Sarah Phillimore suspended from twitter

[anothermimsyborogove]

Barrister, women's right campaigner, mumsnetter @spero, and hero, Sarah Phillimore has been suspended from Twitter. Actor David Paisley and others are gloating about it.

Funny I can't find any tweets saying you were suspended for being a holocaust denier. Perhaps they've been deleted.

@jj1968

Funny I can't find any tweets saying you were suspended for being a holocaust denier. Perhaps they've been deleted.

I have several threads archived and sent to my solicitors. They may have been deleted now, I don't know as I haven't checked.

This is the problem with Twitter, as Judge commented in M v H case. So many tweets were deleted it was difficult to work out who had seen what.

None of the four I wish to sue have said explicitly that I was suspended for Holocaust denial. But they have all contributed to a situation where many 100s of others felt it was ok to say exactly that. I have no idea if I would be allowed to plead this as making their libel more serious. This is why I have instructed solicitors.

many 100s of others felt it was ok to say exactly that.

100s? Are you sure? And they've all since deleted it? Okay if you say so. I doubt the courts will find anyone responsible for what someone else said, that seems a strange demand for a free speech campaigner to make. Good that you acknowledge the people you are threatening to sue haven't accused you of holocaust denial though, I think that's the right thing to do.

@flippinada thanks I'll be interested to know what you turn up.

No of course I am not 'sure'. I spent half an hour in increasing horror trying to document what I was seeing. I got too distressed to carry on but saved some of what I saw. It certainly seemed like 100s.

I simply don't understand this bizarre attitude that as I campaign for free speech I cannot object to defamation. I have always been very clear that speech has limits set only by law and they are incitement to violence, harassment and defamation.

I suspect it simply relates to dislike for me, as I can't accept people can be this stupid. No society worth living in can tolerate absolute free speech. Article 10 certainly doesn't.

I believe you, Spero. Just like loads of anonymous anime profile accounts have made arguably defamatory comments about JK Rowling naming herself after a practitioner of conversion therapy. They think they can do it with impunity.

Are you familiar with the work of jj1968 in FWR Spero? We're at the point where many posters have realised that engaging with them is counterproductive.

@nauticant

Are you familiar with the work of jj1968 in FWR Spero? We're at the point where many posters have realised that engaging with them is counterproductive.

I think I am now and I won't engage further.

Their mission, like all TRA, is to frustrate and demoralise.

I'll quite happy admit to both states. But what they don't seem to get, even though I keep showing them, is that my rage overrides both and it is infinite.

Good night all and thanks for the continued support. Whatever happens, it is good to know that many feel exactly as I do and I hope our numbers can only grow.

I simply don't understand this bizarre attitude that as I campaign for free speech I cannot object to defamation. I have always been very clear that speech has limits set only by law and they are incitement to violence, harassment and defamation

But you were talking about people being held accountable for things other people said. That seems monstrously draconian. Shame if you don't want to engage further but I can understand why.

@Spero must know that I adore her, and have contributed multiple times to her crowdfunder.

To veer hugely off-topic, I must say to @WiltingAtTreadmills that hers is perhaps the cleverest mumsnet name since UnexpectedItemInShaggingArea. Just sublime.

I simply don't understand this bizarre attitude that as I campaign for free speech I cannot object to defamation. I have always been very clear that speech has limits set only by law and they are incitement to violence, harassment and defamation

I suspect it simply relates to dislike for me, as I can't accept people can be this stupid. No society worth living in can tolerate absolute free speech. Article 10 certainly doesn't.

No, I don’t think it’s driven by personal dislike for you. Not stupidity. But you are the person who tweeted a hashtag ‘say yes to hate’, calling for very robust free speech protections. Before you say I misunderstood it or am stupid, no I didn’t and no I am not. I understood your point with the say yes to hate hashtag but I am just surprised that, yet again, you are taking legal action because you feel you are being smeared when you call for free speech laws to the extent that the speech could be construed as hate.

I don’t like that GC women on Twitter are smeared as transphobes either but I accept that the people who say it are allowed to have their own opinions. For someone who sincerely believes TWAW, being GC IS transphobic. Some people also believe that all and any Holocaust comparisons are in poor taste and anti-Semitic. Pretty sure I have levelled exactly the same accusation at TRAs who compare the current position of trans people to the Holocaust. Should I be sued for it? I don’t believe so and I think it would be a slippery slope if I were.

Calling you a Holocaust denier is definitely in a different league to vague transphobe/anti-Semite accusations in quote tweets though. And, very clearly, you have never said anything that can be remotely
construed as Holocaust denial. But why then are you going after people who neither said those things, nor liked or retweeted them? I really don’t see the logic to that. You’d surely have a much better chance of success if you pursued that line, although I am guessing that these weren’t high profile accounts and seem to since have been deleted. Even if David and Kirsty had just liked the tweets about Holocaust denial, I’d think you’d have a stronger case than you do now. The anti-semitism accusation is analogous to KH accusing JM of vandalising a war memorial where that is false and there is no evidence from which anyone could think she did either.

If your action succeeded, it would constrain a lot of comment on what people say and that’s why I keep referring back to your role as a free speech advocate. You get called a transphobe daily, I’d imagine. Why is this any different or especially reputation-damaging? There are also numerous high profile lawyers on Twitter who use the anti-Semite label quite liberally towards people saying similar things you did. If you won and TRAs weren’t allowed to call GC women transphobic, we also wouldn’t be able to call them misogynistic or homophobic. I don’t think that would be a particularly desirable situation.

The anti-semitism accusation is analogous to KH accusing JM of vandalising a war memorial where that is false and there is no evidence from which anyone could think she did either.

Sorry that should say the Holocaust-denial accusation, not the anti-Semitism one.

This was the only tweet I could find that mentioned Holocaust denial (although others may have been deleted). But I don’t think this is actionable either because the author is referring to the definition of anti-semitism used by a particular group and expressing an opinion as to whether the tweets fall foul of this.

And I think it’s fairly well-known that a lot of Jewish people DO take offence to comparisons with the Holocaust and consider it anti-Semitic. Which Spero undeniably did when she said ‘this is how every Holocaust begins’ in reference to the trans debate.

People will always have different interpretations of what constitutes anti-semitism and transphobia. There is no universal standard. Obviously when it comes to the law, we have to use a test based on what a reasonable person might perceive. FWIW, I don’t think a reasonable person would perceive Spero’s tweets as either transphobic or anti-semitic. However, I believe that someone who does feel that they are should be permitted to say so if they genuinely feel that way.

@MoleSmokes I forgot to acknowledge your Molesworth reference! Massive fan of, chiz chiz

Thanks very much BitofFun for all your support. I am also sorry to have missed any Molesworth references as he has always been a big influence on me.

I don't think there is any point in me repeating AGAIN why I think I have been defamed and why I think defamation is nothing to do with free speech. People can read the thread and make up their own minds.

Grateful for the comments and input. Whether or not you agree with me that what was done to me was wrong and needs to be challenged, I hope we can all agree that nothing of any use or purpose can be achieved by constant lies and twisting of the truth. There is an urgent need for people to discuss openly, honestly and rationally, some very significant issues that matter a great deal to us all.

I hope to hear from my solicitors soon and I will update if I can.

Spero do you have anyone who can keep an eye and document DP's Twitter account? It seems he still likes a few 'selective' facts. Hopefully you have an account you can see with.

I just want to say LeanAndMean that although I don't agree with everything you say I think your contributions have been thoughtful and thought provoking and I have considered them in some depth and you have really made me think about freedom of speech and accountability. I think you make some good points about where the line can be drawn.

Goodness. Try to punctuate Eresh more coffee needed!

@MondayYogurt

Nevermind all the good MN does for people trapped in domestic abuse, lonely people, women struggling with breastfeeding and working and navigating a world determined to deny us a voice.

MN has always been a great resource for all those reasons and more.

That doesn't mean that Twitter post is not accurate.

It's not accurate. Hope that helps.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I just want to say LeanAndMean that although I don't agree with everything you say I think your contributions have been thoughtful and thought provoking and I have considered them in some depth and you have really made me think about freedom of speech and accountability. I think you make some good points about where the line can be drawn.

Thank you.

Same here, Lean, I think it's interesting where legal distinctions can be drawn.

Leanandmean31

I do think that there is a difference with between transphobia and anti-semitism on the one hand, and misogyny on the other, because of the seriousness with which they are taken.

Being accused of the former two may well get you called a "hate group". You can have "hate incidents" recorded against you, people may attempt to prevent you from having meetings, from being on social media, from being employed or from being part of a political party. These are thus extremely serious accusations. They amount to saying that you are so utterly beyond the pale that you should not be allowed to participate in society.

If someone gets called a misogynist, nothing would happen to them. The idea that they'd be called a "hate group" for it is laughable.