Stephanie Hayden takes Graham Linehan to court for doxxing

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Their statement is here:

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

If researching and compiling information that is freely available is now classed as 'doxxing' this is not a good time to be a journalist.

Does SH not realise that GL probably has lawyers, you know, the real ones? I wonder if SH intends to represent Shself with Sh’s lawyerly skills?

I did a first aid course once, I might start identifying as a medic. Medic isn’t a protected title is it? Maybe I should tweet SH and ask.

I think the 3rd person is because SG is quoting the basis of their claim and the twitter thread is intended to be used as a press release?

However, under SH's assumption that the case is sub judice on issue of the summons, aren't they actually therefore in contempt themselves for publishing the details as that could prejudice the outcome?

I enjoyed Linehan's name for SH - "Fuckwitlawyer73". Does it break Mumsnet rules if we use that name from now on?

Bad

SHself made me snort with laughter

I'm sure the court / judge will be very impressed at Hayden self-identifying as a lawyer. I believe they look kindly at that sort of thing. Encourage it, even.

Or more likely that both papers have shit hot lawyers

I’m sorry but I think there’s a lot of misinformation being perpetuated on this thread.

Is there really any evidence that bat shit is or has ever been this crazy?

(I’ll get my coat)

Does this mean Hayden would like people to stop talking about his aliases and failed businesses

That’s exactly what the intent is. Problem is, according to Twitter, people have already gone to the police with the info they got from a government website, that anyone can look at.

I have skimmed that twitter thread and also this one, but I assume the poor beleaguered "victim" has set up a paypal/gofundme for this?

It would be par for the course, after all. Professional victimhood is costly.

#law #legal - lol as if a lawyer would write like that

Someone on Glinner's twitter thread has come up with the marvellous word "lolsuit". Sums up Hayden's efforts nicely I think.

Does Hayden realise that if a statement is true, it's not defamatory? Are they seriously going to suggest that what Linehan wrote about their past wasn't true?

I have to say that seeing petulant terms like "deadnaming" mixed in with all the pompous legal stuff was particularly funny. What a fool.

GL is a hero anyway for creating Father Ted, totally behind him on this.

Sorry, posting this again because it's one of my favourite Father Ted bits:

Small and Far Away: A lesson for people who can't tell the difference between perception and reality. Apposite for SH

The ultimate vexatious litigant.

As an aside, as an actual practising barrister, given that the alleged behaviour took place on the days commencing 26 September, how has Hayden managed to comply with the pre-action protocol for defamation which requires a proposed claimant to serve a letter of claim on the proposed defendant which they have at least 14 days to respond to?

To follow on from ARkell v Pressdram, here's another of my favourite Letters of Note which is rather appropriate...

www.lettersofnote.com/2011/02/regarding-your-stupid-complaint.html

Yes McTufty! Oh gosh this is great *grabs popcorn (obviously it's terrible, WTF has the world come to, but glad Hayden has obviously failed to comply with pre-action protocol)
Nothing attracts litigation like (seemingly) deep pockets. Mind you it doesn't take much to set Hayden off does it.

That Cleveland letter made me lol!

I loved the Bird's Eye response to the twitter campaign to get them to remove their advertising from MN. That was inspired. It's what PrimeSight and Ocado should have done, instead of being all woke an' stuff.

@hackmum that twitter username still up for grabs

I missed that, what was their response?

Oh what did Cap'n Birdseye do?

[Another sentence i never expected to type]

Ihaventgottimeforthis I roared laughing at that response. 🤣