Hayden and their latest case

[Amalfimamma]

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

Woah. I'd ask what you said @pepperpot99 but that would be futile and I can probably guess given the deletion

That would be my question Isca. Why would any judge give personal details to someone with a conviction for violence? Current or otherwise. Theoretically of course.

Stalinist? Hardly.

MNHQ are already under siege by those who are hovering over the thread with reporting fingers poised, whilst simultaneously issuing writs. These posts are screenshotted and posted all over twatter to prove how 'transphobic' Mumsnet is.

Some posters are also flying under false colours.

Most people know SH's backstory by now anyway.

Steph wants attention. Don't give it.

Boreofwhabylon I'm new to all this crucible style transphobia witch hunting so I had not heard of the H person.

On a different note, could they be the H in Line of Duty?

[grin{

I'm here for one thing and one thing only - Ted Hastings

I'm glad I know the truth now. It's a public duty to tell the truth IMO.

There are restrictions around publishing details of spent convictions for no good reason.

crucible style transphobia witch hunting

Yup, the bonfires are being built around Mumsnet Towers as we speak...

I'm here for one thing and one thing only - Ted Hastings

Federation rep or not, you will address me as SIR.

(Also, if Ted turns out to be H, Jed Mercurio is CANCELLED.)

There are restrictions around publishing details of spent convictions for no good reason.

This is a useful read:

hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/reporting-criminal-records-media/

SH does not have the wit to be H. They’re more of a Nige I would say.

I quite liked Nige (and think he might be the real H).

It is of course worth noting that Hayden themself has publicly discussed their past convictions. For example:

"denied striking anyone with a golf club and emphasised that she was never convicted of striking anyone with a golf club. She said, "These events date back to 1999 and whilst the original sentence was indeed a 150 hours community punishment order, upheld on appeal in 2002, the sentence was subsequently varied by HHJ Badley (the original sentencing judge) in May 2004 to a 1 year Conditional Discharge following a referral back to that judge after successful proceedings in the Administrative Court involving the Probation Service. The conviction is long spent.”

Is he high up enough though Bore?

That says 2 different things. What does the victim have to say? I’m sure s/he won’t think ‘oh well that’s ancient history so it’s all ok’.

What does the victim have to say?

The victim sadly died (of unrelated causes) after the attack.

Masons Bix

Or...

H might be A WUMMAN

dun dun dunnnnn!!!

They released SH's 'previous' name and criminal activity

But it was on google, I'm certain Harrop stated if it was on Google it was fair game...

"denied striking anyone with a golf club and emphasised that she was never convicted of striking anyone with a golf club. She said, "These events date back to 1999 and whilst the original sentence was indeed a 150 hours community punishment order, upheld on appeal in 2002, the sentence was subsequently varied by HHJ Badley (the original sentencing judge) in May 2004 to a 1 year Conditional Discharge following a referral back to that judge after successful proceedings in the Administrative Court involving the Probation Service. The conviction is long spent.”

The very definition of someone who should be welcomed by women into their single-sex spaces with no exceptions.

I don’t understand if you wrote something about yourself that’s ok but if someone repeats it or screenshots it then they are breaking some law or other?

Yet the law won’t ‘make’ anyone cough up details of who is carrying out an orchestrated and relentless hate campaign against Caro. One where actual physical threats have been made to her and her family.

On what planet does that actually add up?

I have only seen the very few posts this person supposedly made - and I read them almost like someone ‘feeding juicy gossip’ to cause mischief. Interesting.

It is of course worth noting that Hayden themself has publicly discussed their past convictions. For example

Oops. I should have course added the source of that quote from Hayden, which was from here:

www.rollonfriday.com/taxonomy/term/516

My message got deleted for misgendering.

I finished the Kiwifarms thread and the climax was fantastic: several Mumsnetters joining in the discussion. Collaboration!
Now we just need a few of them here -- but they'd have to learn to behave otherwise it's the naughty step.

Some of the homophobia on that thread is absolutely revolting. The stuff about SH is interesting but the vile anti gay stuff makes it very difficult to stomach.

Some of the homophobia on that thread is absolutely revolting. The stuff about SH is interesting but the vile anti gay stuff makes it very difficult to stomach.

I agree. The archived facts from KF are useful, but you have to ignore all the homophobia and transphobia. It is unfortunate that because of the actions of TRAs there is nowhere else to hold these discussions.

but the vile anti gay stuff makes it very difficult to stomach

Yes i agree, it makes reading it very hard

But i think like many of the other places mumsnetters have been rumoured to have set up and/or visited it has much less moderation

Leaving aside the specifics of this matter the issue of publicity in an internet age is very interesting and difficult. There has been a whole legal textbook written recenlty on the Right to be Forgotten (which is by no means an absolute right under GDPR).

In the old days you would have to go to a local library in Hull to look up old copies of the newspaper to find old stuff out and now it is available on a websearch or even the individual chooses to mention it.

There is a summary here hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/reporting-criminal-records-media/