Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Appeal Tribunal hearing Thread 19

@SpinCityBlue Thanks for doing that. Obviously, Ben Cooper is a God, so there will be reasons why he didn't rehash this, although he did give a little pointer. I think the judge was really familiar with the material, so we will have to see. If I was Stonewall, I’d be worried.

Ha! Thanks, that's interesting. I just read 'Unlawful Killings', written by an Old Bailey judge. Fascinating what goes on behind the scenes and how much needs to be considered.

So was "unaware" initially then looked into it while writing spiteful letter at which point definitely knew, beyond plausibility.

I'm still stuck on the dog finding human remains. Surely the first thing the dog does on finding something like that is try to eat it - after all according to most dogs it is better to have eaten something and thrown it up, than never to have eaten it at all - is the training getting them not to eat it? Because surely that sort of thing starts at home.

This is a link to Allison's witness statement

https://allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf

I had a quick search of Allison's original witness statement, which I hope the new Judge (Bourne) is also reading. (I'm putting it in italics not bold, as too much bold hurts my eyes!)

(324) At the same time that Michelle Brewer was complaining about me on 16 October 2019 (as dealt with from paragraph (291) above), she was continuing to work closely with Stonewall. In the bundle are heavily redacted emails between Shaan Knan (of the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group and the LGBT Consortium) and Michelle Brewer from 1 October 2019 onwards about an event which Garden Court were hosting for Stonewall and others on the evening of 23 October 2019. The event was discussed within Stonewall. Kirrin Medcalf, who would go on to write the Stonewall complaint about me to Chambers on 31 October 2019 attended this meeting (Bundle Pages 1848-9).

(325) The trans rights meeting Michelle Brewer had organised with Stonewall went ahead on 23 October, with Stonewall representatives present. It took place in the building at Garden Court Chambers. I did not know anything about it, or that it was happening. Michelle Brewer, who had set up the meeting (and who, as a Garden Court barrister, was effectively its host) was in fact in Scotland and had given her apologies. She did however ask Shaan Knan of the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group to pass on a message to the attendees, asking them to make complaints about me to my Heads of Chambers. The communication in which she made this request has not been disclosed, though it may have been a verbal request. However, Shaan Knan did as Michelle Brewer requested. The minutes of the meeting record him saying (Bundle Page 3847): “Community encouraged to write to Garden Court Chambers Heads in the next couple fo [sic] days to express concern about Allison Bailey’s (barrister) transphobic comments on Twitter. Chambers having a meeting to decide on formal action against barrister Allison Bailey”.

(326) Two of those present in that meeting were Kirrin Medcalf, the Head of Trans inclusion at Stonewall, who wrote the Stonewall complaint against me, and Josh Bradlow, the Head of Policy at Stonewall, who was Mr Medcalf’s boss.

(327) Knan’s reference to the “meeting” to decide on formal action against me (which in the event took place on 28 October) is the first mention of it in the bundle. Neither Garden Court nor Stonewall have disclosed any document in these proceedings to explain how Shaan Knan knew such a meeting was to take place. It appears that he must have been told about it by Michelle Brewer, which in turn provides further evidence that she was in discussion with the Heads of Chambers and others about me and the prospect of taking "formal action” against me.

(328) After the meeting, Michelle Brewer contacted Shaan Knan who reported back (Bundle Page 2138). He wrote: “I did bring up briefly the issue with the terfy barrister and asked people to support and write to Head of GC. I hope to put something together tonight. We won't of course engage with her on social media”.

I'm reading this as: Stonewall representatives were asked by Garden Court Chambers to discriminate, and Stonewall as Stonewall willingly agreed and by doing so caused the detriment.

Yup.

It says KM was 'unaware of Garden Court', yet in the spiteful letter just a few days later, KM is gushing about how Garden Court have 'always been allies to Stonewall' and how 'proud and grateful' they are for that...

Oh dear god! my thoughts crystallised exactly, thank you! The mental image conjured up of KM, Nettle and support troupe coming upon decomposing remains and mangling any evidence is darkly hilarious. Please, someone (Graham Linehan?) set to work on the sitcom.

But in their complaint letter, they refer to the specifics of the trans inclusionary type stuff that named members of GCC are doing. It really is a nonsense to think they didn’t know they were dc.

I knew there was a joke in there somewhere but was too distracted to find it!

I've been down the rabbit hole of cadaver dog training now.

If they are training them in rabbit holes they are doing it wrong.
I've pulled my dog out by the tail from a number of rabbit holes without a smidgen of human remains to show for it.

Depends. If there is a lot of evidence to go through they might need to ensure they have time in their diary between hearing other cases to go through it. I remember hearing a talk by one retired esteemed judge who said he generally made decisions quite quickly when it was fresh in his mind. But his colleague objected saying it made them look bad and the judgements ill-thought. So he made the judgements just as quickly but put them in a drawer for a month or two and everyone was much happier.

I can't remember from the first trial why the tribunal decided that KM didn't know that GCC was a diversity champion member. Was it just on his word?

Just checked, this is what the judgment says at para 199

'The important complaint is the one made by Kirrin Medcalf of Stonewall on 31 October. Kirrin Medcalf was present at the TON meeting on 23 October, to represent Stonewall. He knew Michelle Brewer was a member of TELI, but he had never met her, and she was not at the meeting. He had only joined Stonewall a few weeks before, and was unaware of Garden Court, in particular that it was a Stonewall Diversity Champion. Given the long list of Diversity Champion organisations, this is plausible.'

I hope they're all really small dogs, then. Wouldn't want to give them a taste for human blood...

Of course. Silly me! 😃

RMW says at the end of that interview that gender incongruence is a psychiatric condition.

Was genuinely going to say 'that's a bit niche, that'.

I get the impression that it's all about policing pronouns - making sure everyone is referring to the deceased in the right way. I really can't see it being about preparing dead bodies but I guess you never know.

Thanks - my family generally don’t want to see the deceased’s body again after the immediate death. Have never been to an open casket funeral either, it’s just not common at all in my circles. So I’ve never had to consider anything related to morticians etc other than the funeral director asking whether we’d like to provide clothes for the deceased.

Would you have any insight into which aspects particularly cause problems for “trans, intersex and gender diverse peoples” then? I get difficulties around estrangements and around who makes the decisions could make things tricky, but estrangements happen for all sorts of reasons in all sorts of families.

I thought this too. I can't remember from the first trial why the tribunal decided that KM didn't know that GCC was a diversity champion member. Was it just on his word?

@teawamutu

Yep,
Yep, and
Yep.

They are currently working on two projects. The first focuses on exploring and improving trans, intersex and gender diverse peoples experiences of end-of-life care and after-death services.

Given the age of trans people generally even late transitioning males, I wouldn't have thought there was a huge market for this unless there is a disproportionate number dying somewhat prematurely...

... Just saying it seems very niche.

I'm listening to this now, not watching the footage. Observations:

1. RMW's voice. Jeez.
2. What a load of bloviating shite.
3. How dare RMW use children as cannon fodder for RMW's wishes and lifestyle choices?

Inability to see or acknowledge unintended consequences?

That would be fine if it wasn't explicit there too often there very much is an explicit preferred outcome...

Which in the context of this hearing...

I think after-death care may involve cosmetic presentation by the morticians (standards vary).

There's also, depending on those responsible, potential difficulties registering death certificates etc. Plus the rare occasions when a coroner's care may be involved.

After-death care can be quite broad, particularly complex if there are estrangements between parties etc.