Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 4

[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)

Witness Statement of Allison Bailey: allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Witness-Statement-of-Allison-Bailey.pdf

Kirrin Medcalf's complaint to GCC: allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PH-Bundle-pp-331-2-Stonewall-Complaint.pdf

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

Thread 3 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3?

Used to be the corner stone of professionality. In the days where there was such a thing.

KM is demonstrating the belief widely shared that there are 'real' people, who are entitled to law and policing consideration and to risk assess and to have their feelings and needs and inclusion valued.... and then there is the subhuman underclass who aren't.

Name changed for this but I'm being managed out currently. Been shifted sideways, excluded from my old projects and put on work that doesn't match my skills so I feel I'm being set up to fail.

It would be very difficult to prove this and certain colleagues are still emailing me and me them.

Because I'm on Allison Bailey's side and because of my support for Dennis Kavanagh on Twitter I have received weird messages such as 'why do you want us dead?' and 'people like you are why we carry knives'. Never happened to me before, it's a bit disconcerting seeing as my profile pic on Twitter is of my face. What is weird about it is TRAs don't usually say these things to heterosexual males.

Being threatened for being rational is very strange but I suppose that is where we are.

@IStandWithAlison - There seems to be some question marks about your contributions. E.g., whether that spelling of Alison is intentional and not to be construed as support for Allison Bailey.

I would you to clarify this and, if relevant, if you have a role in Allison Bailey's case in any capacity. I would normally never ask such questions but thought you might welcome the opportunity to get this into the open as several references have been made to your name, the content of your posts, and (inappropriate?) attention drawn to deletions of contributions by other posters.

If you have a perspective on the case, and you're not involved with it without declaring that material fact, then I would welcome informed commentary. I know nothing at all about employment tribunals and admit to a very scant knowledge of the wider legal system and its many branches.

I think this is where you might need to set up your evidence trail, based on AH's 'defence' of GCC.

Email them and challenge them. Point out how you're being treated. Keep copies of everything.

I brought a grievance against a head of dept like this, and won. He basically had to fess up and apologise for 'not realising' what was happening to the only female employee in his dept.

I think one of the new posters was just an old poster with a name change
Mysterious . . . . . . . . .

I agree with this. My sister is a keen dog agility person and they (dog agility/flyball etc people) couldn't give a monkey's about the handlers - only -ve comments are along the lines of "That dog tried so hard and that tw*t just ignored her & pushed her away because she made one little mistake. People like that don't deserve a dog!"

That sounds stressful. I've been managed out before and it's not a very pleasant experience. It's very easy for emails to appear to be supportive but the reality of the workplace is very different. Also one phone call or an email appearing to offer support doesn't really undo the damage. You become very wary of accepting support from people that you don't know are genuinely on your side.

That's so typical, and so typicall awful.

I think this is where the claim of feeling 'unsasfe' comes from though. Close proximity with those who will cite facts out loud might cause them to question what they have been taught, therefore it's unsafe to hear it, as it can cause severe and catastrophic logic to embed itself in their brains. And how could they be the lovingly protected victims any more if they stopped believing? How could they dominate and subjugate women if they stop believing? They have to believe for their own self-preservation.

Is there a link for that please

FWIW I didn't interpret @IStandWithAlison 's post as being anything other than an explanation of legal professional titles/courtesies.

I haven’t posted on these threads before and I’m not around much these days but was a regular poster on FWR and here from the start of the gender ideology shit show, posting, fundraising and attending meetings. My life changed and I had to step away. I can’t watch live unfortunately but am avidly following the threads and tweets.

I thought it was a bit unusual for someone to (a) misspell 'Allison' in a user name like that, and (b) take such massive offence on behalf of Robin Moira White and Jane Russell. I'm sure neither of them give a flying fuck. Well, maybe one of them.

Pink I was not referring to you.

In fact Spindle has just mentioned who I was referring to.

Going back to KM for a moment and the interconnections between transactivists. Has anyone else seen the lengthy document, possibly produced by GI, in distinctive pink and blue which I think was posted yesterday but I can't find now. KM was named as a 'facilitator' along with Shon Faye and others in putting together a survey of trans experiences. IIRC the name of one Alex Sharpe, of GCC, was also on it in more of an author/editor type capacity.

I'm worried that in replying to you I might be accused of derailing as the conversation has moved on, but as you asked...

1. I have already acknowledged that I spelled Allison's name incorrectly, and apologised for it. The name change was supposed to communicate that I am in total support of her and my comments were separate from that.

1. I confirm that I have no connection whatsoever to Allison's case or any of the parties.

1. I was just upset at what looked like the career/role/achievements of an objectively brilliant woman being put down simply out of dislike of whom she represents. I appreciate that that wasn't the intention, although some posters have confirmed that they believe this would be justified. This sort of view point comes up constantly and it infuriates me, and it seemed like a good discussion to share the clarification on.

1. I have no idea about any deleted comments. I didn't see them.

I am sorry for my interjection and had bowed out of the discussion.

@MsMarvellous it's been very interesting to hear from someone with in depth knowledge of being a barrister's clerk as there being a 'nod and a wink' to reduce the quality of work offered to Allison seems to be a key aspect of the case - so thank you.

'I was just upset at what looked like the career/role/achievements of an objectively brilliant woman being put down simply out of dislike of whom she represents.'

I have no dislike of any of the barristers. They are doing their jobs. The case they present is offensive to me, however.

Oh that's interesting. I hope someone can find the link.

KM is demonstrating the belief widely shared that there are 'real' people, who are entitled to law and policing consideration and to risk assess and to have their feelings and needs and inclusion valued.... and then there is the subhuman underclass who aren't.

Yes, very clearly demonstrating this central tenet of the TRA ideology.

'His safety and wellbeing be protected'

But Allison's safety and wellbeing at work?? 🤨

It's very easy to change your username. If for example there is a miss spelling.

The discussion started with something we discussed yesterday, whether it is permitted to share the complaint to GCC document from AB's website. EJ said that it was permitted because it was not taken from these proceedings where there is a prohibition order in place and because it has a redaction of the sender of the complaint.

It could be this one?

'TRANSforming Futures: Criminal Justice Report'

33d79401-9c2f-4c98-84f4-557b6904a1d5.filesusr.com/ugd/76972e_8939af11c66b443aaf2d85e6e5ff90d1.pdf?index=true

The people involved:

'Particular thanks go to the phenomenal Levi Hord who analysed the data and created this report, to our fabulous graphic designer Cosette Pin, to the amazing counsellors Ellis Johnson and Kris Black, and to the brilliant facilitators: Chay Brown, Drew Simms, Ellis Johnson, Kirrin Medcalf, Sabah Choudrey, Shon Faye and Toryn Glavin. This project would not have succeeded without the hard work, advice and input of the fantastic Kieran Wilson, Kuchenga Shenje, Melz Owusu, Suzanna Hopwood and the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group.'

The glossary says that 'trans' =

'An umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or
does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth. Trans
people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of
terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer
(GQ), gender-fl uid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless,
agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman,
transmasculine, transfeminine and neutrois.'