Harrop MPTS Hearing

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

I thought this may be of interest:

www.mpts-uk.org/hearings-and-decisions/medical-practitioners-tribunals/dr-adrian-harrop-nov-21

The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that from 10 May 2018 to 23 November 2019, Dr Harrop inappropriately used his Twitter account to post tweets that were offensive and/or insulting and/or inappropriate in nature and some of which were intended to intimidate.

@PronounssheRa

It's not necessarily Harrop who gave them the documents.

Only limited numbers of people have access to these documents. Should be fairly straightforward to establish who shared them with vice, either directly or through a third party.

What the fuck was he thinking and what was his intention behind it.

Limited is not one though is it?

I doubt Hunte will pony up his source.

Just because something is highly likely doesn't mean it's proven.

I think there are a number of potential avenues for complainants who has a reasonable expectation of anonymity and privacy to go down.

The ICO
The GMC
MPTS
The Police, if they see this as an extension of harassment
A solicitor

And put a rocket up the arse of Vice magazine. Its privacy policy states "If you are unhappy with how we’ve handled your information, or have further questions on the processing of your personal data, please contact us at [email protected]."

Private Eye will be interested, no doubt.

@CovidCorvid

How do I find the vice article on archive website?

It's still live on Vice. I found it by looking on Twitter.

Poor man just wanted to express himself.

Article is archived here archive.ph/pXfjU

@Shortpoet

Poor man just wanted to express himself.

Is this where we get to say “freedom of expression doesn’t mean freedom from consequences” :D

Is the "this post is hidden" message automatically triggered by key words?

The statement from Vice implies that they received the documents anonymously, according to good old journalistic "protect the source" principles. If that's the case, why are the accompanying photographs such a perfectly matched (sickeningly sycophantic) illustrative set? They wouldn't have had these hanging around in stock, surely?

Interesting post from SH there.
On a completely unrelated note, wasn't there an incident a while ago where someone's alternative identity was unmasked precisely because they leaked legal docs relating to a case, to which only they would've had access?

It astonishes me that Ben Hunte and his editors were stupid enough to admit they had sight of the documents. Let's face it, they could only have come from Harrop or one of his associates.

Is Hunte a worse journalist than Harrop is a GP? Difficult question.

Ooh, I've never been in a cesspit before. I might get my nice new All Saints trousers mucky.

Seriously though, WTAF? I am in Manchester today, it would've been an interesting day to go and observe.

It's right to state that it wasn't necessarily AH who leaked the documents.

But it can't be right to say they can't/won't ever know who did do the leaking. Because if that's true, what confidence can any of us have, ever about confidentiality?

Lawyer isn't a protected term, doncha know?

I think it would be helpful if the GMC made a statement tomorrow indicating whether the leak did or did not orginate from the GMC side.

Might narrow it down.

He’s using the photos from this shoot for his Insta & FB avatar. It’s shameless.

The witnesses were probably obvious, but Vice has now enabled Jigsaw identification of at least one, which has now set his golfing buddy and chums on them again and will probably see a repeat/escalation of the harassment she was presumably hoping to avoid.

@Personwithrage

It's right to state that it wasn't necessarily AH who leaked the documents.

But it can't be right to say they can't/won't ever know who did do the leaking. Because if that's true, what confidence can any of us have, ever about confidentiality?

It may not have been AH but it had to be either from GMC/MPTS, AH or one of the legal people involved.

@MonsignorMirth

Interesting post from SH there. On a completely unrelated note, wasn't there an incident a while ago where someone's alternative identity was unmasked precisely because they leaked legal docs relating to a case, to which only they would've had access?

That was very curious wasn't it. I take my bobble hat off to whoever leaked them.

From the vice article

Asked what he would like to say to the gender critics and transphobes who may read this, Harrop paused for a moment, before calmly and confidently responding, "you will not win".

This from the man who is in a professional tribunal, facing 15 charges, after being given two written warnings, and has now had to take a break because he has given an interview to the media, who now claim they have all the details of the witnesses??

"Harrop paused for a moment, before calmly and confidently responding, "you will not win".

What planet is he on?

What planet is he on?

I don't know, but it look like it's about to self-destruct. It's l,ike Harrop has written is very own Reynolds8 Pamphlet.

*niche, I know. Can't help it.

@RedDogsBeg

Seems like AH is pulling a sickie, has asked for a break and the Hearing has been adjourned until tomorrow.

Quelle surprise

He'll now go for the mental health defence. Which should at least see him suspended until (if ever) he is deemed fit to practise again.

@Shortpoet

Poor man just wanted to express himself.

Spectacularly missing the point as per usual.

The issue is that confidential information has been given to Vice news, information that is not being shared with the public or press in attendance at the actual Hearing.

Furthermore, people appearing in Court or before a Tribunal usually wait until after the Hearing has taken place before doing interviews in the Press.

As Signalbox stated and as we are always being told:

freedom of expression doesn’t mean freedom from consequences

Useful for the esteemed monitor to remember one would have thought.

What. The. Almighty F?!!!

I hope those who's details were sent to Vice press charges against him!

Surely now they have to strike him off???

@MonsignorMirth

Interesting post from SH there. On a completely unrelated note, wasn't there an incident a while ago where someone's alternative identity was unmasked precisely because they leaked legal docs relating to a case, to which only they would've had access?

I think you're right, my memory is a bit woolly hatted though.

Hunte and Harrop, something delicious about them fucking up so spectacularly. The arrogance of the two of them. His poor barrister.
I've just messaged MPTS via their website, I complained about Harrop's behaviour via email to the GMC ages ago, I would really like to know those details haven't been leaked to Mr Hunte.
I just cant get over their stupidity.

Poor man just wanted to express himself.

The tribunal is about standards of professional conduct. Harrop's right to free expression remains intact so I'm really not sure why some TRA's think this is a gotcha. He could have said anything he liked within the law and not been in front of this tribunal if he hadn't advertised his profession when posting on Twitter.