Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 3

[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

On the first page underneath where you put your screen name, select the video and mic that are not crossed out (top option), 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)

Thread 1
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing?

Thread 2

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2

The emotional support person seems to be rather more actively involved than I would have anticipated.

Stonewall seems to be mostly comprised of women. Or at least those in this case are women + Nancy + Ruth.

Its still astonishing to me how much of the TRA attack on womens rights in recent years is actually spearheaded by women. Appalling anti-feminist attacks wrapped up in "inclusivity, diversity and male faux focused feminism".

Why do they do this?

Unless I'm mistaken, the ESP left and that may have been because they didn't want to be seen by the observers.

Yes suddenly being a support person lost its appeal.

Speaking hypothetically....

I am autistic and a very common occurrence is to completely become overwhelmed after interactions with people and to try to replay the whole conversation in my head in a panic that I must've said something wrong.

I can see how having someone with me to make notes and reassure me afterwards would be quite useful.

Sorry I missed it, but what are Kirrin's pronouns? Did BC refer to Kirrin as Mr?

Ah, I see that the Emotional Support Person has gone and has been replaced by a solicitor/ legal person, which would explain all the note-taking and laptop shifting.

He is referred to as Mr by everyone.

The ESP is still there and making copious notes.

Is it definitely an actual dog rather than a furry who identifies as a dog?

It's a lawyer. The support person left.

Here's where I think the ESP disappeared:

KM is in centre. Behind him is his mother and to his right solicitor who is assisting with screens. These are the only people. We have reduced people.

twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1523987034112675842

Yes.

KM's statement is just 'This thing AB said suggested that trans women are not women' over and over again.

That is her legally protected belief. This whole statement is a confession.

Ah ok. It's a very small screen. Thought the note taker was the ESP.

KM is both "he/him" and "they/them".

KM's statement is just 'This thing AB said suggested that trans women are not women' over and over again.

And the same party line that most "GC" people are men.

I feel like this is real wizard of oz / man behind the curtain type stuff. All these big Important companies and government Departments have been taking direction on how to manage their employees.... from these guys?!

Maybe the note taker identifies as a dog - a pup play lawyer ?

Well of fucking course he they is are.

Why is she called his mother and not his birthing parent? 🤔

Of course we're now all chatting about this instead of their answer's...

😂 Good point.

'All these big Important companies and government Departments have been taking direction on how to manage their employees.... from these guys?!'

The shame of it. This organisation has been 'advising' the MoD.

Why would someone capable enough to be head of trans inclusion need his/their Mum in the room whilst giving evidence on behalf of the organisation he/they work(s) for?

It really is. I can't believe so many government departments, organisations and private businesses have fallen for this.

Like trying to get you out of PE...

'Why would someone capable enough to be head of trans inclusion need his/their Mum in the room whilst giving evidence on behalf of the organisation he/they work(s) for?'

I'm not sure KM is giving evidence on SW's behalf. It seems like they are more placing the blame for these actions on KM, and insisting (via ZAF) that he was not acting on behalf of SW when he made his complaint.