Stephanie Hayden takes Graham Linehan to court for doxxing

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Their statement is here:

twitter.com/flyinglawyer73/status/1046792462067519489?s=19

Those lawyers aren't buying it

@NotMyNom there's another funny article on the same site here: www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-barrister-mocked-claiming-white-people-can-be-black-if-they-want

Is there a link to roll on Fri?

The nice thing about the Roll on Friday article is they reeled it in from the previous week.

Very affirming article:

www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-transgender-lawyer-calls-police-transexual-solicitor-harassment

And boom! The next week exposed.

The threats we see are pretty vile. Hate to think what the rest are like

True, but the fact that they are happening is, yet again, an open demonstration to the world of what we are dealing with.

If the TRAs think nobody will report on this exact tactic being used, they are even more stupid than we thought. Massive own goal. Again.

Laura that article is too funny!

"This is insane", commented one person. "Are you on acid Allan?" asked another.

I'm not sure that this will work in this case because previous people seemed not to have the financial resources to let it go to court. Glinner does.
Not to mention the very, very many of us who would welcome the opportunity to literally put our money where are mouths are and reciprocate his support of women and girls in our defence against the tansborg in purely financial terms.
Frankly, I'd give Glinner my last 20p if it'd help.

Having said that, I'll be amazed if this ever gets to that point

Saw sisters of mercy had been bleating about injustice too. Looks dodgy to me.

Are they a lawyer too? Like me?

Were you assigned lawyer at birth, or have you just recently come out as a lawyer, Fekko?

Were you assigned lawyer at birth, or have you just recently come out as a lawyer, Fekko?

Harrop is rejoicing:

Breaking News:

A 50 year old male, living in the Norfolk area, has today - October 6th, 2018 - been issued with a verbal warning from West Yorkshire Police, for abusive and transphobic conduct online, under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

twitter.com/DrAdrianHarrop/status/1048528976946368512

That thread all but states it's Graham Linehan who is the subject of the warning:

twitter.com/JamesRu5531l/status/1048532965033222144

That would be an interesting development. But, I do wonder if it's in connection with SH and that proceedings? Or, if it's a misidentification of the subject?

It's the right age and location.

But can we trust Harrup to tell the truth? Why would he know about this? Presumably because he made the complaint against Glinner.

From now on we should pay very close attention to Harrup's tweets and report anything to the police that could be a misogynist hate crime or otherwise harassing and vindictive.

Or, SH made the complaint and, somewhat akin to Posie Parker, the Police followed it up...

Glinner hasn't mentioned it so it will be interesting to see if this is confirmed or denied through more reliable channels.

So much sympathy for Linehan if he had to put up with this nonsense.

Do you have to accept a verbal warning? Is it like a caution?

Some context here www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/09/harassment-warning-fair-hearing

Basically the cops can issue a warning, it's essentially equivalent to a caution such as might be given for possessing weed or something (NB I don't know if they still do), and it goes on a criminal record, but unlike a caution you can't say 'no, I don't accept that caution, prosecute me or fuck off', they can issue it without consent.

And there appears to be no way to get rid of it, either.

So you can get a criminal record without recourse to a fair hearing? Sounds rather unfair.

Glinner, you’re a sound man. I’m sorry they are doing this to you.

Popchyk has pointed out on the other thread that it would have been Norfolk rather than West Yorkshire police that dealt with this. So can we still trust Harrup?

PPs have addressed this - it's truly shocking that you can't contest the warning. You can, however, apply to have it omitted from an Enhanced DBS, iirc. You can cite that you did not have the right to contest it and it was issued with no follow-up investigation.

Actually - if Glinner didn't have so much already on his plate this would be a fascinating test case. However, I'd wish it on no-one.

West Yorkshire Police eh?

I think I can see a pattern emerging

West Yorkshire Police eh?

Well, altho' I don't live in West Yorks I'm profoundly grateful that despite the fact their overall crime rate must be so low that there is still funding for a, what must be, largely superfluous Police force.

If only they could lend that spare capacity to investigating Rotherham or similar.

What's that you say, Daphne? You're right, geography never was my strong suit...

"Popchyk has pointed out on the other thread that it would have been Norfolk rather than West Yorkshire police that dealt with this. So can we still trust Harrup?"

Not sure about that. The warning can be issued over the phone.

I think Harrop is speaking the truth here.

Note that it's not a finding of wrongdoing, nor an admission of the same, they are literally warning him that if he carries on with the behaviour then it might be an offence.

The police just want to close the case and move on. And as such it is closed without a finding of wrongdoing as such, at this point.

"Transphobic conduct" is that a legal phrase? Why isn't "mysoginiatic conduct" a thing? Or being an utter arse?

"Transphobic conduct" is that a legal phrase? Why isn't "mysoginiatic conduct" a thing? Or being an utter arse?

In a Mitchell & Webb world, I suspect that your suggestions would be adopted as legal phrases... :) And then there would be extensive investigations as to the precise meaning of those splendid phrases.

Excuse my ignorance, but why would it be WYP when the person spoken to is in Norfolk?