Linda and Venice's court case has been thrown out

[ChickenonaMug]

Result!

I'm guessing that they may be getting advice from the flying lawyer .
So definitely a case of JR My Arse.

There's already been a case that basically spells out that judicial reviews are not for pursuing private prosecutions that have been dismissed by the CPS. Anyone with five minutes of law education would know this had no chance.

CFs don't read the rule book - the just bang their head against the glass until someone lets them through (or they are swatted)

Wahey! Fabulous news.

In The Case of the Unmoved Fence, that I have knowledge of, the CF (self representing of course) went and filled a form out for an appeal, even though the judge had ruled that there was no case for appeal. They just can't help themselves.

prolonging the agony

More like acting true to type.

Brilliant news 🎉💐 and a big 🍷 for Linda and Venice!

I’m so pleased to read this.

A judicial review of what, ffs? 🙄 That uppity women won’t just roll over in deference to Giulianas fabricated hurt feelings? and that the judicial system takes a dim view of vexatious nonsense? what on earth could be reviewed here when the case has never crossed the lowest hurdle of there being anything to prosecute?

I do hope Linda and Venice are awarded costs.

Thanks for all the MN love! I'm so happy that the criminal case is over and grateful for all the support the last few months, both on and offline. Lovey evening at LAWS, now I'm absolutely exhausted. Thank you

drradfem
Not surprised you're exhausted! You and Linda have been incredible

Hurrah! A victory for real women. So proud of them.

Always interesting to note how much time South Yorkshire police (Rotherham) have to spend on investigating nonsense like this. Although the CPS subsequently decided not to prosecute, hence the private prosecution, at a time when the Press report that ordinary people cannot get crimes like burglary, theft, arson and violent attacks investigated, how is someone able to get South Yorkshire police to spring into action and interview Linda and Venice over such feeble allegations?

How is someone able to get South Yorkshire police to spring into action and interview Linda and Venice over such feeble allegations?

Exactly. I think some digging is needed.

American Toilet story - Is that a follow up series to American Horror Story?

Yes, the budget has been cut, so in this new series it's just Kathy Bates playing an irritating lavatory attendant. There's no gore but lots of carbolic soap and that crunchy loo roll they used in schools in the 1980s.

There's a statement here on the Chambers website for the barrister who represented Linda & Venice

www.2harecourt.com/2018/11/30/gudrun-young-successfully-defends-leading-feminist-anti-racist-campaigner-linda-bellos-obe/?fbclid=IwAR0NLBNEBQmEszHqav6E1gPnHcmiw_WqZVFyp_XCcj_cUVD8Qa7h9vUHtfE

^Linda Bellos OBE, a leading feminist and anti-racist campaigner, represented by Gudrun Young, appeared today in Westminster Magistrates Court to be informed that the private prosecution against her had been taken over by the CPS and discontinued.

Linda Bellos faced an offence of using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour contrary to section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. The alleged offence arose out of an event called “We Need to Talk” which took place in York on 8th November 2017. This was a public political meeting arranged specifically to debate issues arising out of the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act 2004, as part of a Government consultation process. These changes would make it much quicker and easier for trans people to legally change their sex by a simple process of “self-certification”.

Linda Bellos made certain remarks at the debate which she has claimed were simply a statement that she would defend herself against a trans woman who threatened violence towards her (in response to an incident that had occurred previously when a trans woman assaulted a 60 year old feminist at Speakers Corner in Hyde Park).

The event was live-streamed on Facebook by Venice Allan, who also appeared as a co-defendant charged with an offence contrary to section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

Giuliana Kendal, a trans woman, who had been watching the live-streaming of the debate, complained to South Yorkshire Police that she found the remarks threatening as a trans woman.

South Yorkshire launched a full investigation into the matter, including interviewing Linda Bellos under caution. On 8th May 2018 Giulian Kendal was informed that the CPS had reviewed the matter at a high level and decided that there was no realistic prospect of conviction, taking into account the context in which the words were uttered and the fact that Linda Bellos would have a defence of freedom of speech under Article 10 of the ECHR.

Despite this, Giuliana Kendal decided to bring a private prosecution against Linda Bellos and Venice Allan. Detailed representations were made to the CPS inviting them to exercise their statutory powers to take over and discontinue the prosecution on the grounds that neither the evidential sufficiency or interests of justice test of the Code for Crown Prosecutors were met, that it was a politically motivated and vexatious prosecution, and that Giuliana Kendal was incapable of fulfilling her duties as a prosecutor in a fair and impartial manner.

Today the CPS took over the prosecution and discontinued it.

Giuliana Kendal indicated in court that she would be seeking judicial review of that decision.^

I'm so happy that the criminal case is over and grateful for all the support the last few months, both on and offline.

All the love to you, Venice. How you stay so chipper, I will never know. You're wonderful. Have a on me.

"On 8th May 2018 Giulian Kendal was informed that the CPS had reviewed the matter at a high level and decided that there was no realistic prospect of conviction"

Nice bit of misgendering there by V+A's solicitors. Giulian indeed. They'll be on the end of another private prosecution.

It would seem unusual for a situation where someone's feelings were hurt to be considered by the CPS at a high level. You'd expect high level CPS involvement only for serious cases.

I wonder if Venice and Linda could submit a Freedom of Information request for all information pertaining to that case, from both the police and the CPS (including all emails).

I think the results might be very interesting.

I doubt that the legal system would look kindly upon a judicial review of a case that the CPS has now, twice, declined to prosecute.

However, at this point, I suppose the ability to keep telling the story and to claim that it demonstrates the legal system is stacked against GK is the notional value and it creates a victimology.

NB - on the issue of the partiality of the legal system, Barracker made these observations in a valuable thread about the civil and legal standing/rights of those with a GRC:

Men created the Yogyakarta principles for you.
Men lobbied for you.
Men in the House of Commons debated for you.
Men in the House of Lords debated for you.
Men made a law for you.
Men devised an authorisation process for you.
Men made judgements, set legal precedents for you.
Men created surgeries for you to tell you the male body could be made to 'look female'.
Men gave you a certificate to force people to pretend you were Female.
Men gave you legal rights over females.
...
What you have is a legal mandate, from men, over women.

V+A.

I meant V+L of course.

"Note Stonewall liked Dr Haddocks tweet. "

I think that's actually Dr. Twazzock self-importantly @'ing them in. Not them liking it.

It would seem unusual for a situation where someone's feelings were hurt to be considered by the CPS at a high level. You'd expect high level CPS involvement only for serious cases.

I wonder if Venice and Linda could submit a Freedom of Information request for all information pertaining to that case, from both the police and the CPS (including all emails).

Excellent idea. I'm sure @drradfem has already thought of it, as it would also be interesting to see how much this is costing the taxpayer.

Would a freedom of information act allows Venice to see all the emails/info submitted from Kendall?

I really don't know, Datun. Not a self-identifying lawyer.

I know you can do a subject access request to the police force that investigated the incident and find out what data they hold about you. But how that interplays with Criminal Procedure Rules and the Freedom of Information Act I wouldn't know.

I totally understand if Venice and Linda want to draw a veil over the whole business now and leave it all behind. This has been hanging over their heads for far too long and they've already been vindicated. And they might find out nothing of real interest in the end anyway.