Hayden and their latest case

[Amalfimamma]

So this is the latest message to intimidate after their idea to compile a list of gc women

The odd thing is that Steph's court case isn't on a 'random justice website'. It's not on any of the main law subscriber sites, such as Westlaw, for example. It's probably a transcript obtained by someone involved in the trial for some reason.

I might as well tape myself saying "bloody hell, this is insane" and play it on repeat.

It is rather funny, what are they trying to achieve I wonder. Their criminal history is readily available on the internet. They are never going to silence us :)

It's probably a transcript obtained by someone involved in the trial for some reason

Or it could be entirely fabricated. I don't think it's authenticity was ever verified?

Well, I for one, think it’s time for SH and AH to stop their harassment of Mumsnet HQ, and of MN users, including but not limited to Caroline Farrow and Venice Allen ( ageist comments can result in hurry feelz too ) to stop defaming us online by referring to this site as a radicalisation forum for young people, to us as right wing extremists, and nutters ( ableism is wrong esp for a medical professional ). Continuing to tweet these baseless accusations and making threats with the sole intent to intimidate, along with opening accounts in order to come here and harass us directly is extremely unwise ( vexatious litigation is not ok and has consequences ). I mean, we could counter sue for harassment, a group litigation perhaps? If we were in the habit of wasting time with nonsense proceedings because we didn’t like what someone said on the internet.

a group litigation perhaps?

I've been wondering about this. Maybe that way we can help Kate Scottow. We could do it all as one.

It's not made up. SH said they wouldn't be sueing over this. In fact they are quoted in it.

www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-transgender-lawyer-suing-graham-linehan-was-convicted-threatening-man-golf

I am sure posting this online is not good I mean the court order

I was wondering about that. Presumably the court order was granted for a specific reason to gain specific information, not to be posted on social media in an attempt to intimidate any woman who does not believe that TWAW?

Also, where is the safeguarding? I assume that Steph is representing themselves, therefore they will be the recipient of this personal information - where are the guarantees that they will use this information in a fair legitimately manner.

In general it is pretty shocking that an abusive man can use the courts to find the location of the women they are abusing, or to further abuse women. I realise this is a known issue, but that doesn't make it any less shocking.

I've just deleted my previous account, and reregged, using a burner email account.

Even paranoids have enemies.

It's not info I'd want want people to know.

A little help. Hmm. A little help for who? Us?

Maybe they were an old sparring partner of SH?

was wondering about that. Presumably the court order was granted for a specific reason to gain specific information, not to be posted on social media in an attempt to intimidate any woman who does not believe that TWAW

This.

NewWomensMovement certainly anyone directly targeted could indeed group with others that have been harassed and commence a group litigation for harassment, and/or lodge a complaint of vexatious litigation with the attorney general.

Even if they obtain the poster's details they could be from anywhere in the world.

I also note that Steph's hearing was before Mr Justice William Davis, who today was in charge of Applications without notice.

So rather than Mumsnet failing to contest this, am I assuming correctly that they weren't told about the case until after the order was issued? And all Steph had to do was get her paperwork in at least two hours before the hearing?

So rather than Mumsnet failing to contest this, am I assuming correctly that they weren't told about the case until after the order was issued?

I thought they needed to give MN a chance to contest?

You can do without notice applications in certain circumstances (the classic examples are freezing assets if you suspect someone is going to spirit them away, or injuncting someone if you think they will destroy evidence). But the rules are quite strict. I do hope that Steph has given full and frank disclosure. Their hands, like their underpants, must be clean.

What did Liger Woods do to get banned from Mumsnet??

I missed that!

It occurs to me that it might make an interesting shirt investigave piece looking at how the police & courts are being used in this?

There was Giuliana which was thrown out
Helen Islan, thrown out
Glinner, dropped
Various other women subjected to injunctions etc

Shirt?! Short obvs

I've just done the delete & re-reg with burner email too.

Previous profile was I think 13 years? All gone.

Should have done it sooner, but hey ho.

👀

Venice

The Court List for Mr Justice W Davies shows that he was hearing odds and sods 'interim applications', "unrobed" (oo-er, missus)

The regular reference to golf is one's thinly veiled desire to have a hole in one.

I always thought the purpose of golf clubs was to hit balls.