Bloody terrified about the Fair Cop judgment now

[teawamutu]

I know noone can reassure me and it's pointless posting, but just - eek.

His judge sounded like he got it.

Fingers and everything crossed for Harry

Maya's judge also sounded like he got it, albeit less so.

Harry is all set to appeal if the judgement is bonkers.

I do wonder, if he wins are they going to use the money and move on to other things?

In Harry Miller's case the judge was wide awake and full of questions. The case of the College of Policing and Humberside Police looked poor and the presentation of it was woeful.

I would hope that with a wide awake High Court judge, he'll be keener to base his reasoning on a sound understanding of the law, and be less concerned about feelings and that certain parties are so super special that only their interests are to be considered.

If it goes Harry's way I'd be interested to see what enforcement would look like. I could imagine a very reluctant and non-compliant "cooperation" from the Police.

If it goes Harry's way I'd be interested to see what enforcement would look like. I could imagine a very reluctant and non-compliant "cooperation" from the Police.

Police will fuck about not caring and lodge an appeal because if it goes Harry's way everyone who has had similar happen to them will take the police to court.

When are the results due? Do they know?

I'm afraid too but keeping my fingers crossed and sending out those positive vibes.

Yep. Nervous. I do think the Forstater case will be over-turned on appeal though - the judgment is bonkers. So much so it has made me wonder whether the judge just capitulated to the TRA side for fear of harassment himself, but deliberately left gaping holes in his reasoning so it would be overturned.

if he wins are they going to use the money and move on to other things?
The T&C of the Crowd Justice site are that it's used for other similar cases (she says, crossing her fingers so hard her knuckles have gone white).

Is an employment tribunal not quite a lot different than a judicial review, though? (I really know nothing about either).

I'm also afraid. The law can be a very blunt instrument and sometimes makes some very apparently odd conclusions because of the mechanics of our legal system.

Oh I hope they can help you, Katie!

I’m really worried for Kate now, and some of the other cases on the go. But I do feel more hopeful about Harry.
1, It seemed like the judge “got it”.
2, The judge seemed clear this is about wider freedom of speech, not a matter of TWAW

1. Just a hunch, but I think judges get to judge cases interpreting the law and that is how case law develops. I don’t think this one sounded like he was keen on police taking that role upon themselves. It’s a job for the experts, not the PC Gull’s who have just been on a mermaid’s course.

I do wonder, if he wins are they going to use the money and move on to other things?

I am not sure if he can be awarded costs. If not then my understanding was the amount raised wouldn’t cover the costs.

I'd love it if Harry won, got costs and used the CJ money for similar cases.

Wasn’t there a moment in the Maya case where the judge told Kristina Harrison that she was a woman with a prostate?

Can’t tell what Harry’s result will be as the law sometimes throws up very strange results, but I don’t think there were any similar indicators that the judge had trans ideological thoughts.

I think Harry's result is going to be appealed whichever way it goes.

Do not lose heart. This was one solicitor in one employment tribunal delivering one (seemingly bonkers) ruling. Having argued the case with another employment lawyer, I am fast realising that this may not be an area of the law they are well versed in at all.

And having argued with a law professor not so long ago about them twisting the law into the direction their ideology leads them to, I also understand how brazenly the law can be misrepresented and how difficult it is for a lay person to counter the jargon employed to confuse us. You just have to remember just how many court cases bring you two legal camps arguing opposite ends of the law, and just how often the sides that lose or win can change. No individual law professional is in sole possession of the one true interpretation of the meaning of the law.

Interpretations aside, in my view the solicitor who chaired Maya's employment tribunal showed too limited an understanding of both the GRA and how the GRA and the Equality Act interact to deliver a ruling that will stand (in all fairness I wouldn't expect him to). He might have been much better advised to limit the scope of his ruling, but we will never know why he went as far as he did. However, I would expect a High Court judge to be much better informed about all relevant laws and much more skilled in applying it.

Now that alone doesn't mean the next ruling would be better for us, but it gives us a fighting chance. I know anyone going to court would rather win outright, better still never actually have to go to court at all. But we do need proper test cases - one way or the other such cases will inform our campaign going forward.

This judgement cannot set legal precedent by the way, it's not what Employment Tribunals are designed for. Which is why this is not yet a test case, although it may become one. Only the higher courts are tasked with properly examining the law pertinent to a case such as this and tasked with looking at the relevant human rights legislation.

So ignore all the trans privilege activists crowing about this ruling stopping us from speaking about sex in this debate and naming men as men. It hasn't and it can't.

Thank you, Charlie. That's a bit reassuring.

The judge in Maya's case definitely didn't get it and PP is right - he said during the hearing that he considered prostate cancer to be a "woman's health issue" if such prostate was attached to a transwoman. I remember a few of us saying "shit we're fucked" when someone live tweeted that.

Also I recall someone saying elsewhere employment judges generally tend to be quite left-leaning because they're drawn to that area of practice for a reason. Whereas judges who take on judicial reviews should - fingers crossed - be utterly objective because it's such an important area of law.

I think Harry's result is going to be appealed whichever way it goes.

Yes, I met his son after the first day in court and he said this too.

The best thing that could have happened to Maya's case was to lose with a questionable judgement and then appeal. The coverage and sunlight it sheds will be much greater that way. Crowdfunding means Maya can take it to higher courts with attendant publicity and rulings that, if they go our way, will serve to fix a lot more than a lowly employment tribunal judgement win would have done.

The judge in the Harry case denounced the use of the word t**f and says it was used to deplatform.

I thought the judgement was supposed to be out for Christmas but it will be better coverage-wise if it waits till January.

Thanks for the post, Charlie.