Indeed. I would also note that unlike Helen most of the women she's shouting at have not hauled a trans person into court and had their case dismissed as utterly without merit.
Miranda Yardley wrote,
'Regina v Miranda Yardley: More DARVO from Helen Islan'
POSTED ON 3RD MARCH 2019
(extract)
"In the Daily Mail today “Britain’s first transgender hate crime trial is halted after one day as judge says ‘there is no case and never was a case“, the complainant against me Helen Islan tries to distance herself from the proceedings which were brought in her name:
‘The decision to prosecute was made by the CPS, not me personally and I accept the verdict of the court.’
It does not surprise me she is trying to wash herself of responsibility. Having tried to blackmail the court by saying she was unprepared to give evidence unless her name was subjected to a press restrictions order, her evidence on Friday appeared to me to be incredibly dishonest as she attempted to distance herself from anything and everything she has said and done: apparently never having tweeted under her real name, it was ‘esoteric search engines’ which created and posted tweets under the name ‘Helen Islan’, as shown by screen captures of these tweets in the evidence bundle. In spite of admitting in her statement and even evidence given to open court that she was a volunteer with Mermaids, getting her to acknowledge anything was met with denial of the facts, attacks on my character and reversals… now where have we seen that before?
The upshot is, her evidence was like witnessing a tooth extraction. I suspect the judge agreed, from the way he was rolling his eyes and having to tell Islan to stop wasting the court’s time waffling and just answer the questions. Islan was so unreliable as a witness, so truculent, I would not have been surprised should she have been indicted for perjury.
Anyway, back to the original quote which I will reproduce again so that we are clear as to Islan’s words:
‘The decision to prosecute was made by the CPS, not me personally and I accept the verdict of the court.’
On 10 August last year, I received from Islan’s solicitors Mishcon de Reya a three page legal letter threatening me with a High Court injunction, action for defamation and a costs order. This letter was I believe funded by the Mishcon de Reya ‘Pink Law‘ initiative, so again Islan benefitted from LGBT without herself being a part of this world.
What a hypocrite." (continues)
mirandayardley.com/en/regina-v-miranda-yardley-more-darvo-from-helen-islan/
Mail on Sunday article by SANCHEZ MANNING and JOANI WALSH referred to above:
'Britain's first transgender hate crime trial is halted after one day as judge says 'there is no case and never was a case'
(extract)
On one side was Yardley, an accountant, who describes himself as a transsexual and identifies as a man, even though he underwent gender reassignment to become a woman ten years ago.
Despite his own experience, his contention is that individuals cannot change sex – and this has drawn fierce criticism on social media.
Giving evidence via video link was his accuser, Helen Islan, who is married with children and works with the trans advocacy group Mermaids, which campaigns for children who want to change gender. (continues)
Initially, Ms Islan’s complaint was dealt with by West Yorkshire Police before being passed to colleagues in Essex, who decided it was a hate crime.
But when the case reached court the defence referred to pages of social media posts in which Ms Islan herself was regularly tweeting about her trans child, about him taking blockers, that he had ‘come out’ at school.
The court heard that a simple search on Google brought up Ms Islan’s personal details, including a family photograph that she had herself posted.
At one point during the hearing, Judge Woollard said: ‘Where is the evidence [of harassment] taking into account the need for free speech? You have to show a course of conduct and at the moment we have one tweet.
Where is the evidence for Miranda Yardley outing Ms Islan’s son?’ Later he threw out the case and awarded costs to the defendant.
Yardley told The Mail on Sunday afterwards that he was ‘horrified’ by the decision to charge him, saying: ‘I faced losing everything I worked for.’
Barrister Amanda Jones, who has represented clients accused of ‘anti trans’ comments, said: ‘The police and the CPS routinely ignore rape threats, death threats and abusive material targeted at women online.
The entire criminal justice system is falling apart from underfunding and this case appears to have been a complete waste of public funds.’ (continues)
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6764763/Britains-transgender-hate-crime-trial-halted-one-day.html