Judicial review for woman prisoner alleging sexual assault by trans rapist in prison

Thank you Nic. So frustrating. I can't imagine what it's like actually being there.

Will get digging, furiously, to let off some steam.

Hope this review gets the right response. Even mermaids admit there's no way these male prisoners were "born in the wrong body" so now that myth is well and truly busted, what possible rationale could there be for them being in a women's prison?! Just the government just hate women so much it's decided to sponsor males to rape us? I wish I was kidding.

What possible advice could their be that can't be disclosed?

Thank you Nicola for the update & all the work you are doing.

On twitter I saw a suggestion that other female prisoners might come forward. I think the claimant's barrister said it. Do you know what that was about? Could it end up with more claimants joining the case?

Can't thank you enough for all you're doing to fight for women Nicola. I hope that this isn't too dispiriting for all involved, especially the women at the centre if this.

@RedDogsBeg

Now I wonder why the usual suspects are not contributing to this thread.

😂

Thanks Nicola. This must be beyond frustrating for you

Thank you Nic

Hi Nicola Williams, Fair Play For Women here. I'm at couart - here's what's happened.

Late submission by the defendant (sec of state for justice) and only seen by the claimants legal team 40 mins before the hearing started. It contains legal advice that the SoS was given before he approved the new trans policies. Some is redacted so they can’t disclose it to the court without getting permission as it is legally privileged. Defence barrister says the new submission could be relevant to the case and so will need to seek instructions from SoS about whether privilege can be waived and redacted information shown to court and defendants legal team. The judge was very reluctant to adjourn but there was no other option. The judge made an order for any necessary disclosure to happen by 6th December.

So in effect, the MOJ has messed up and means the JR will be delayed to at least until the new year. In the meantime the press are asking for court bundles and skeleton arguments to be made available. That decision will be made later.

Reddogsbed I don't know for sure. If the defecce say the advice was incorrect they will be arguing that somehow it led them to a lawful policy, because they haven't reversed the policy and are defending it in court so must be claiming it's lawful.

And if anyone in government bothered to check whether the advice was actually correct and compatible with current law so they didn't get caught with their pants down, looking like a bunch of unprofessional nitwits.

Rather like no one in the equalities (hollow laugh) committee office seems to have bothered to proof read the inquiry release.

They don't like the accountablity, the fact that the Public paying for them see how incompetent they are, no wonder there are moves afoot to stop/limit JRs.

The public have a right to know who the Government are paying for advice and what that advice is.

Does anyone know if the claimant is still in prison? This will cause her stress regardless but I would argue that delaying this even further would contribute further to that. Poor woman.

I believe that the govt/defence were saying it's correct but they can't/won't share it? Which is risible.

This is why the govt hate judicial reviews.

Accountability. They'd much prefer there wasn't any.

How long is the adjournment likely to be? I have no knowledge of these things. A day? A week? Four months?

Manderleyagain I thought the Defence were arguing that the legal advice on which the policy was based was incorrect, but they can't show that advice due to privilege?

the redacted parts are relevant but I can't tell you what they are

How the fuck is this supposed to work? Laws can't be built on 'because I say so', and especially not when that comes with 'and I wont' tell you why or who told me to say that'.

Hoping that it's not too long to get this sorted - unfair to drag it out like this.

I find the statement from the Defence Barrister to the Claimant's Barrister that the redacted parts are relevant but I can't tell you what they are utterly chilling.

This is our Government, our taxes, we have a right to know on what basis they decided the female population in prison were expendable.

They are going to wriggle like crazy to stop the Press viewing the Court Bundles, they know they will be slaughtered. As I said earlier their best bet is to admit they were wrong and undertake formally to immediately right the wrong.

Reddogsbed no the argument from the government is that the policy is lawful. That's why they are defending it.

Mischance thanks for your insight. Your poor relative & the people who love and worry about them.

Unless you have some experience of the prison system, it is entirely impossible to imagine the total absence of control within in our prisons. And this means they do not, and cannot, protect vulnerable people. Given that a large proportion of the prisoners (of either sex) are vulnerable through deprived upbringings, lack of literacy, and mental health problems, this means that the population within the prisons is open to abuse day in and day out.

The prisons are run by the drug barons - really, I promise you this is true. I have a very dear, but mentally and physically damaged, adopted relative in a prison where the authorities openly admit that they cannot protect that person from being sold drugs and being beaten up if payment is not forthcoming. Their attitude is that this person should request a move to another wing ("Like everyone else does") - the idea of protecting that person in the first place seems to have escaped their twisted logic.

No prisoners are safe; and there is no way that a transgender rapist in a women's prison will be sufficiently monitored to make the women safe. The whole system is broken and in disarray.

The mass of mentally ill and damaged people in our prisons says something about our mental health services and welfare systems. Something of which I feel ashamed.

It's not like it's an issue of national security, is it?

You and I paid for that advice. I want to know what it is.