GLP are going after Sarah Philmore and are going to lose

Would you mind pointing me in the direction of this guidance please @RedToothBrush ? I know of someone who might find it very helpful in their situation. I've had a look but can't track it down.

That /s is beginners sarcasm

/s level two is adding a fuckyou to the subtext
Which is what that act is all about.

I saw the /s but its meaning went right over my head. As it would.

It feels as though this quote could be paraphrased as

"defamation lawyer Matthew Gill explained that this kind of speech does not break the law in any way, but it is generally possible to make a complaint about a member of a professional body to their regulator, even though they may ignore it."

Did Maugham run his tweets past the GLP in-house defamation lawyer first, how would that conversation go?
"Matt I'm thinking of accusing another barrister of driving an unstable exhibitionist to attempt suicide, will that be ok?"
"Sure Jolyon, that'll be fine. Crack on and make sure you do it on two different social media platforms so as many people as possible see it"

Pretty sure they do face the same rules; however as a non practicing barrister JM can’t have his income affected by BSB action against him. A practice restriction won’t affect him, but he dan still be disbarred, at which point he can no longer title himself as a barrister or KC, as “barrister” is a protected title.

IANAKC, but since it's a title formally bestowed by the King, there's probably some convoluted special process that allows it to be taken away again, like when people are stripped of their honours. I would think it's outwith the competency of the BSB.

I think if you look you’ll see a “/s” at the end of the caption to that photo, indicating that sarcasm was intended. So the intended meaning was “no women’s rights have been trashed by my using the women’s toilet”.

Which is of course incorrect.

I'm a retired doctor but my name is still on the medical register & if I were to commit some heinous crime like misgendering & deadnaming Mr Euan Weddell then he can still report me to the GMC. In fact I would welcome it. I am Spartacus. I am Sarah Phillimore.

Echoes of Arkell v. Pressdram

You know that photo (Sophie Molly selfie in the women's loo), captioned "Another day of destroying women's rights," shows very clearly his thinking, and actually most of it follows GC thinking.

• he knows he's not a woman
• he knows women have rights
• he knows those rights don't include him, because there is a clear distinction between him and women
• he knows that his presence in the toilet is unacceptable to women, and for him this is a key reason to be there

The mere existence of something that is women-only is provocative for him, and something to be "destroyed".

Anyone recall how Sally Bercow FA and FO that sometimes you can't avoid the court action even if you do say sorry ?

Thats effen daft (I can understand where the tradition is tradition)

The BSB should force ex member to make it clear that they are ex-members

[(Edit) or if the ex-member is using the title that they will face BSB action if they break the rules the same way they would if they were still registered ( eg like a medical doc) ]

It's one of those titles that when you earn it you can keep it even if you no longer practice as a barrister

It's a feature of coercive control and crops up on various UK guidance for identifying coercive control.

The US calls it "paper terrorism" (or something like that) where the offender uses regulation and laws to target harrass and force the person into defending themselves for no reason.

Is KC not protected ????

Seriously???

Anybodys cat can call themselves KC and the BSB are forced to say "naw not our business"?

This thread is so funny.
These people would also be funny if they weren't so misogynistic, vexatious and continually targeting women.

It's increasingly viable that Sarah herself has a potential case of harassment against certain idiots, which she could in theory bring.

As do several other women.

At some point one of those women will take it to court.

Absolutely. Get Owen to do an exclusive interview with Molly & Co for the Guardian.

Please.

Make it happen.

GLP has a very weird setup. It's not a law firm and it's not a charity (though theoretically it's a "nonprofit"), so that's two regulatory regimes it's not subject to.

And Jolyon is no longer registered as a barrister though he's ostentatiously kept the KC title.

An uncharitable person might think GLP was specifically set up to keep its activities opaque. They might even think it's a bit of a fucking cheek to keep dobbing SP in to the BSB when Jolyon has made sure he himself is no longer regulated by the BSB.

Ooph (what did google do to my link)

Sorry actual link

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2024/0814/1465018-denis-obrien-to-add-370-names-to-case-over-fake-ads/

That last sentence needs to be on a t-shirt or something 😄

Sarah is immensely brave and admirable. She's been harassed relentlessly by these idiots.

🤷‍♀️
Its has a in house employee who's job is to create media stories in a "law firm"

He (not the firms SM ) via X threw in JKR into the mix.

If I remember my debt collection and the law has not changed too much the winner of a court case can appoint the trustee to recover funds?

The there is the possible court orders.
This kinda kicked off in 2014 against a company called Red Flag and involved court request to access employees personal tec and personal SM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.rte.ie/amp/1465018/

So he has no assurance that a case would be fought under UK law. No idea if X says what country holds jurisdiction in the EU but that is likely Ireland due to it being HQ there?