I am still reeling from the revelation at the end of the last thread that some of AC's supporters have outed the name of the victim on twitter.
I would have thought that it would count as contempt of court, and I'm very much reminded of the far right and the ongoing case of Tommy Robinson.
Of course its a tactic to intimidate other potential victims. That's the point. A court would take a very dim view of anyone in contempt for this reason.
BUT
The thing with the recent Tommy Robinson case, was it was a win - win for Robinson regardless of whether he won his appeal against contempt (which was on a technicality rather than because he was wrongly convicted). It was about all the publicity the case was going to generate, and the opportunity for the far right to play the victim and to create a fake narrative which too few would check for accuracy.
Given the nature of trans activism which shares the traits of disregard for truth, disregard for victims, seeks as much publicity as possible, pursues reversal narratives, it really would not surprise me to see another contempt trial rise out of the case.
If there are also other charges potentially pending, it also runs the risk of affecting any other future trial. It might create the situation where the argument is used that DC or someone else can not have a fair trial because of the publicity. It smacks of potentially setting this up as a defence. Of course, if this is how a court looks at such a case again, they'll take a very dim view.
This might beg the question of whether there is even darker stuff that people involved closely to the case or to the politics of the case, might be aware of, and might have reason to act in this abhorrent way which has all the mentality of gang / mafia intimidation.
It also has me pondering about the lack of BBC coverage of the case. The Cliff Richard verdict has had huge ramifications for them, which have not yet fully worked through into a review of policy.
If there are potentially other cases connected to this, I suspect the BBC might be extremely cautious about going near it as a result.
None of this is reassuring and it once again, highlights the erosion of how the courts and media both value and uphold the law and the movement to undermine both institutions for nefarious agendas.