Never away from her chosen profession of self-promotion for very long, pro-am motormouth Katie Hopkins has continued her (hopefully brief) career with Canadian outfit Rebel Media by imposing herself on the unfortunate residents of Bradford. Here, she no doubt believes she will find more evidence of wrongdoing by all those Scary Muslims™. But she had instead landed herself in potentially very hot water.
Viewers may still want to look away now
Hatey Katie has published a video in which she talks to, or perhaps that should be ultimately talks at, a group of girls somewhere in Bradford. From this, she has deduced that the girls are “strong”, telling her faithful followers “Life advice from The Strong Girls of #Bradford. Brilliant young women! ‘Keep your circle small’”.
However, and here we encounter a significantly sized however, as Zelo Street readers will see, the screen shot of Ms Hopkins’ Tweet has not included the video she released. And there is a good reason for this, as Thomas Atcheson pointed out. “Did you have their parents’ permission or do you not know the law? I doubt they know who you are and the purpose of your filming”. Was she doing this as a self-employed worker?
Because if she was, there are issues concerning working with children. As Working With Kids has told, “DBS Checks are carried out - and must be carried out - for anyone who wishes to work with children, the elderly or individuals who might otherwise be classed as vulnerable … The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), is able to provide information about an individual as to whether or not he or she has a criminal conviction or has been charged with a criminal conviction which has expired”.
Did Ms Hopkins have a DBS check? One Tweeter was not so sure, despite the ritual abuse from the Hopkins faithful. “Well if working with children I’d expect her to have had a dbs. Are we confident she has?” And why she should have had a DBS check was straightforward: “You require a DBS check if working with children and I understand social media is part of her self employment role rather than a hobby”. Quite.
And that same Tweeter had more advice for those who thought Ms Hopkins had done nothing wrong. “Maybe you think strangers approaching children is natural but child protection laws are real”. Plus Hatey Katie might not have passed such a check with anything like flying colours if her own recent pronouncements were taken into account.
She was, after all, the person who told her followers “Not all girls are innocent at 14. I was pleasuring my boyfriend harder than a Russian gymnast working a pole (Capital P optional)”, and was reported to have “faced a particularly vocal backlash on Twitter after she described the 15-year-old victim in the Adam Johnson grooming trial as a ‘slag’”.
Is that the kind of person parents want to see interacting with their children? Once again, it will be passed off as “it’s only free speech”, but child protection laws are there for good reason. And it’s looking like Ms Hopkins is on the wrong side of them.
Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by adding to its Just Giving page at