In court tomorrow

[BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted]

Hayden versus Associated Newspapers.

The Judge? Go on guess. Mr Justice Julian Knowles.

Remember him? I couldn’t be happier.

This is according to contacts at the NZ fruit farm

I wonder what Scott v the LGBT Foundation is about. It's on the same list.

I think 'robed' means that the courtroom lawyers wear the robes that they are entitled to wear formally in court?

I thought robed meant they have higher qualifications than a general magistrate.
Am I making that up?

Exactly Catting especially with the ridiculous reporting rules it’s the only way we know what they mean by woman

Yes, very handy for discerning the difference between solicitors/barristers/judges from everyone else in the court room!

Is Hayden both complaining that their point of view wasn’t represented, and complaining that the Mail was trying to contact Hayden?

Yes, very handy for discerning the difference between solicitors/barristers/judges from everyone else in the court room!

Got it.

Basically, if the judge wears a robe then the barristers and solicitors must too.

Robes are the default for anything above magistrates court, if the hearing is open to the public.

Judges sometimes eschew robes so as not to scare children (or because it’s too hot for wigs) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_dress#United_Kingdom

Hayden is complaining because the information in the Daily Mail is factually incorrect.
He's claiming that they've said he was born male.
No me neither.
The farm is a vile place but sometimes it throws up an absolute gem

Brilliant. Can’t wait to see the evidence SH will bring to refute that.

This photo of Justice Knowles is from one the DM stories on Harry’s case.
Not sure if it will be the natty red outfit tomorrow or not?

Bonus image, flow chart of the court hierarchy.

That is a really badly drafted grounds.

claiming that they've said he was born male.

Ah! This a test of the privacy that a GRC is supposed to offer (if a person has a GRC, no one in authority is allowed to divulge that).
It’s going to be a test as to whether that holds up for the press, or if public interest over rules it, I suspect.

Thanks for explanations.

Is Steph representing Stephself?

I don't know if Steph is representing Stephself. It'll be interesting if nothing else.

Will Steph Also be wearing the fancy robes as Steph is representing Steph self as Steph’s lawyer?

Can someone dumb down the case for me please?

And also, I'd really like to know why everyone says Hayden is a "lawyer" , as in, Hayden is not really one. I admit I love the snark, but Hayden's twitter profile says they are? Where is the discrepancy?

I understand Hayden said in the courtroom against KS that they are extremely litigious, but that doesnt make you a lawyer!

So, women have to take the word of men, who claim to be legally women, and we are not allowed to know if they have a GRC? And telling women if the man actually does have one, isnt allowed?!

I was googling t’other night about trauma and bereavement in relation to sudden trans identity (something that various expert practitioners such as Marcus Evans have written about, in the context that it isn’t being adequately explored by gender services).

My search accidentally turned up this utterly batshit document, written by Stephen Whittle and dated as 2007 (so not long after the very first GRCs were issued). It is an absolute bonkers interpretation of privacy as relating to a GRC, it essentially threatens undertakers with legal action if they reveal the dead persons trans identity to anyone, even the legal next of kin. If a cross dresser is hit by a car Swhittle says that the professionals handling the body should dispose of the lady-clothes and pretend to his wife that her husband is naked because all his clothes were completely destroyed by the accident!
Swhittle also says that the death should be recorded with the chosen gender, regardless of the deceased’s legal sex! So some people will be born and then completely vanish from all public records, thanks to Swhittle’s crazy vanity interpretation of the actual law!

www.scottishtrans.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/NHS-Bereavement-A-guide-for-Transsexual-Transgender-people-and-their-loved-ones.pdf

Presumably, this case could be very influential as to the difference between Stephen Whittle/Stonewall Law and actual Law.

The fact of Hayden's grc is all over t'internet, including on this very forum where they shared this of their very own free will.

Looking forward to hearing the result of this latest episode in the courts.

*Hayden is not really one. I admit I love the snark, but Hayden's twitter profile says they are? Where is the discrepancy?

Hayden has a law degree, but does not have a professional law qualification and is unable to become a solicitor or barrister due to an extensive criminal record (as entered into the public record via Kate Scottow’s recent case in the magistrates court).

Even if Steph represents Stephself tomorrow Steph is not legally permitted to wear robes as Steph is neither a solicitor nor a barrister.

Thank you @DuLANGMondeFOREVER ! That makes sense.

Male vs Mail. Lolz

Apparently the term lawyer has no basis in legality. So anyone can call themselves a lawyer. It's meaningless.

This a test of the privacy that a GRC is supposed to offer (if a person has a GRC, no one in authority is allowed to divulge that).

I don't think its correct.
If my official capacity gives me access to personal information, I may not reveal or share that information. If I do, I can be prosecuted and fined.
On the other hand if I use the evidence of my own eyeballs to reach a conclusion and state it as fact, that is not a breach of GDPR.
It may not be kind or relevant, but it isn't a breach of GDPR.

The GRA also states that in certain situations a person is not treated as their acquired sex. There is no automatic right to be treated as your acquired sex that confers that right in every situation, even if you have a GRC and altered birth certificate.

Personally - feel free to call me an extremist - I don't think that people convicted of certain offences should have the right to change their identity at all.