Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 2

[ickky]

The Tribunal started on 25th April at 10am. If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access as early as possible.

Send an email to

[email protected]

The subject heading of the email request should read

“MEDIA OR PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST – Case number 2202172/2020 - Ms A Bailey – 25th April 2022.

Then ask for the pin for the online access.

You will be contacted with instructions on how to observe the hearing.

When joining the live tribunal
select the video and mic that are not crossed out, this is the courts vid and mic.
On the next page select NONE on the drop down windows for vid and mic, these are your own video and mic.

You must be muted so as to not disturb the hearing.

There is also live tweeting from twitter.com/tribunaltweets

Abbreviations:
AB: Allison Bailey, claimant
BC: Ben Cooper QC, barrister for AB
SW = Stonewall Equality Limited (respondent 1)
IO = Ijeoma Omambala QC, barrister for SW
RW = Robin White assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC would be a better abbreviation)
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell assisting AH
RM= Rajiv Menon QC & SH = Stephanie Harrison QC (jointly respondent 3 along with all members of GC except AB)
EJ = Employment Judge Goodman hearing the case
Panel = any one of the three panel members (EJ and two lay members)

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 1 👇

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

SL: my question [in the transcript] could be interpreted as a gender critical question.

Remarkable.

That jumped out at me, too, Jules.

What a load of bollocks he's talking.

I am keeping an eye on tribunal tweets and you can see Mr Lue squirming through the tweets. He really did not want to be pinned down on the racism comparison.

I lost the thread of it but I think SL's "gender critical" question is the last paragraph of page 5876/6025.

Mr Lue's mask was very good but it's falling off now.

He's never been on Twitter and is incredibly proud of that fact.

Now Hochhauser is complaining about the time it's taking. The absolute cheek. :)

Quite.

I'm effing and blinding at the computer here - thank goodness for mute!

BC: Do you read The Times Mr Lue?

SL: No I do not.

The air of faint incredulity and bewilderment that Mr Lue affects is wearing very thin now.

"It's really hard to tell a human being on this earth what they are..."
unless it’s to tell a woman that she’s actually a cis heteronormative vagina haver

'The air of faint incredulity and bewilderment that Mr Lue affects is wearing very thin now.'

Like the Martian atmosphere.

It's seems remarkable that Lue is claiming that at the time he was involved in setting up a competence in GCC in trans issues to cooperate with Stonewall and its campaigning in this area, he was aware of just about all of the debate going on with reasonable people disagreeing with Stonewall.

Happy to tell Allison a crock of shit, though

Ah. EJ was amused by BC's answer there. It's for the witness to answer and not anyone else.

One plausible way in which Lue had no knowledge that reasonable people were disagreeing with Stonewall is that he had a default assumption that Stonewall is always in the right and in setting up on association with them it is a given that you never question anything what they say or do.

I wouldn't want that kind of mindset in my counsel.

A lovely long BC pause there.

This is why people who are 'live and let live', including me, have allowed all this to happen. We didn't see it coming or understand what we were seeing because our instinct was 'how can you tell someone they are not what they truly think they are.' I was peaking around the time of the gcc gra training session, but till then i didn't get it.
I can believe SL didn't know the SW position was controversial before AB's email. Many of us here didn't. There was some press coverage eg Janice Turner but the vast majority of public discussion was 'gra reform is good, anyone who objects has bigoted motivations'. It was very difficult to get any publicity for the feminist objection. I wrote to index on censorship about then to try and get them to look at the censorship side. They had said nothing.

'I can believe SL didn't know the SW position was controversial before AB's email.'

He did. He was involved in the GRA training in 2018 (it's on YouTube) and there is a long transcript of discussion about self-ID, single sex spaces etc. and he clearly understood the position was controversial, by any regular use of that word. He might still have thought the position was correct, but there's no reasonable way he can say he didn't know people disputed it vociferously.

For someone so allegedly utterly ignorant of Stonewalls campaign & activism re Trans Rights the current witness, Mr L has managed to dress himself, two days in a row, in the Trans Flag colours - yesterday it was a pale blue shirt and pale pink tie, and today the tie says it all really. How can one so learned, profess to be so ignorant of the issues then, and more so now.

The timewasting, obfuscating and other stalling tactics by this witness, and the QCs for the Respondents is also utterly appalling and shameful. We see you!!!

Michelle Brewer describes Allison Bailey's position as 'dirty transphobic laundry' being washed in public.

SL thanked Michelle Brewer for her support after that email to him, but denies that he was supporting the characterisation of AB's views adopted by MB.

Loads of people in the chat struggling to open the bundle. So much for open Justice.

BC finished with Mr Lue. Ms Omambala is also cross-examining with one or two questions.