All the best to Kate Scottow in court tomorrow

[BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted]

@BustedWench: we haven’t forgotten. I have a prior commitment tomorrow but fully intend to be there to support you on Friday,

Kate, if you are reading this, I'm de-lurking for the first time to wish you all the best and send my hopes for a positive outcome tomorrow.

ScapaFlo

It's only one side tho, isn't it? There's no context.

And almost all the comments are along the lines of diddums/why is this a police matter/no wonder violent crime isn't being addressed.

So no sympathy even without Kate's testimony.

Tenterhooks though

The case is just a twitter spat. Ridiculous that ANY legal/police time has been spent on it at all. A travesty, in fact.

As one of the BTL commentators says, "she should have burgled Hayden's house - the police wouldn't even come out."

Yes even with moderated comments the DM commentariat aren't having any of it.

Sorry! Reposting as I used bad words, and have reported my last post for deletion !

Fell down the hell well - I didn't know SH lost (effectively?) their last case. Wasn't SH asking for £100k for 'harassment', and it looks like SH won a big fat nothing. Could the same happen here?

(I've no idea why SH is speaking in the third person, on their own twitter account!?)

twitter.com/flyinglawyer73/status/1224766769367265286

Stephanie Hayden @ flyinglawyer73

The proceedings commenced by Stephanie Hayden against Helena Wojtczak have been concluded on a confidential basis with neither party paying costs or any compensation.

I'm liking the comments too, for common sense. It says at the top of the article (when I read it) 44 comments, but only 14 are showing. I wonder if that mean the others are pending mod'ing or failed.

I'm sure SH won't like that article. Bit too much sunshine.

The case is just a twitter spat. Ridiculous that ANY legal/police time has been spent on it at all. A travesty, in fact.

I wonder if you would be saying that if the roles were reversed? Something tells me this thread would have a very different look generally.

LOL. Like many GC women don't face this sort of thing all the time? Where are their court cases?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7975577/Mother-two-39-appears-court-accused-calling-transgender-woman-pig-wig.html

@BustedWench, I wish you good luck but more to the point I need to thank you from the bottom of my heart for saying it like it is.

It's a sad state of affairs when we cannot describe someone by their biological sex without being criminalised for it.

DM seems unbiased in it's reporting. Neither appear to have covered themselves in glory - particularly BustedWench using multiple accounts to target the complainant. Let's see what tomorrow brings. I'm not sure why Hayden's previous character (given that she's the victim), is being brought into play. Them's the rules I guess! I wouldn't like what I did in my whole life to be discussed in a case where I was assaulted for example. I'd argue relevance (if I was on a US crime drama).

And as for 'a pig in a wig?'. Seriously?

And as for 'a pig in a wig?'. Seriously?

So what? Should someone be criminalised for using that term?

How does using that term equate with the targeted harassment of Louise Moody for example?

mobile.twitter.com/drlouisejmoody/status/1224417736157167617

*And as for 'a pig in a wig?'. Seriously?

So what? Should someone be criminalised for using that term?*

Yes, quite frankly!

Whatever the complainants past is, I don't see how it's relevant to this trial. Just saying.
Or do you endorse women's previous sexual history being brought up in rape trials? You all being feminists and stuff.....

If we’re going to be criminalising people for silly name calling on social media, the police are going to be very busy.

I assume you’d also want that to apply to every time someone has rocked up here and called us all bigoted cunts? (As happened earlier this week, for example).

I’d rather the police stayed focused on crime and not Twitter spats, myself.

But this wasn't silly name calling. From what I've read it was targeted and sustained abuse against one person over a period of 6-7 months.

But that’s not what you said, sayI.

You said someone should be criminalised for calling someone a “pig in a wig”.

And as for 'a pig in a wig?'. Seriously?

So what? Should someone be criminalised for using that term?

Yes, quite frankly!

Yes.............

And particularly as part of a sustained attack on an individual! That comment alone is bad enough, but from what I've read from the story linked, there was a sustained attack on this one individual. That makes for very uncomfortable reading.

Just wanted to say good luck today. Hope all goes well.