do if you see that sort of harassment occurring in a public space, how you can call it out, but how you can do that safely because we want to make sure that by standards aren't also put at risk to recognise the personal safety for them as well in those situations. But we all need to be taking responsibility.

Philip Grindell: 24:42

We'll definitely include that link to that training on the on the podcast. Thank you. Can I just ask just just go a bit one bit because I just conversation with some of them this week about about people talking around cyber stalking. I have a view that we shouldn't call it cyber stalking. Because in my view, all stalking involves a degree of cyber stalking now. And I think I was saying to them that my view was that when we talk about cyber stalking, it's almost as if we're separating it from stalking, we all kind of know. And it almost seems to suggest it's less than normal stalking. And so my view was, we should get rid of this term cyber stalking, and we should just call it stalking. What's your kind of views around cyber stalking, stalking the connection, that disconnect,

Unknown: 25:38

I would absolutely agree with that perspective, we actually just refer to the whole term as stalking, because 100% of our cases have some sort of cyber element or both an online and an offline element. And we need to be able to see it as again, as I said, in the context of all of those behaviours in the offline and the online world, they were motivated by very similar things. And we need to by differentiating it almost as if you get to separate responses, and we shouldn't be, we need to be understanding it within the same level of risk. We need to understand the perpetrator as you would in an offline setting. So I absolutely agree to that. It's it's a tool that is used to carry out the stalking, and that's how we would recognise it, it's still stalking, it's still underpinned by the same, by the same things. It's a part of all of those behaviours, mechanism that's, that's being utilised by the stalker, but it Yeah, it, it shouldn't be seen separate to even when we have seen cases that are purely on online, but that, as I said, most of our cases will have an element of both online and offline. You're absolutely right, the impact then isn't quite understood. The severity of that isn't quite understood. And far too often. Victims are coming through to our service or being told just Just close your account down. Just just don't look at that. Yeah, just look,

Philip Grindell: 27:03

I think one of the really interesting things that I've experienced with with, you know, with people that are being cyber stalked, if you want you want to use that term is that there is actually this element of greater fear, because they don't know who it is, when they leave when they walk out into the street, or what have you. They're looking around. And as they're scanning, you know, and we know that people are stoked, often become paranoid and hyper vigilant and or experience all those differently. Because they don't know who it is, they're looking around, and everyone is potentially that person. So that level of anxiety is anxiety. You know, it goes through the roof, because because they can't identify who this person is, are they watching? Are they? Is it the person that's given me on by coffee? Or who is it this person? So I think it's a really thing, can we can we talk touch on it? And I don't know what your views on it around these Apple tags? Because that's kind of misunderstood. You talk about that the media, but you know, what does that What's all that about?

Unknown: 27:56

We really try to work with companies to ensure that the safety by design built him. And for us that just was completely not pulled through. From a sort of a consumer perspective, when we take stalking out of the scenario, we can understand why something like that will be useful, you've lost your keys, you've lost your phone. But immediately, we started seeing cases coming through on the national stalking helpline where that was being abused where that device was so readily available, being thrown into the boot of someone's car to track them. And the person just isn't aware that that that's, that's happening. So we would really, really urge tech companies to build that safety by design feature in and to really consider the risks that some of these devices can present. I mean, yes, there's Apple ear tags, but there are other devices, listening devices, tracking devices, hacking devices that are all too easily available off of eBay off of Amazon, and we need to be taking FAR more responsibility to assizes taking full responsibility about how those are available advertised. I mean, there is a question even should they be who needs to be using those those devices? And there needs to be far more building for the protection of victims and things like that. Market?

Philip Grindell: 29:26

Yeah. So let's get just get back to women and violence get girls? I mean, it's a hot topic. Is it? Is it a hot topic because it's getting worse? Is it a hot topic because we're hearing more about more about it and and because of you know, Suzy Lamplugh trust and others. There are platforms where women can go and talk about it and engage and report it. You know, what is is it getting worse or is it just more talked about more open now? What what is the statistical evidence around that?

Unknown: 29:59

Yeah, Unfortunately, the statistical evidence is inconsistent, because as you'll be aware, from your, your background, the criminal justice recording systems change, and they're not consistent and they don't talk to each other. So Ministry of Justice Statistics don't align with CPS recording systems, which don't align with police systems. So to build a picture of what's actually happening across the criminal justice system is really, really difficult. And that's problematic in itself, because we don't know where our issues are. We definitely know when we're looking at things like you know that the homicide rate femicide, right, they're not decreasing. So there is there is a serious question that we need to ask ourselves about. What are we doing, what our approach is to that over the over many decades, last decades. But I do think when we look at the overarching beggars, I'm particularly looking at stalking 1.5 million people are experiencing stalking, but the number of reports over it over 100,000, it's still quite small in comparison to the number of people we know are experiencing it. So I think there's still a lot more to be done in terms of awareness raising, I don't know if this the crime is increasing, but I still don't think we're adult that way, reaching all the people are potentially experiencing that crime typing, getting them into the system, getting the support that they need, helping them to identify what's potentially happening. And and that's the that's indicative of both of those figures. It's just it's it's so boxed in capacity, the number of people we know who will be experiencing it, the number of people are being supported.

Philip Grindell: 31:43

So when you say, we know that we've got, you know, this amount of people are experiencing it. How would you know that?

Unknown: 31:52

So those are the 5 million figure that comes from the Office of National Statistics, that's an estimate from them that that 1.5 million. And the most recent figures we've had, in terms of those that reported to the police was in the year ending. So just to December 2021, there was over 117,000 reports made to the police. So that is that is quite a significant increase in the year before. But that's still a drop in the ocean in comparison to that 1.5 million.

Philip Grindell: 32:25

And also, you know, I can tell you that I can almost guarantee or having been there and have actually dealt with one very recently that those ones presumably are ones that are classified as a stalking. Exactly. There'll be lots of others where a woman has gone into report stalking. Yes, but it's been probably classified as harassment or something else. This just comes Yeah. And so arguably, that figure is probably significantly higher. But for whatever reason, you know, through throughout crime classifications through police officers, not necessarily understanding it, whatever it is, they're not those figures are likely to be inaccurate.

Unknown: 33:06

They absolutely are. Yeah, and that's why it's so difficult to paint a clear picture. And you're absolutely right. in huge amounts, organ cases, we now are being classified as harassment. What I would say though, is even if you combined the harassment if we've done this, so we've combined sort of malicious content, harassment, stalking, it's still a drop in the ocean in comparison to the figures of those we know that we'll be experiencing that 1.5 million people who will be experiencing stalking in any given year, it's still really small. So again, it still tells us where you know, where are those people go? And why aren't they able to access the support that they need? And what's happening in the system that's not not allowing that to occur?

Philip Grindell: 33:50

So we, you know, as an example of where I think some of the system failures, are we, as we discussed previously, we have dealt with a case recently where Lorraine Sheridan who's who's arguably one of the kind of global experts on stalking, and obviously she's, she's a partner in diffuse. You know, we looked at an incident and wrote report that this was stalking. So there is no in our view, no, hiding away from the fact that this was stalking written by someone who's arguably an expert or in a PhD in the subject and everything. And yet when the perpetrator was arrested, he was cautioned for harassment. Is that something you've heard before is that typical or

Unknown: 34:37

it is all too common. It is all too common it's it's it's frightening the lack of understanding that frontline officers have, but I know we spoke about the scope of actually should it even be held with PCs or should it be going much much higher up the up the ranks held by specialists units because Some of the impact, you know that this crime type has. It's quite, I mean, we would strongly discourage cautions when it comes to stalking, this should not be happening because it draws a line under the under that under the under the pattern of behaviours, it makes it really difficult when that continues to be able to see that for the full context of what's occurring precautions already been issued. Nothing like information notices should be given strong words of discouragement, nothing like that should be given it should be because this is about fixation obsession. As soon as you start doing that you're telling the perpetrator you can act with impunity, needs to be a hard line, we need to go in with the stroking legislation, and we need to be going in putting robust boundaries around perpetrators, but all too often, absolutely. We're not seeing stalking being recognised. Some reason it's felt that it's easier. It feels like it's easier for the police to prosecute harassment,

Philip Grindell: 36:00

but it's also CPS. I mean, it's not just the police that you know, the prosecutors Yeah, yeah, they should be looking at that and saying, No, this isn't harassment. This is a stalking so so arguably, even if you're going to say, well, we're going to take a caution because it's easier, cheaper and all the other things that go with it. Okay, stop coercing them for stalking, if that's what you have to do, but to have huge evidence of a stalking and then downgrade it to a harassment and they're not even charged. I'm actually just caution them for that seems to be wholly unacceptable. We're in all different races. And as an investigator, you know, when I'm when I'm then dealing with that individual again, and I'm doing my research on him, what comes up is he's been cautioned for harassment. Rather than actually there's evidence that this guy's a stalker, and we need to recognise that and his risk pattern.

Unknown: 36:48

Yeah. Yeah. I don't know if there's a we've heard of cases plea bargaining. So we know perpetrators would rather be possible sentence for harassment, then then that label of stalking, but also think there's the connotation spoke about it earlier. Stalking, Kundra conjures up still a very typical image and about man lurking in the bushes. And I don't think professionals quite understand when they're seeing stalking, that it is stalking. For National stalking Awareness Week, which we run every year, we did a piece of research in April just gone and looking at the role of advocates. And we found that the criminal justice response when an advocate is present, advocating as they do for victims and pushing for the right, access the right support the right outcomes, it is incredibly different to when a victim doesn't have an advocate. So in combat, so just as an example, when it comes to an advocate helping people to report to him five victims, who were supported by a stalking advocate, so that they help them to report to the police, and reporting drops to about one in 50, when you haven't got an Africa, one in three when they've got an advocate. So this talk is charged. And that's one in 435, when you haven't got an advocate, one in that one Enforcer. They're strong because prosecuted, and that's one in 556 when there's no advocate present, and one in four victims saw their stalkers convicted when they've got an advocate. And that compares with the national rate of one in 1000, when there isn't an advocate president.

Philip Grindell: 38:31

I mean, that's just shocking. Isn't it? Really? I mean, I was going to say earlier on, we talked about it a little bit at around, you know, why do we need the Suzy Lamplugh trust? Why do we need the other stalking charities? But I think those statistics make it pretty clear why we need all these organisations, because victims are being let down.

Unknown: 38:51

Yeah, yeah. You know, in an ideal world, we wouldn't exist. In an ideal world, that response, each one of those victims going through that criminal justice system would get the right response. But we simply, we simply aren't there. But what I would say is that we we work really closely with police forces across the UK, and a lot of those officers are calling out for that training are calling out for that help for that support. So I think there is a huge question about resourcing here as well and making sure that those officers do get that. And, you know, not just two hours of training, but robust training, because actually, if you don't get an intervention early on these cases end up lasting years and decades. It is in our interest to intervene early and quickly.

Philip Grindell: 39:34

And also by doing so, you know, if we look at it, and it's bluntest, it's cost effective. You know exactly. If police and public services are worrying about their budgets. As soon as they get involved and deal with it, the less money it's going to cost them to investigate and deal with all the issues around it.

Unknown: 39:52

If that case lasts for decades, yeah, the impact in the state the impact on the criminal justice health systems, the whole system is far, far greater, let alone the impact on the, on the on the on the victim and all the people surrounding the victim, many, many dozens of people are impacted around the victim as well. So absolutely getting that early intervention, close those behaviours around the stalker. And actually, it is only benefits across the whole system and for the victim.

Philip Grindell: 40:20

So moving on to this getting back to the strict harassment because I know we've we've touched on it. And I saw an article how true it is, I don't know. But there's an article in the paper about least trust who's who's vying to be the political conservative party leader, and therefore the prime minister talked about street harassment and how it's something she wants to really get her behind, you know, whether whether that's a political thing or otherwise, who knows what is strict harassment.

Unknown: 40:51

It can be quite a broad range of behaviours. We often talk about it in the context of public sexual harassment. So for example, somebody's walking down the streets, they are being wolf whistle, cat calls. Actually, there's physical contact, roping, touching, steering, following, occurring. And it often occurs in public space, so can occur on streets, but actually things like transport as well. More broadly, we can understand harassment, men might experience that as well, somebody becoming aggressive on the street. Again, the same sorts of following occurring. It's unwanted behaviour, it makes it has an impact, it means that people don't feel safe. It's, it can be incredibly intimidating. And, as I spoke about earlier, it's just far too rife. When we're looking at the statistics, 88 90% people, women experiencing those sorts of behaviours. And, actually, I'd say young girls, most of that behave that those sorts of experiences start when, when, when, when women are young girls, in their teens, and we just have to stop that system from occurring that just can't be what normal looks like in life.

Philip Grindell: 42:25

So are we are we saying then that, you know, a girl walks past or a woman or girl walks past a, a place and she gets walk? whistled? Are we saying that that the police should come and arrest that person for? Well, firstly,

Unknown: 42:39

that could be an example, that could be an example. We've also seen cases where, for example, persons on a train and somebody else's incessantly staring, or watching an ad, or sometimes might actually take out a phone and stop filming, or their lawyer will then follow them off, or they'll or they may come up. And it's very clear that the person makes it clear, they don't want the attention. And there'll be persistent in, in in in their comments, or making that person feeling uncomfortable, we would argue that there does need to be an offence for public sexual harassment, we do need to call that behaviour out. And by creating that fence, what we're saying is, we're not tolerating that behaviour, it wants to be accepted, it cannot, we've got to move away from that behaviour being normalised. We know that. Most people, though they experience and most women might experience that behaviour. Many of them want report of 86% out and poor because they don't feel that it's going to be taken seriously or that anything will come from it. And that's why we do need to be sending a really clear message from the criminal justice system, that it will be tolerated.

Philip Grindell: 43:55

And then we get in on ourselves. And I know this, you know, this, this always happens in the extremes. But we get cases where women in the public eye have come forward and said, Oh, no, I love it. When I'm walking on the street and I get a whistle at the end, I feel like I've you know, I've dressed night or whatever, you know, so that you and so what happens is the media jump onto that one individual and their own personal experience of this as opposed to the majority where they're saying we feel unhappy. And I know this because my wife said to me years ago, I remember her saying we were good, she was going to somewhere and we were talking about how you're gonna get there, you know, on the map, what have you. I'm not going down that street. Why not? Well, there's a building site there and I I just felt uncomfortable walking past that. And it never crossed my mind. So I think we need to be careful how the media again, you know, report this and trivialise if you like the experiences of young girls and women.

Unknown: 44:55

Absolutely. I mean, I I don't think there'd be a single woman who hasn't had to go through that process in their head when they're leaving? How am I going to get to a place safely? How am I going to get back again? And just even consciously sort of just running through that in their head? And that is an everyday, that's an everyday existence. And I think I think men don't often understand that, that it is as simple as my train might come in slightly later, how am I going to get back? And is that going to be a safe route and that constantly that that constantly weighing down? And that isn't, that isn't a world we should be living in.

Philip Grindell: 45:36

I talk about when I've done some sort of training for people, that women have a better risk assessment process naturally than men do. Because when you walk out of a venue, you're looking at risks is, you know, who's that person there? Is that taxi safe? You know, is it how do I get home? Whereas men don't I don't walk up apartment think, risk. But, you know, I'm not saying that's your kind of immediate experience. But for many women, that is high on their agenda when they are out and about enjoying themselves.

Unknown: 46:08

Yes, I mean, it's the it is the, it is the privileged position that maybe you find themselves in that they don't have to ask themselves that question.

Philip Grindell: 46:18

And interesting. Sookie is it's unconscious. We don't know, don't do it, because it's natural for us just what we do.

Unknown: 46:25

Exactly, exactly. And, yes, women do that. And they can do that. But they shouldn't have to do that. That isn't what we should be doing. That is the natural state that we should be in every time you you're going out in the evening. And I think we are it's a natural state, and we just go into it. Subconsciously, and that isn't the environment we should be living in. And I think I think I think more men need to understand that.

Philip Grindell: 46:54

That is that's the that's the challenge, isn't it? Because for us, it's an unconscious thing. We don't we don't know what we don't know. And not everyone's had the conversation that you and I have had and an iPad with other people. So they don't, which is the what the beauty of this podcast, hopefully is that, you know, men will begin to be aware, even if they don't necessarily accept it initially, that they're actually women's experiences different amounts experience in terms of how you go about just daily business.

Unknown: 47:21

salutely. Absolutely. And we saw it. After the tragic case of Syria variety, the outpouring that we saw across the press, from millions of women and men asking the question, What can I do? And I think that's great. We need more men to be asking that question of what can you do? Because as I said before, this is everybody's responsibility. And as as I mentioned, we've got the bystander training that partly came up from that call, because members of the public men, were asking what can we do to change this narrative? And I think we need to continue to keep that pressure on, and continue to ask ourselves that question.

Philip Grindell: 47:58

So that's finished on it on a, I suppose a mildly positive note, but I'm hoping we can make it positive. Obviously, the ladies have just won the euro. football championships. Fantastic. So so the lionesses, and I know there's a big discussion around whether we should call lionesses or not. But you know, that's what they're called. And I think that's okay. So they've won football. And this is, you know, huge pouring out from the from the girls who are in the team saying, this is more than just a football match. We won. This is about being able to impact society. What do you think? How do we how do we take this when to really make an impact on society?

Unknown: 48:43

We have to make sure that we don't let the narrative die away. It can't just be a moment true celebration. And actually, what's been really lovely in the press and in the media, is the number of people talking about actually the legacy just not just not just the women who want to date but the women who laid the groundwork. And I think not just not just talking about football, but just generally when we look at the phenomenal women who have come before who have laid the groundwork in all sorts of sectors and areas and in life. And we have to continue to shout about that. And we need to continue to make sure that space is carved down, we've got to make sure it's not just a moment, we need to continue to drive that and recognise that and, and give space to that. And I think that again, is everybody's responsibility is recognising those achievements. And and what's really lovely is being thirsty for more and we've heard that in that narrative, actually, what next and making sure that we're ambitious, in that and we don't we don't settle I mean, we've spoken a lot about the challenges, for example, in the criminal justice system, but you Huge amount of huge amount of work being done across the sector, across many, many charities who are challenging that. And we know when those processes when those systems have been challenged, we do see positive outcomes. And we need to make sure we continue to do that, and we need to make sure that as I said, that is everybody's responsibility so we can continue to see some of those positive outcomes.

Philip Grindell: 50:25

So Okay, final thing that Danielle said just last thing, this is final thing, what are your five top tips them for? Personal safety?

Unknown: 50:39

Oh, that's a difficult one. Because it depends on what what you're

Philip Grindell: 50:46

talking about. There's talking about women and girls in terms of, you know, young women or women and girls or going out to dinner for an evening, whatever with friends, what would your top tips be?

Unknown: 50:58

I mean, the first thing I would say is, trust your instinct, it's really, really important to trust your instinct, if you don't feel safe. If you you're experiencing unwanted behaviours. Go to a trusted friend, or go, there's lots of different campaigns running like Afghani, you can go to staff in the venue, you can go to staff and the platform and report it, that would be the second thing I would say, if you really cannot really encourage you to report it, report it to the staff, report it to specialist services like ours, if you think you're experiencing harassment, or stalking, seek help. It it's, we shouldn't be accepting these behaviours, a lot of these behaviours are criminal behaviours, and we need to be calling them out, if you can, I'd also encourage you to report to the police. And there are like our services, numbers of specialist services that can help you through that process. And, and help you to navigate those systems.

Philip Grindell: 52:00

That's true. That's true, you got two more?

Unknown: 52:06

Well, we didn't really touch on, we do a lot of work in terms of loan working as well. And, and personal safety in the workplace. I mean, a lot of this is about employers responsibilities as well. But it's always great to have things like a buddy in any in any area of life. So you can touch them with them and say I'm, I'm here, and they can check in with you. And we do that a lot in the lot in the workplace. And we've got a huge amount of campaigning that's happening around taxis and private hire vehicles as well. We're calling for minimum standards and licencing. Because at the moment, it's all too easy for somebody who's been convicted of serious crimes to go into one licencing authority and get a licence and, and, and not have it granted in another area. So again, if you're if you're out late at night, remembering things like taxis, you can be held private how they're called, can't be they need to be pre booked, things like that. Because we see a lot of again, curve holding things like that happening. So having a you know a number on you, where you can pre booked that taxi and making sure that you can see the licences on that page.

Philip Grindell: 53:20

I would say one thing as a tip for anybody really. But we know that statistically, if if you as a woman, a proach a man and ask for their help, you're almost almost always likely to be safe. Because Because predators will make themselves known if you like. So the example that was used was, if somebody asks you, can I help you? Can I help you with your bags? You should probably say no. Because why are they asking you? And then there's evidence around how they, how they kind of team these events in terms of set them up? If you actually go and say to somebody, could you help me with my bags, the chances of you picking out somebody who's a predator are so remote, that actually, you know, that's the better, better way to do it. So, arguably, if you are feeling uncomfortable, if you are unhappy if you are worried, you know, then you know if you were to approach somebody and say I'm scared or I'm you know, I'm Can you just stand by me for a moment? Can you wait for me to the taxi comes or something? Statistically, they are saying that you're more you know, you're very likely to be picking someone who's going to be safely because a lot of men feel very uncomfortable about men like me, where for instance, I wouldn't come up to them and say, Can I help you? Because I know how uncomfortable it can make you feel? No, but actually, if you came up to me and said, Excuse me, could you just stand here for a moment while I'm waiting for the taxi? Then I put down I would absolutely do that. So I think this instinct thing and there's loads and loads of research around trusting your instincts. And I know and I know that copying of the one of the books written on it. Whenever I investigated people who women who'd been raped or seriously assaulted, they would always say, there was just something about him. And what happens very often is you shut your instinct down because you don't want to be rude or offend anyone, you know, when you're getting hassled in a bar and you're, you know, you're, you've said, No, and they keep coming back. And you know, listen, I said, No, if you're not going to accept my No, when I, when I say no to a drink, you're sure so I'm not going to sit because that my no later on when I say no to a sexual advance. So, you know, I think the instinct thing is, we don't understand and we don't recognise how, how and why our instincts are there and how powerful they are. And I think whenever we talk to people who have who have been in situations, they nearly always say there was just something about that person. And we did, and they shut their instinct downs. So your first point about listening to your instincts is so important.

Unknown: 55:58

Absolutely. And actually, most people who call our frontline services will often say, I don't know if this is something I don't know what it is, because I haven't potentially identified it's talking but it doesn't feel right. It doesn't the instinct and just go back to your point in public spaces actually fell, I would say that's really interesting research. But the instinct actually goes the other way, in that when when someone's experiencing harassment, and somebody else might come up in the instinct, you know, whether or not somebody you potentially want to be standing next to, or someone who. So again, just going back to that bystander approach, just and there's ways to do it, we, you know, you're not intimidating, or you're not stifling someone or, or, or, or making them feel trapped in. But they may, they will instinctively know as well, whether or not that's the person that

Philip Grindell: 56:49

I kind of met more about a random person just coming up to you and asking you to help you, you know, that sometimes that's a bit. And, you know, even even if I'm walking behind some day, all night, I cross the road often because I just know, I don't want to be walking, if I'm walking at a faster pace. I don't want to be walking, rapidly approaching them because they're going to feel intimidated or scared, etc. So I often across the road.

Unknown: 57:10

Yep. Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. Because that is something that women will be being attuned to somebody is walking really quickly up behind them. And they can't see the visibility is not clear. Absolutely. So there are small things like that,

Philip Grindell: 57:24

I'm going to end there, because we otherwise I could end up talking to you all day about two things. One, it's, it's, it is fascinating to, it's so important, you know, and I've got, you know, obviously I'm married, I've got sisters, I've got nice nieces. And so you know, when you when you understand the issues, and then you understand the importance of those issues. Because if you're thinking about wolf whistling a girl who's who's walking down the street, you know, think to yourself about how that would make your sister or your daughter or somebody feel before you do it. If you're going to do that sort of behaviour, think about how that would feel if somebody you loved had that behaviour done to them. You know, if you're going to start commenting on a woman online about what she looks like, or what have you, think about how somebody you love might feel about that. Because too often people just do these things, and don't personalise it in terms of where they get very upset if someone did it to their daughter, but they're quite happy to do it, somebody else's. So I think it's such an important subject and one that we really need to keep talking about, I think the women and girls piece, you know, I think that it 97 Out 90 or 1000 people and several other million are watching the girls win the football and supporting them and everything else, but we can't let it in there, we've got to keep this going keep this conversation going, men have got to be part of the conversation as you said, because because we need to understand it and we need to we need to also, you know, be able to stand up to it and and kind of call it out when we need to. But it's been an absolute pleasure talking with you Sookie from the Suzy Lamplugh trust, what we'll do is we'll make sure that all of the relevant links are on the podcast so that everyone can see them. And if you are somebody that's listening to this, and any of the issues that we've talked about are of concern to you or anyone else, then you know, don't don't stay silent, call out contact the Suzy Lamplugh trust or any other the organisations that are out there or the police that you know even if you're just unsure even if it's something as Sukiya said, it just doesn't feel quite right. Don't suffer in silence. Reach out, talk to somebody, share your concerns, and stay safe.

Unknown: 59:37

Thank you very much.

Philip Grindell: 59:42

And we go we're off. We're off. We've recorded it. Thank you so much that as such it's so important isn't it be so important I'm gonna just I could go on forever about it because there's so many things I'm I remember chatting to you about, about the simple thing about why women wear trainers where they go to work. or going out. And I say I thought was more comfortable. And you said to possibly but also it's because I can run. And it never crossed my mind. You know, and I think so much of this for men, you know, who are supporters, arguably, it's so much of it, we just don't know, we don't understand it's unconscious, you just until you get immersed in it, you don't, you don't understand it from from a woman's perspective around your mom, my wife missed the last train a couple couple of nights ago up in London, with her niece bizarrely, and who's just got a job working for Sarah champ champion, which is good. But she missed last train, she phoned me up and I said, you know, get a taxi outside Waterloo now black cab, whatever is going to cost and get yourself out. Good. So it literally 20 minutes later, she was obviously scared, she was crying. She was someone No, there's not crap advice from British Transport. And I said, right, you know, go and stand somewhere really public, and I'm gonna get in the car and drive to it's gonna take me 40 minutes. But you've got to stand in somewhere bright in a light. Don't don't talk to anyone don't engage in anyone. And I will be there. And if you see another woman walking past grab hold of her and say, you know, can you stand with me for five minutes or something? But you know, I? Even then it was like, it took me a minute to understand the fear. Yeah. And then she said, I just got in the car. And I said run away. She said, Don't worry, I've gotten a cab. I said, well tell me who the cab driver is Tell me his name. And the registration number of his cab, which he did, he called out. And he was brilliant. But but you know, she missed her last train. And if you're living in if you don't live in London, you got to travel home with all the train strikes, everything else that's going on. This this element where women are vulnerable, is often overlooked.

Unknown: 1:01:44

Yeah, because the thing is, so it's the reality of our experience, because it's happened before. So I was 13, maybe even younger 12 When I was first followed home in my school uniform. And some guy was like, Fleming, I thought was gonna grab me. And what I remember is I was trying to cross the road, but it was a really busy road. And I thought I'd just run out into the road because he was kind of backwards gaining on me, there was two men who must have been in their early 20s, but much older than me at the time, who saw it who watched who looked concern and didn't intervene.

Philip Grindell: 1:02:15

And I think that bystander training they're doing, I'm gonna have a look at it. Because it's so important. Because I know, as a man, often I kind of think, well, what do I do here? You know, do I see a woman she's looking nervous, I don't approach her because she'll think I'm some weirdo. But you can see a person vulnerable, either because they're drunk. And therefore they're vulnerable. Or because they look lost, or, you know, whatever it is, and it's so difficult, because you don't want to alarm them, you don't want to appear to be this creepy guy. But it's blatantly obvious that they're vulnerable. And I know lots of men will be in the same position where they'll be thinking, What do I do? Do I just walk on? Do I just do I just ignore it or leave it? What do I do? And, you know, I think, I think it's, it's always about the silent majority of men who need to stand up and you know, say to their mates, that's not only leave it and I think, you know, if, you know, if a building site is Wolf whistling, that building site should be publicised. And we all know that all the all the all the scaffolding companies label all their scaffolding, and they're very good at promoting your work, I put on the internet, this, this building site with this company have been harassing a wolf with me. And because I think you know, name and shame, it affects the commercial bottom line, only then do they start getting involved? We know now that reputations are everything, if I'm going to be a big contract, and I'm looking at the contractors, and I'm researching it, and I say well hang on a minute, that company, there's at about 50 complaints around whistling and everything else to girls, we're not having them doing it. You know, so that's, so that's when it's going to start impacting them is when it hits their bottom line. But

Unknown: 1:03:56

sadly, yeah, we didn't touch on mandating associations. We could have

Philip Grindell: 1:03:59

gone on forever company really, I mean, I could have we could have got a whole list of things here. We didn't touch any with them. But but but hopefully we you know, we can do it again another day and talked about some of the other things you're you know, in terms of other programmes you're doing on my head because I think the more we talk about it, and the more we get the messages out. Now I'm I'm, I'm I'm negotiating the moment with two big law firms. Bar DAG, see, Bobby have been probably aware of their most expensive divorce company in probably the world. And Ferrer's who are who are less expensive, but just as good. And we are both when I'm talking to two separate high, high, you know, high powered female lawyers, they're about doing a kind of safety evening for their female clients because I've got lots of high profile or high net worth, whatever you female clients. Yeah, and good to get you along as well. So if you're, if you're if you're free, because it's going to be Yeah, it's going to be hopefully what's going to be as a bit of a talk about all the various issues what we can do how we can stay safe, but a net working, you know, cheese and nibbles wherever you and off we go. But it'd be good to do that because it'd be good to get a bit more exposure for you. And also a bit we're not the you need probably need less an idea but but but I think it'll be good to have your expertise there. Because I, you know, I've got my bit but it may not be in my mind, it may not be yours, but

Unknown: 1:05:21

I'll be fantastic.

Philip Grindell: 1:05:23

Because, you know, these kind of is some of these are kind of high powered women that, hey, I've got budgets and be I've got influence. Yeah, and we're, you know, the more we talk about it, the better I think,

Unknown: 1:05:34

yeah, no, absolutely. I didn't mean what I said that we need to we need to keep hammering the point home, it's not enough that we've just won just be a moment celebration, got to keep going with it. Well, there's

Philip Grindell: 1:05:47

already talk about, you know, when the when the men when they get to go to Downing Street, they get to go to Buckingham Palace against all these various thing. The women had a parade, you know, a thing in Trafalgar Square, the men wouldn't have got that, but a bus round the current round, you know, bus route through through London, all this sort of stuff. So, so, but I think I just think, you know, I haven't got kids, but if I had a daughter, you know, I said to my wife, you know, when I when I look at it, and I think I can my wife, what she's that bloody love Island, and I can't bear it. I said, I said, I hate the whole concept of this, this, this fakeness and everything else. And so when you look at the girls on the football, they're all They're all hard working. They're all talented. They're all natural. You know, there's no kind of giraffe eyelashes or anything else of that nature on show. That's who I'd want my daughters to look up to not some bimbo on Lamar, and he's done bugger all but wants to be famous. And I really hope that might change that narrative around this kind of pre packaged. Yeah, horrible look to there's a bunch of girls. Yeah. Which is great. And then, you know, and then you know, in some ways, some Australian, some are gay, some are single, some, you know, who cares? They're actually bloody good at what they do. And so it's gonna be interesting what happens, and I hope it isn't just forgotten. And I hope that Liz trot isn't just sprouting something that she thinks is a populist statement, rather than actually is I mean, she's, you know, a fairly competent, she's gonna get in. So be good to see if she does get in if that's, you know, if she does actually move the wheel on, on violence against women and girls and street harassment, but I know how it will be better, you know, the whole first thing in the street, you know, and all that sort of stuff. But

Unknown: 1:07:29

I hope it does. I know, Boris Johnson was seemed to have a specific issue again. So it all makes sense. Now, after the

Philip Grindell: 1:07:36

I mean, I dealt, I dealt with him once with a brother, but a death threat against him. And I won't tell the full story. But the first thing, the first, the beginning, and the end of the conversation were wholly inappropriate, and completely inappropriate. And then the beginning, the middle bit where we actually talked about the threat was genius, you know, and that was the that was, you know, he was the only one that actually got it. The only one that asked me the proper questions around provenance of intelligence and all that. But at the same time, if you've filmed it, the first bit, and the last bit you've had to edit out, so that, you know, so, you know, so. So this kind of sums him up really?

Unknown: 1:08:14

Yeah, brilliant. I'll fill up back at the meeting in a few minutes. But thank you so much for having

Philip Grindell: 1:08:20

me. And I will let you know when it's out. Yeah, that's how

Unknown: 1:08:23

it sounds and make sure we're putting things around social media. And if there's anything that you need from me, in the run up, if there's something that was unclear, just let me know. And I'll make sure we can sort it out. And then if you're ever in London, yeah, let's get a coffee. Yeah. Okay. Catch up? Definitely.

Philip Grindell: 1:08:37

Definitely. I'll book an appointment, because I know you're busy.

Unknown: 1:08:41

Now, but it sounds like things are going great for you as far as it sounds like it's super busy.

Philip Grindell: 1:08:45

Yeah. I mean, we're just kind of expanding into the Middle East, which wasn't something we planned, but we're kind of doing quite a bit over there. So. So I've dealt with quite a lot of stalking jobs. Interestingly, a lot of I mean, I've dealt with one recently a female billionaire in America Who's mad as a boxer frogs. And her suggestion was, why don't I give him 250,000 pounds or dollars to let him go and study because I know he wants to be a lawyer that might stop him. And I was like, No, we're not going to reward him for doing this kind of stuff. But yeah, so it's been really good fun. And we do a lot of stalking we've we've had some real bus stop sort of police there. But the metro ticket met the Met are the worst out of all of them.

Unknown: 1:09:21

I can imagine just because we do as well. So I imagine it's very similar stuff that you're having to

Philip Grindell: 1:09:26

Yeah. Okay. Well, I'll catch up you soon. Yes. Thank you so much.