Raquel Rosario Sanchez

[Signalbox]

I have tried to find a previous thread for Raquel but don't seem to be able to locate it.

Raquel has released an update on her crowd justice page.

Hearing to take place from February 7th to February 14th, 2022...

"Dear everyone,
Hope you are well.
We had a very successful hearing on November 17th. It went on for longer than expected (we ended being with the judge for nearly 3 hours) which felt draining and nerve-wrecking for me but it all generated a positive outcome for us.
Our trial will take place from February 7th to February 14th, 2022. My lawyers reached out to the University countless times so we could collaborate and find dates suitable for all the witnesses, lawyers and parties but they refused to even acknowledge our emails. Having to constantly chase them represented an unnecessary expense for us and, I believe one of the purposes was that, without their dates, my case would be thrown way into the future (the other purpose would be to increase our costs). For example, into September or November 2022. I had truly resigned myself to this eventuality so I was surprised that last week the Court decided the dates for us and a lot sooner than I anticipated.
Most of the University's submission on November 17th related to anonymity and secrecy. They sought orders from the Court to further anonymise their disclosure (which the still haven't provided) and they wanted the judge to order that nobody can access legal documents without making an application to the Court. The judge refused both requests citing the principle of open justice, and reminded the University that the Supreme Court ruled that the public has a right to see justice so no requirement to seal the documents would be made for my case.
You have to wonder why is the University so absolutely paranoid about disclosure and why they are so anxious about the eventuality that the public will get to read Court documents about my case (ie. about the University of Bristol's treatment of me). What is it that they are hiding?
Having caused endless obstructions and delays by not releasing their disclosure, the University told the judge that it would take them too long to do it so they wanted the trial dates (established right at the beginning of the hearing) moved. The judge said, and this was beautiful: "I am not moving the trial dates. There have been enormous delays. Those instructing you must get their act together and get ready for the trial." And then she dropped the mic and left. Just kidding, but you can imagine how happy I felt to finally hear that!
We had to make three separate applications to the Court relating to disclosure problems that we have encountered with the University, and they had one application over something that was resolved prior to Nov 17th. While the Court did not grant us the Unless Order we were seeking, the judge did make a comprehensive order that included our concerns. I am particularly happy that the judge considered that all our applications have been reasonable and were due to the drawn out disclosure issues. Therefore, we were awarded cost for all three of our applications. Meanwhile, the Court did not awarded the the Defendant cost for theirs and told the University to go pay for their own application.
I feel very happy that during our November 17th hearing we finally managed to get the dates for our trial, which has been worrying me for such a long time, and I am also happy that the judge said this case was "an extremely important case."
That being said, February 7th, 2022 is almost here. Less than two months and a half away. That means there is a lot of work to be done (as in, A LOT) in a very short amount of time. The University has been increasing our cost unnecessarily and, while we may recover that after the trial, at the moment we really need to raise enough funds to see this case through. Please, if you can share with your friends, families and colleagues, and spread the word on social media, I would really appreciate it.
As always, I am so grateful to my lawyers for their hard work. Particularly to my barrister, Alice de Coverley, who was on fire on Nov 17th. It has been a challenging couple of months with no end in sight but now everything feels clearer and near. Having a trial so soon feels daunting but I am ready.
Thank you all for your kindness and support throughout.
Best,
Raquel
Ps. I was featured on Woman's Hour on my birthday, where I discussed our case. You can listen to the BBC Radio 4 Woman's Hour interview with journalist Emma Barnett (35-06 to 51-41) on the BBC website. An acquaintance volunteered a full transcript of the segment so you can also read the interview on this PDF"

Placemarking

Raquel's deposition is a difficult read. It is incomprehensible that women are considered a threat if they wish to meet and discuss things that affect them, based on their sex. One person's strongly held view, ie that transwomen are women, does not justify the silencing of people who hold another point of view, ie that women are oppressed because of their sex and that sex is immutable.

I struggle, every time I read something like this.. to see this from the point of view of acquaintances who have trans children or who believe that the harm caused to women is in part due to the insistence that the sexual binary is of primary importance and that we would be liberated if we departed from this narrative.

But then, I cannot get past the fact that those who wished to silence Women's Place UK and Women Talk Back were doing so based on no evidence of violence or threat to anyone. The strength of the opposition to groups of women who wish to meet and talk is incomprehensible, especially given the lack of evidence that there was anything that constituted hate, or illegal activity.

She clearly points out that the university repeatedly put the needs of trans students above that of their female students. Protecting the right to freedom of speech of one group does not mean that those rights should be taken away from another group. Protecting one group from harassment does not mean that others groups should not be protected. It is possible to give voice and protection to groups with differing views. We have done that for centuries to religions.. and I hate to bring religion into it as I do not believe that protecting the rights of women is a belief system, but it is the most familiar example that we have.

I have shared this on my facebook and have had no comments and one like. The last time I shared something gender critical, the same thing happened.. I posted a silly picture of one of my kids a day later and had dozens of likes.. My friends are silent on this subject. Thank heavens for this board because this story and the stories of other women who are silenced makes me cry. At least I know that my reaction is not unique.

Update from RRS

Dear everyone,

Hope you are well.

As you know, we were in court from February 7th-14th, 2022. At the end of the trial, the judge informed us that he will aim to have his judgement ready within the next three months, but that at that point, if he needed more time he could request an extension.

We have received no news from the Court yet. Many people have been asking me, so I imagine lots of you will want to know the outcome of our legal case against the University of Bristol. I really want to know too, but I'm not worried, or stressed or anxious about it. The outcome will be ready, when it is ready. And if the judge needs extra time, then that is perfectly understandable. The last two months on this litigation (December and January) where thoroughly horrible for me, due to the conduct of the Defendant and their insistence on making this process as difficult as possible for me. So all my sleepless nights (and there were a lot) were before the trial, and now I feel at peace that my legal team and I worked very hard to ensure we presented our case as best as we could.

You can read my Witness Statement here:
www.raquelrosariosanchez.com/witness-statement

You can find the Closing Submissions, the Witness Statement from Dr Emma Williamson and our Skeleton Argument on this page:
www.raquelrosariosanchez.com/legal-documents

That being said, I still have a lot of pending legal bills. The bulk of the work for the case took place towards the end, hence why it accumulated. December and January were extremely busy and intense for my lawyers and for me. Please consider donating again, and sharing this page with people in your circles who could contribute as well. I really need your help to meet the stretch target.

I will keep you posted regarding any news from the Court, as soon as I can. And again, thank you for all your support,
Raquel

Ps. Here's an interview I did last night with Andrew Doyle for his programme Free Speech Nation on GB News. The interview focused on my legal case and broader issues about academia:

Donated and bumped

Bump

She has such beautiful hair.

And here she is writing an opinion piece for Newsweek. (Isn't that quite a big US magazine?)

Gender Dogma Threatens to Pulverize Women's Rights

I didn't know she had some US academic background:

I minored in Women and Gender Studies in Utah and did a Masters Degree in Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies in Oregon.

I'd be interested to know if she had any bad gender-identity ideology experiences there. My preconception was that this stuff hit earlier in US academia.