Claim Posie said Cis gender women being blended in to meat by transwomen for human consumption

Do you think that KJK therefore invites the kind of hyperbole being spouted by Lal as a result of comments like this about the Charlene Downes case? Is it a fairly inevitable outcome?

I don't know the truth of what happened to Charlene Downes. Sadly, only the people involved in her disappearance do. But I believe it is completely wrong when someone in the public spotlight and commanding attention says statements like that which are false. It's wrong because it excites feelings in people based on a false premise. And it's foolish because it allows the guy/woman(? I dunno) to scorn her and make her sound like a crackpot. Be honest, if this Lal accused Maya Forrester of grinding up a transman in a meat grinder with no evidence, would you not be dismissive about everything else they said?

So if Lal mocks her for what she's said, then I don't have much sympathy because she opened that door. Which is not to say I agree what Lal says about trans issues. In fact I don't see PPs meat grinder comments had anything to do with transgender issues so I don't know what s/he's going on about. But then she goes on to say people in power are raping children or enjoy the idea of raping children. Ugh. Really after everything that happened over Carl Beech?

I might agree with some of her ideas, I don't know, certainly that short clip doesn't inspire me to listen to much she has to say. I just support her right to give her opinion without being physically attacked or threatened - as long as it's truthful.

said:

"She has called for the forceable sterilisation of trans people. ‘

I thought the hormones and the surgeries did that on a voluntary basis.

It is? When Derek? Was it just topical that it was brought up this week and coincided with this week's new?

I've just realised that that Posie Parker clip is from last year. How come people are just bringing it up now?

We can all listen to it. She said ‘what we know is that there’s grooming gangs in Telford’ and continues. She then said ‘I think’ before talking about this poor girl.

We do know there’s grooming gangs in Telford. Stop being disingenuous, the ‘what we know is’ was not in reference to this case, as you well know

Kellie Jay has never claimed to be anything other than a straight forward woman reading the news, taking it all in and forming her own opinions from that.

I understand Kellie Jay.

I was a very young woman in the 1970s living in the area Peter Sutcliffe was murdering women.

To this day I remember how much that coloured my existence as a female and it was the men around me and on the news and in the police that created that picture of horror. A man did it and men were running around policing it.

One evening I watched a horror film with my boyfriend, a man that was anxious about the ripper, the fucking ripper as he was known, and I got up walked into the kitchen and fainted. The film I watched of a woman being ripped apart when the police and every man I knew were powerless to stop women being ripped apart was enough to make me black out.

This is mocked relentlessly.

This thing that is entertainment, is on every channel as something to be enjoyed. The same people watching it for pleasure are so critical of a woman being affected by it .

I learned that lesson that day when I passed out on the floor and my boyfriend laughed at me.

It's not real to people. They will mock your reaction to extreme mutilation. They will pull you to shreds for mentioning it as a real visceral fear enough to make me pass out on the floor.

Because it's entertainment.

Better have a word with the press who were still making the claim as early as last July, then.

Best take that up with the Prosecution then, because they raised this theory first

And the police were heavily criticised for their handling of the case by the IPCC.

Every time a prosecution is taken to court, there is a theory. That doesn't mean that theory is true. Or that is should be repeated as fact years after it turned out to be an unsubstantiated rumour.

No.

And what do you think of the peculiar interpretation of events as broadcast on NZ telly?

Do you think that KJK therefore invites the kind of hyperbole being spouted by Lal as a result of comments like this about the Charlene Downes case? Is it a fairly inevitable outcome?

No, she didn't just repeat it as a claim - a claim long since known as unsubstantiated in any way - she said that what we know is ... And we don't. There's no evidence that it's true at all.

They raised a theory but they had no evidence to back it up. Some of the guys at the kebab shop had joked about it. A witness said someone had told him that's what happened but the witness was miked up by the police, spoke to the man who'd told him, and he denied he ever said it. It was never proved, there was no evidence and the police were severely criticised for their botched handling of the case.

Posey Parker said, "what we know is (...) a young woman who never actually made it to mainstream news, wasn't a big story, was cut up and I think she was put in sort of meat that was sold for human consumption"

Posey Parker absolutely does not know this. Charlotte Downes disappeared 20 years ago and the trial happened 16 years ago. That's plenty of time for her to verify the facts and shr should not be saying things that deginitely happened when there's no evidence to support that. Once you state facts are definite when they're not, you open all your arguments to being disbelieved.

Susanne Levy was trying to say we don't know how many women support the Standing for women position because...

And was cut off and ridiculed.

She's right.

They ridiculed her.

Led by the Young New Zealander of the year.

Lal posted this on LinkedIn in that day, it was in the feed I read that morning. The account has now gone private.

All of them would not let Susanne Levy make a point, just sneering contemptuously and laughing along with laughing Lal's lies

It's extremely revealing of New Zealands media's attitude to women.

It is pretty dire, from the law professor and the presenter for allowing this to go on. Just a simple challenge from the presenter of when where and what was said by KJK to back up the claims would have been a start!

Seriously, Lal completely repeated unsubstantiated claim after unsubstantiated claim while the Dean of Law of AUT sat and nodded along and the presenter did too.

Sadly, Suzanne didn't really get to talk much and when she did she was talked over by Lal.

Has anyone seen anything more of what Kellie Jay said other than that snippet that is going around twitter?

Because it was clear to me that she was talking about safeguarding issues again.

Fuck. Lal used the word 'terf' and made a gesture towards Susan Levy from Speak up for women.

And again, no one picked Lal up.

And Lal says "there was no violence against Posie Parker. I think there was unwanted use of force, yes, and I think that was not right. However, the most violence suffered, in terms of Posie Parker was her Marilyn Munroe dollar store weekend suit."

And the presenter laughed. Fuckwittery writ large!

The Dean of Law at AUT, Khylee Quince then came through and said:

"she has called for the elimination and extinguishment of trans people. She has called for the forceable sterilisation of trans people. Undoubtedly, that is speech that crosses the line'.

Wowsers. This is a dean of law??? Repeating falsehoods? Fuck.

And that dean of law was at the protest and did not seem to denounce the violence there. That dean just kept repeating, there are consequences, there are consequences.

The hypocrisy is that that Khylee Quince quoted someone about 'one's assertion of free speech should never make another feel less free'.

Well I guess when you are so far entrenched that you have lost perspective on this and have not actually done your research, that you might say that without cringing.

Lal and the presenter then just talked over Susanne Levy. And made out that the views that would have been discussed on the day were 'unpopular' and that if you have 50 people turn up against 5000, you have to accept that the views are unpopular. With no awareness at all that there were women who couldn't make it into the park and that is not including the women who felt they were unsafe even turning up.

Lal then makes that ridiculous claim.

"What the likes of Posie Parker do is they lie, for the purposes of inciting violence against transgender people. Posie Parker has told her followers that due to the transgender agenda, cisgender women are being kidnapped, blended and put into meat for human consumption. Now that is a ridiculous claim, but when you have a fanbase of nothing but fools, they believe you and they act on their hatred against transgender people."

"Posie Parker has called for cisgender men to go into women's toilets with guns to protect cisgender women from transgender women. Posie Parker's funders have called for the complete elimination of transgender people. Posie Parker absolutely incites violence against trans people."

"It has become clear to me that the state will not step in and protect transgender people from hate speech that incites violence. However, it has also become apparent to me that if the state does not act, New Zealander's will. And the likes of Susanne learned that very clearly last week when thousands of people across Aotearoa come together and say 'We will not stand for transphobia in our country'. That just makes me very happy"

And the presenter just agreed with it all.

There really is going to be a long road ahead, and I think that New Zealand women are so very very brave.

I think if the prosecutors for the case were able to make these remarks in court in 2007 then there is no reason to hold her to a higher standard of evidence?

Best take that up with the Prosecution then, because they raised this theory first

Already been said but...well, you know.

Best take that up with the Prosecution then, because they raised this theory first

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1552482/Missing-girls-body-put-into-kebab.html

She's not claiming that anyone in general or specifically has been found guilty of this murder. The prosecution claim about the disposal of the body was made in court and reported in the Telegraph.

Do you think that "not coming across well" means that this person Lal is justified in saying what they said (a mad misinterpretation of what KJK was discussing)?

She didn’t make the claims. She repeated what was reported the prosecution concluded.

No one's been found guilty of Charlene Downes murder. And certainly there's zero evidence that she was ground up and put into kebabs.
Posie Parker does herself no favours making claims like this. She does not come across well in that interview.