Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Scottow verdict: Guilty

384 replies

DeployTheTut · 14/02/2020 10:46

I have no words. Reports from Joani Walsh and Maya Forstater at the Trial in St Albans

twitter.com/mforstater/status/1228261217212522497?s=21

twitter.com/joaniwalshi/status/1228259484801359872?s=21

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
CallofDoodee · 14/02/2020 17:22

According to Joani, Kate was also reprimanded by the judge for using 'MandyMcGirlDick' as a Twitter name.

And yet, if you search girldick or #girldick on twitter..... Actually, don't, you will need the brain bleach.

Be kind? Be fucking kind?

If there is a crowd funder for Kate I will happily donate.

NotTerfNorCis · 14/02/2020 17:30

The person Kate was found guilty of upsetting with her hurty-words appeared in court for 21 offences and was once locked up for 6 months. Think on that.

Michelleoftheresistance · 14/02/2020 17:37

girldick, ladydick, all those names for penises originated with people born male.

Female people don't name penises. That's a male thing.

SW16 · 14/02/2020 18:22

Mummmyzzzz:

Here is one explanation
www.google.com/amp/s/blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/i-stand-with-kate-scottow/amp/

toomuchtooold · 14/02/2020 18:36

I'd also be happy to contribute to the crowdfunded if there's one going.

It's like the emperor's new clothes, isn't it?

TheBewildernessisWeetabix · 14/02/2020 19:23

Why does the Daily Mail consistently refer to the claimant as “Ms Hayden”, but the defendant as “Scottow” throughout the article

That is one of the ways the media influences first impressions of people who skim the news or do not know the parties involved.
They do not come right out and say this person has our respect and that one does not. That bias would be obvious and objected to. They simply use an honorific to indicate their respect for one person and leave it off to indicate lack of respect for the other.
Once you start noticing this style of manipulation you will see it everywhere.

FemaleAndLearning · 14/02/2020 19:40

I didn't recognise Hayden. Hayden's picture on Twitter and pink news is nothing like the one in daily Mail!
Sad to hear the judgement let's hope she wins on appeal.

NoSharon · 14/02/2020 19:42

Proper result imo.

Hirsutefirs · 14/02/2020 19:46

A losing appeal is worth it, if only to get Flyingtrainers’ photo back in the papers.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 14/02/2020 19:49

That is one of the ways the media influences first impressions of people who skim the news or do not know the parties involved.
They do not come right out and say this person has our respect and that one does not

Sorry, but that's total rubbish - papers when reporting usually do refer to the defendant by their surname.
It's a totally normal thing to do. Nothing to do with "this person has our respect and that one does not" Confused

NoSharon · 14/02/2020 20:11

Has it been confirmed that there will be an appeal? Otherwise it's just the sentencing hearing up next.

Amalfimamma · 14/02/2020 20:14

NoSharon

Pray tell how is the verdict correct.

And yes an appeal has been confirmed and Kate was sentenced today al 10.30am.

You're not very up to date on the story are you?

Michelleoftheresistance · 14/02/2020 20:27

VMMV: HQ were clear that all views should be equally expressed here. That's a point of view.

However may be a good idea to explain your pov and what it adds to the discussion, as a one liner just dropped on the thread like that can otherwise look a bit goady and intended to cause trouble. Which I'm sure wasn't your intent. And of course as the judge instructed, being kind is important. I don't think he meant that's a burden to be carried exclusively by GC women.

I have kittens as needed.

NoSharon · 14/02/2020 20:31

Oh - what was her sentence?

NoSharon · 14/02/2020 20:36

She was found guilty of the crime. Correctly imo.

If you can't do the time, don't do the crime!

TheBewildernessisWeetabix · 14/02/2020 20:38

As I understand it she responded in kind to her stalker. Women are not allowed to do that.

RoyalCorgi · 14/02/2020 20:46

Curious contrast between the Scottow and Miller cases. My understanding is that in the Scottow case, the judge said it didn't matter that Kate didn't direct stuff at Hayden - the fact that she wrote them meant that they could be picked up by anyone as Twitter is a public forum.

The judge in the Miller case said the exact opposite, namely that Miller's tweets were for his followers, not for a wider audience:

twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1228286850223177728/photo/1

Hirsutefirs · 14/02/2020 20:48

In a way, she got off lightly. A court ordered her to desist and she didn’t.

Defiance of the justice system can go down very badly.

Fatty being a dreadful undesirable doesn’t mean Ms Scottow isn’t guilty. You are not supposed to harass bad people.

Amalfimamma · 14/02/2020 20:48

NoSharon

She was given a conditional discharge.

Why, in your opinion, does she deserve this? Have you followed the trial? Do you know that. Hayden defended the gassings by the nazis? That hayden stelked Kate and admitted as much in court?

I'm genuinely interested in why yu think Kate deserves this

slipperywhensparticus · 14/02/2020 20:48

Well...ms Hayden knows more about crime than me but perhaps we should be kind and not talk in soundbites for tomorrow's pink news

LangClegsInSpace · 14/02/2020 20:51

Before the CPS prosecute something it has to pass two tests. The first is whether there is enough evidence that someone has committed a crime. In this case yes, Kate Scottow caused annoyance to someone on the internet, which apparently is illegal, and her tweets provide the evidence.

The second test is whether it's in the public interest to bring a prosecution and I can't work out how prosecuting Kate was in the public interest. This took up two days of court time and the judge went off to deliberate for a whole week - very unusual for magistrates court. The outcome was a small amount of costs, a tiny victim surcharge and a conditional discharge.

And of course Kate's career has been ruined which is not a legitimate sentence, it's simply a horrendous side effect, out of all proportion to her 'crime'.

The other horrendous side effect of this misguided prosecution is of course the chilling effect it has on the human right to freedom of expression for all of us. See the Harry Miller judgment for all you need to know about that.

These horrendous, unjust side effects from the prosecution of someone involved in a twitter spat with a TRA troll could have been foreseen by the CPS. I would like to know how they reached the conclusion that it was in the public interest to bring this prosecution. Is there any way we can get them to show their working?

FOI won't work because it's an individual case. Kate could do a subject access request but probably wouldn't get much because they don't have to release information that relates to the prosecution of offenders.

CPS have a complaints procedure. It's open to anyone who has had direct contact with the CPS with some exceptions, including people convicted of a crime who want to appeal. So that's a non-starter.

They also have a 'feedback procedure' and anyone can provide feedback. It has no teeth of course:

All feedback will be acknowledged, formally recorded and analysed in order to identify improvements to develop our services so that they continue to meet the needs of the public. We are committed to delivering excellent service standards and will use feedback to identify and develop good practice. Where it is possible and appropriate to do so, a response to the feedback will be provided.

www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/Feedback-Complaints-Policy-Jan-2019-v2.pdf

Nevertheless if enough of us get our feedback officially recorded they can't pretend they didn't know when the shit hits the fan, and I do believe we are now seeing the first spatterings of shit hitting the fan in all sorts of areas.

If anyone is considering providing feedback to the CPS they might want to remind them of how much egg they had on their faces after their ridiculous attempt to prosecute Miranda Yardley of transphobic hate speech or whatever the bullshit charges were.

Cascade220 · 14/02/2020 20:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Cascade220 · 14/02/2020 20:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LangClegsInSpace · 14/02/2020 20:54

Nobody would buy a wig with that sort of comb-over though.

Amalfimamma · 14/02/2020 20:54

A court ordered her to desist and she didn’t

She did actually.

Hayden went looking for her and her tweet and most of the tweets used as evidence didn't even mention hayden.

Hayden, who's tweets, mysteriously, weren't recorded in evidence by cps

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread