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

Thanks ickky. Looking forward to your new thread.

Good move by IO not asking any questions - clearly keen to get him off before he can say anything else batshit

Well that's a load of bollocks isn't it? I'm sure I could do a quick search on twitter to disprove that. What a different world he lives in if he expects normal sane people to believe that. Stonewall's whole point of being is to pressure people to not be homophobic, transphobic, etc. If they really can't bring any infuence to the situation when they accuse someone of transphobia, then what is the point of them?

I am wondering after this, how many letters that were written to employers that affected people with 'dog whistle' opinions that were indeed sacked or lost imcome, but due to the time period or lack of actual evidence [as in, not a barrister and not knowing how to do these things] there have been.

If I were any of those high level NHS directors, company CEOs, local authority officers & cos I’d be so embarrassed that I’d leant any credence to anything KM had said. I’d want to dig a hole and hide I’d be so embarrassed to have been taken in by someone who talks such utter shite

He was just spouting stuff he sees in the media. Unfortunately there are a lot of young people (I reckon he's late twenties now but he's been in this debate for over a decade) who are intensely vulnerable to rote learning complete rubbish and then sticking by it in the face of the evidence.

The final cross examination seemed odd. As though the witness was being led to say the right thing.

And spent so much money on it.

She's trying to protect GCC and not Stonewall and trying to distance them from him. They're all clever QCs and how could they be influenced by him. I can't wait to hear from Michelle Brewer.

I missed the last 10 minutes, did IO get to the cross examination?

Hopefully BC will return to refer to him in his summing up.

Why am I not surprised that KM conveniently ignores Kathleen Stock, Jo Phoenix and many more who suffered harm as a result of being accused of transportation.

But he holds a senior post at Stonewall and someone has programmed him.

What needs to be established is who. Who has programmed this unfortunate person and sent them out under the bus like this?

I missed the last 10 minutes, did IO get to the cross examination?

She chose not to do any further examination.

IO had no questions

Thanks @Ereshkigalangcleg

*transphobia obviously 🙄

I feel desperately sorry that someone who needs three emotional support beings was put into a position of some authority at SW.

I am not sorry for this adult male who actually seemed to relish the power he had (has?) over clients and their female employees.

Well it serves IO right as they wasted so much time, there was none left for them.

'Who has programmed this unfortunate person and sent them out under the bus like this?'

It's collective. The internet does most of it.

When this is all over there will be an interesting psychological case study to be written about how a set of ideas at odds with reality came to be accepted by such a large section of society. It's quite frightening to see people being persuaded of things that are completely unreal. Emperor's new clothes has been cited many times, but it really is.

I'm not sure that IO had much to gain by re-examining KM. He did a fine job of presenting himself as a rogue employee who holds unhinged views and, as presented, his evidence will support IO's case that his mischief was nothing to do with any direction by Stonewall.

Her witness had dug himself such a massive hole another hour of re-examination wouldn't be enough to get him out. Best just to let him disappear from view.

Well that was a long day

I don't think he came across as a rogue at all. He was very clear that his positions are Stonewall positions. I don't think they have other witnesses, do they?