JK Rowling says she is going to FUND any girl’s case in the event that they come to a decision to sue the police over being strip-searched by way of a male officer

JK Rowling has vowed to fund any ladies who make a choice to sue the police over being strip-searched by way of a transgender officer.

It comes after police chiefs sparked outrage after refusing to in an instant ban trans officials from strip-searching ladies in spite of the United Kingdom’s best possible courtroom ruling that intercourse is organic.

In a transfer branded a ‘shocking loss of urgency,’ forces around the nation have mentioned they ‘is not going to rush’ to modify their insurance policies, even after the Supreme Court‘s bombshell April 17 judgment clarified that prison intercourse is according to biology, no longer gender id.

Chief Constable Rachel Swann, who leads on range for the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), advised officials the day after the ruling: ‘We welcome the readability that the verdict on the Supreme Court has equipped and can be reviewing our insurance policies and procedures in keeping with the result. 

‘However, we can no longer rush our reaction to this landmark ruling. We will want time to believe the total implications of the courtroom’s choice, as will many different public our bodies.’

An NPCC spokesperson added on Saturday: ‘Forces will have to make choices [about strip-searches by trans officers] on a case-by-case foundation.’

In reaction the creator, 59, took to X to inform her 14million fans: ‘So the police are dragging their heels on preventing men strip-searching ladies, which, because the Supreme Court ruling showed, was once unlawful all alongside. I’m positive they hope no girl comes to a decision to sue.

‘Of direction, I’ll fund her if she does.’

In a transfer branded a ‘shocking loss of urgency,’ forces around the nation have mentioned they ‘is not going to rush’ to modify their insurance policies (dossier picture)

That signifies that, in follow, trans officials might nonetheless be allowed to hold out strip or intimate searches on detainees who don’t proportion their organic intercourse.

Sussex, Merseyside, Northumbria and Surrey Police all showed to The Telegraph that transgender officials are nonetheless authorised to hold out searches on detainees who proportion their gender id – even supposing they’re biologically male and the detainee is feminine.

Similarly, transgender folks in custody could also be searched by way of officials who fit their gender presentation, no longer essentially their organic intercourse.

The forces insisted those insurance policies are these days ‘beneath overview.’ But there may be nonetheless no nationwide steering – 15 months after the NPCC withdrew its earlier coverage, which had counseled gender self-ID for searches.

Internal NPCC communications acquired by way of The Telegraph disclose that on April 17, Chief Constable Swann thanked senior officials for his or her ‘endurance’ and insisted there could be no rapid alternate.

Female officials livid: ‘It’s like we simply do not topic’

Rank-and-file officials – particularly ladies – are mentioned to be fuming on the management’s reaction.

One Northumbria officer mentioned: ‘The messaging we are getting as officials finds a surprising loss of urgency. There’s no rush to check coverage.’ 

She described the NPCC’s stance as: ‘Keep calm and elevate on – we hate this ruling and are taking a look at choices to bypass it.’

A feminine officer mentioned the loss of acknowledgement for ladies’s considerations made her really feel like she ‘simply does not topic in any respect.’

She added: ‘There is not any contrition. No reputation of the hurt finished to ladies’s rights and the homophobia demonstrated by way of the include of gender ideology and the conflation of intercourse and gender.’

Similarly, transgender folks in custody could also be searched by way of officials who fit their gender presentation, no longer essentially their organic intercourse (dossier picture)

A joint commentary issued by means of Surrey and Sussex Police’s intranet, dated April 17, mentioned: ‘We don’t seem to be pronouncing any adjustments to our practices and insurance policies till the total ruling is launched and assessed.’

Officers in Sussex have been advised the ‘complexities of this ruling are some distance more than has been publicly said.’

Both forces permit strip-searches to be performed by way of officials of the similar gender id – or organic intercourse – relying on whether or not the individual has a Gender Recognition Certificate.

Merseyside Police, which offered a gender identity-based strip-search coverage in April 2024, defended the verdict. 

In a commentary to workforce, the power mentioned: ‘We police with out worry or favour, malice or ill-will to verify the security and safety of all contributors of our neighborhood and can proceed to take action.’

But gender-critical officials have interpreted the connection with ‘malice’ as a veiled swipe at their ideals.

The controversy erupted after the NPCC quietly dropped its nationwide steering on strip-searching in January, following a prison backlash from campaigners who argued it violated the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE).

Under PACE, officials ‘won’t’ strip or in detail seek ‘an individual of the other intercourse.’

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, and prison readability at the definition of intercourse, the police seem to be stalling.

Chief Constable Swann mentioned: ‘It is vital for us to behave at the Supreme Court’s ruling as briefly as we will, as each our colleagues and the communities we serve are on the lookout for readability on some very difficult problems. But it’ll inevitably take time to believe the total implications of the ruling.’