It's true, there really are male brains and lady brains

[SwirlyGates]

Rapist taxi driver keeps licence. (Mind you, he's in jail, I don't know how he's going to drive anyone anywhere.)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78yj51m07eo

This is Scotland. Colour me shocked.

We really need to start testing any one who runs for public office. Minimum IQ for starters.

EDIT Highland licensing committee voted in private last week
This needs to be stopped as well. There was no need for it to be private.

Whats wrong with those 6 men? Why do they think a convicted rapist is a suitable person to keep this licence?! Wow. Just wow. Why bother having the licence at all?! 🤮

This has shocked me. Not that these six individuals see nothing wrong with approving a rapist to go on accessing lone women to rape. But that they've done it publicly. So glad their names and faces are out there. That poster really says it all.

This must be a wind up? Please?

FFS.

It's not all men - but it's always the men. Always. 🤬

WTF?!?!

Quelle surprise.

news.stv.tv/politics/we-know-where-you-live-female-councillors-subjected-to-threats-and-intimidation

Before anyone has a heart attack, the decision is apparently getting reviewed. https://www.phtm.co.uk/news/8998/phtm-news/highland-council-scrambles-to-overturn-decision-letting-jailed-rapist-keep-operators-licence

But it was made in the first place, and voted for as in the original picture. As we often say on here, WTF is wrong with men?

Edited to add, from the second article, "The council has refused to explain the reasoning behind the original vote".

the backlash has thrown the local authority into chaos. The matter will now be reconsidered by all councillors, mandatory legal training is being rolled out across the local authority, and some of the politicians who originally voted to let Brown keep the licence are now facing potential votes of no confidence.

I don’t think it’s legal training that’s lacking here. Is there a course which can remediate shit-for-brains?

FFFFS.

I saw an explanation re this story from Jonathan Brown (@ BroonJunior), who I think is a journalist.

They declined to revoke the operator/rapist's lic immediately which would have immediately shut down the business (other people work there). So the local authority is creating a short window to allow transfer of the licence to enable those other workers to keep their jobs. If there's no transfer it will be revoked in a few weeks
(summary of what he said, not verbatim)

Thanks for that info, I can see that if he’s in prison they might have thought it was ok. It was clear how it was going to come across though.

The worst part is that these are the same men who would be like 'it's not all men, I'd never assault a woman', without realising that rapists only get away with what they're doing because men like them sit back and allow it, more focused on proving they're not the bad guys than actually being good men.

Thanks for this explanation. If correct this goes some way to mitigating the decision, but if the process had been open, or even if the council had explained their reasoning, there would have been no misunderstanding of the case in the first place. It's the secrecy and the failure to explain themselves to the people who vote for them that is the underlying issue here.

It makes sense for his operator's licence to be left in place pending transfer to another person. He's lost his (taxi) driver's licence and is in gaol, so he can do no harm, and it would be unjust for other employees of the firm covered by the licence to lose their livelihoods because of what he's done.

That doesn't explain why the situation was not more completely communicated to the female councillors, Police Scotland, and the press and general public.

Or, is it me who's completely misunderstood?

So is this a storm in a tea cup?

From the BBC article:

"Brown was the holder of two taxi operator's licences, according to papers for Highland Licensing Committee on 23 June, external."

"Brown's taxi driver's licence, which had permitted him to drive a taxi, was suspended by Highland licensing committee in January 2024.
But his operator's licence was not suspended at that time."

His taxi driver's licence has been suspended, but not his operator's licence. That would tie in with what @RoastOrMash quoted from Jonathan Brown.

I suppose the council is restricted on what they can say because the committee proceeding are private and they can't just publish details of one case because there's media attention.

Ok, that makes more sense but very, very badly communicated.

Thanks @RoastOrMash, I hadn't heard that, and it would explain the decision.

Still, it doesn't explain why: a) 6 men voted for it and 4 women against it; b) they don't seem to have thought about the optics until they were splashed all over the news; and c) why the voting was private and after the story had blown up they still refused to explain their reasoning.

NB I know nothing about council voting and when/why they have private votes. Plus, what about it is private? Just the discussion, given that we know how the individual councillors voted?

I assume that the journalist has worked it out for himself, rather than being told by the council?

If his taxi drivers licence was suspended in Jan 2024, there has been plenty of time for the operators licence to be transferred in the meantime though. Why didn't the business get this sorted sooner? This smacks of a company that hoped/believed he was going to be found not guilty and be returning to work. I'd absolutely never as woman order a taxi from them now.

If this is true why was the vote not unanimous?
it was notable that all women voted against

oops x post with op

According to the Press & Journal, it was his wife who asked for his operator's licence not to be revoked:

https://archive.ph/arOn2

Which should have been rejected by the male councillors, along with the female councillors.

Why should the decision be a matter for the licensing council and not the police?

He obviously needs to be banned from taxi driving.

YY, excellent point.