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?

‘Your argument is the equivalent of saying 'it's acceptable to refer to the Doctor as a cleaner in a report about a surgery she performed, because the person having surgery was an awful person yet the doctor treated him anyway.’

And no it isn’t. There might be two qualified surgeons in the room, one leading and one assisting. I might refer to the assistant as an assistant, because they are assisting. That isn’t the same as referring to a doctor as a cleaner, and even if I did mistakenly think a doctor was a cleaner, I would not regard that as ‘exceptionally offensive’. That you would says more about you.

I have seen this with teenage girls in "lesbian" relationships who are convinced they won't get pregnant because their "girlfriend" identifies as a girl and girls can't get other girls pregnant. Until they do.

‘I have seen this with teenage girls in "lesbian" relationships who are convinced they won't get pregnant because their "girlfriend" identifies as a girl and girls can't get other girls pregnant. Until they do.’

That’s a sad indictment of the education system.

That’s a sad indictment of the education system.

That is also a sad indictment of having non medical people writing and talking about conception for vulnerable and young people.

That’s a sad indictment of the education system
It is but I get more angry at lobby groups lying to vulnerable young people. It’s another arm of the protection racket. Tell them what they want to hear and they will become our recruiting sergeants.

Adding this from the comments section of an article about all this from Roll On Friday, a lawyerly blog/news thingy.

Roll on Friday forum is quite fun to read. There's an ongoing argument across many threads about trans issues between some fairly clueless but typically arrogant know it all woke bros and a brilliant female lawyer called Lucy Van Pelt. It's quite a blokey forum in general though. They often make disparaging remarks about mumsnet, because of course a website primarily for women isn't going to be worth listening to.

‘It is but I get more angry at lobby groups lying to vulnerable young people. It’s another arm of the protection racket. Tell them what they want to hear and they will become our recruiting sergeants.’

I teach and I am actually more angry at the schools. They have the legal duty of care. They are (mostly) not vulnerable young cultists. It is completely unacceptable that they can’t find the spine to say no, that is not true and we are not teaching it.

Young people believe what teachers tell them, that's how education works.

If teachers say girls can't get other girls pregnant, kids believe it.

If teachers say this term Andrew is a girl called Melissa, kids believe it. To the detriment of Melissa's girlfriend.

This is a different picture KM

Yes, it’s a position of great social power and must not be abused for anyone’s political cause.

Am I the new poster referred to above? I'm a serial name changer but not new. I absolutely agree with this post of Tabby's and didn't mean for my earlier post to imply otherwise. The accountability of all players is fundamentally important and I am wholly in support of Allison's claim. Just also reflecting on the many, many ways that this ideology is causing damage. The whole thing does makes me desperately sad - I have a young TM that I know and a lot of the sadness comes from watching that play out.

Am I the new poster referred to above?

No Cheesel.

Although I do take exception to your name. It makes me hungry and craving my favourite cheesy snack (Cheezels - a hole lot of fun!)

KM is very vulnerable.

What just struck me ‪is that the witnesses in this case show a comparison of two approaches to dealing with trauma. Allison has channelled her childhood trauma to fight injustice; the other route‬ results in a paranoia about encountering women in toilets after reading tweets and having your Mum with you at work.

As an autistic woman, I'm not denigrating the very real support needs people have and you can't compare trauma histories. But Allison is fierce. Other witnesses, not so much so.

Thanks @Helleofabore - and also yes re Cheezels, and also Twisties - foods of the (chemical) gods. I think you and I might be from the same hemisphere.

Also... stream of consciousness. I can imagine that a proud butch lesbian is an existential threat to trans men: the path not travelled.

Good point @JulesRimetStillGleaming

Mmmmmm!! Twisties….. I sometimes get a Twistie fix though when I go to Italy and have the Parmesan version there called ‘Fonzies’. (Although, beware of the chocolate dipped Fonzie, it was like the vegemite Cadbury experience!)

But Cheezels are my favourite. Meaning, of course, I have seen you around. I do miss those chemically enhanced rice extruded items of no nutritional value!

Is there a list anywhere - or does anyone know from maybe day 1 - of who is up and when? I know the timetable went out of shape a bit but I just wondered.

It's AB today (right?) but 2 or 3(?) more weeks to get through.

All I feel I can say, after having an earlier post removed, is that I have seen clear photographic evidence that Kirrin is OFAB. I agree with a PP that knowing this does change the way I 'hear' KM's evidence.

‘All I feel I can say, after having an earlier post removed, is that I have seen clear photographic evidence that Kirrin is OFAB. I agree with a PP that knowing this does change the way I 'hear' KM's evidence.’

That’s interesting. How does it change it?

I think it is worse that a person who has stated that ‘bodies are not inherently male or female.’ in a Tribunal under oath is giving any advice on health or sex.

This person is very dangerous to young people if they are giving advice.

No. They've agreed not to publish the witness list or timetable to avoid any intimidation or threats to witnesses before they appear. This was based on the judge seeing the terfisaslur stuff and being alarmed.

If you really do stand for Allison you might want to spell her name properly.

@tabbycatstripy , I'm requoting this post by Cheezel which I think makes some good points about how knowledge of KM's sex changes the flavour of KM's words.

Just caught up on yesterday's hearing. Quite extraordinary.
RMW and IT'S set up is farcical. Why can't RMW log in to hearing via another computer with headphones, sitting near IO to assist?
That would be too sensible. A case where the legal bill is going to cost many hundreds of thousands of pounds is being treated like a circus by some parties.