Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

Announcement re deletion of Wig and Robe/Judge Flounce threads

871 replies

carrie (mumsnet) · 13/01/2005 13:15

Dear mumsnetters,

We are now able to shed a bit more light as to what actually occurred re the Wig and Robe/Judge Flounce episode. We are pretty sure (having received a confession of as much) that, as some of you suspected, W&R/JF was a non-lawyer masquerading as a QC. Given this knowledge we have deleted the relevant postings and banned the user from the site.

If nothing else the whole business is a salutary reminder that you can never be completely sure that folks are who they say they are and neither should you necessarily completely trust the advice, especially "professional" advice, posted on mumsnet.

As a result of some concerns raised by you we are looking into making parts of the site, the swaps and weight loss clubs for example, something that operates via mumsnet HQ so that people's addresses are not being circulated. If anyone has any other suggestions then please [email protected] or post them here and we promise to consider them.

We?d also remind folks that when organising meet ups you should take the same precautions you would when meeting anyone from the net - make sure you meet in a public place and that others know where you are going.

Having said all that, it would be a shame if this relatively rare occurrence of someone pretending to be someone they are not changed the warm, supportive, welcoming and caring atmosphere on mumsnet - and we're confident that you won't let it!

Thanks for all the supportive and helpful emails we've received from so many of you.

Carrie, Rachel and Justine

OP posts:
NameChangingMancMidlander · 13/01/2005 13:39

I feel that there was no need for people to stoop to her level when confronting her. I am sorry that I was taken in, I am clearly v ignorant of the law and I'm v thankful that I never had the need to ask or act on her advice.

lowcalCOD · 13/01/2005 13:39

naily! are you outing yourself?!!

NameChangingMancMidlander · 13/01/2005 13:39

lol

SoupDragon · 13/01/2005 13:40

W&R was very rude, offensive, aggressive and a $$$$ing liar

nailpolish · 13/01/2005 13:40

no! oh dont say that

i couldnt pretend to be a QC, i dont even know what it stands for

lou33 · 13/01/2005 13:40

coddy

i have it displayed on a stake as a warning to others.

lowcalCOD · 13/01/2005 13:40

soupy
th scaley voice of reason

oops · 13/01/2005 13:40

Message withdrawn

lowcalCOD · 13/01/2005 13:41

lots of mention of whisky
or maybe youall drink it and i am the odd one out

SoupDragon · 13/01/2005 13:41

Noooo... it was always a "damn fine malt"

msann · 13/01/2005 13:41

dont wish to start an arguement ... BUT...(!) if any1 is silly (i chose a mild word on purpose...) enough to take action solely upon the word of others in an online community such as this ...then surely they're somewhat to blame for their own naivety??

lowcalCOD · 13/01/2005 13:42

lol

CarrieG · 13/01/2005 13:42

i like a damn fine malt meself.

SoupDragon · 13/01/2005 13:42

You're absolutely right, msann. The problem was that some of the people taking that advice were particularly vulnerable.

ThomCat · 13/01/2005 13:42

She may well come back. At the end of the day though as long as when/if she does she doesn't offer any legal advice and isn't nasty or aggresive, will it really matter?

Just feel sorry for her, it's sad and pathetic.

As log as you take other poeple's posts with a pinch of salt and we are all a bit vigilant etc can any real harm be done??????

hercules · 13/01/2005 13:42

That's the point though. W&R was often giving advise to vulnerable people.

suzywong · 13/01/2005 13:42

elliot what's CBT?

hercules · 13/01/2005 13:43

snap post sp

ThomCat · 13/01/2005 13:43

Whoops, sorry didn't mean to post that again!

msann · 13/01/2005 13:43

vunerable or not....its like the saying 'if sum1 told you to step out under a bus would u do it?'

SoupDragon · 13/01/2005 13:45

It's not quite the same as being told to step under a bus since that is clearly a stupid idea. The advice given was so well written and sounded perfectly reasonable as well as being close enough to the truth to fool most people.

lowcalCOD · 13/01/2005 13:46

yes and lots of poeple trusted her as we saw.

oops · 13/01/2005 13:46

Message withdrawn

SoupDragon · 13/01/2005 13:47

Which is not to say they were right to trust it. I don't know if anyone actually acted on the advice they were given without taking legal advice from their own solicitor.

aloha · 13/01/2005 13:47

No, but if I really believed you were a doctor I might take your advice seriously, especially if I was alone and afraid. I think blaming the victim and not the criminal/conman here is to truly miss the point, I'm afraid.
What people who raised the alarm (for the benefit of others, btw, not themselves) didn't appreciate much was being called things like 'nasty' and 'bitchy'. It was not in PPH's interest to prevent JF giving horribly misleading advice to vulnerable people - she is fine, thanks, and has a very good knowledge of the law for when she needs it - and she suffered not only a torrent of abuse from TrollFlounce, but from other mumsnetters for just telling it like it was.