Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 7

[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 please choose a non inflammatory/offensive name, everyone can see it in the chat - This is a court room, please behave accordingly.

The court chat function is there for official court purposes, not for observers, please don't use it unless you have a technical issue.

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, senior counsel - barrister for SW
RW = Robin White junior counsel to SW - assisting IO
GC = Garden Court Chambers Limited (respondent 2) (GCC would be a better abbreviation)
AH = Andrew Hochhauser QC, senior counsel - barrister for GC
JR = Jane Russell junior counsel to GC - 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

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

Thread 4 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4

Thread 5 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4548160-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-5

Thread 6 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4550451-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-6

It's so disingenuous

I am loving EJ!

🫣🫣🫣🫣

this is jaw dropping

how dim do these ppl think the tribunal is?

EJ pointing out that MS cannot come up with any other objective for the seminar is pure sunshine.

I'm not sure how much of the claim AB will win, but this morning was a large part of the reason to raise a vast amount of money and to get this into court. So that a QC from GCC would explain how "overcoming the cotton ceiling" of lesbians was fine and not harmful to them in any way.

She doesn't understand that what the barriers for queer TW are is that women won't sleep with them!

Maybe MS has had her brain addled with GI theory? Round and round in circles, denying things in front of her eyes. Cognitive dissonance. Talking of wider context. EJ is confused.

EJ asking about what "wider context" she's talking about.

I'm not sure I know either.

There really is no limit to what some of this lot dont know.

this is jaw dropping

How does it contrast with CGD in Maya's case?

There we believed it was a bunch of US "liberal" people desperate to preserve good standing in their circles, so they'd actually almost take pride in losing to a transphobe from TERF Island in its TERFy courts, thus demonstrating their good liberal credentials.

What are the dynamics here? People unable to admit to themselves what they've done? So increased anger on show due to the cognitive dissonance?

CGD seemed more at ease with themselves, in a comfortable bubble, just not understanding the weird foreign culture.

Absolutely blinding sunshine, Hell. ☀

It's glorious.

What the fuck does she think this seminar was?

Exactly, what???
And has she ever answered what she thinks 'cotton ceiling' means, as she refuses to accept that it means what everyone else knows it to mean????

It is so funny that if you read the post-facto justification of the Workshop published by Planned Parenthood Toronto, it is transparently a case of "let's talk about anything other than what the workshop was really about".

Go BEN!!

Flipping heck this is GRIPPING. Thx for the new thread.

Exactly. I want Allison to win for her sake, as well as everything else.

But your post is the reason why I donate.

I would have donated even if the outcome was a foregone conclusion not in her favour.

Oh Ben. Get this one in the net. It's vital. Keep pushing.

GO BEN.

MS stuttering.

I take back my comments on the previous thread that MS is GC.

This case is professionally humiliating for the QCs who have given evidence. GCC will be the talk of the steamie.
They know this and it's one of the reason they are pure raging while giving evidence.

I hope he pushes the use of the word desire for that is CRUCIAL.

Way, way too late to try to re frame it all and spin it now as not about problem solving homosexual females saying no to sex with male people. The evidence is everywhere, male people spread it far and wide, and Stonewall are right behind this with NK spilling it all over R4 how homosexual people are like racists.

This is the problem with alternative facts and alternative realities that just work on not looking at the unwanted and difficult facts: it does not stand up in court and you can't force everyone else to comply. Or hide all the evidence.

And considering the very, very ungenerous pile on and threats and rage for anyone saying anything that can be even remotely construed as off message, it's downright funny to see the demand that this huge pile of evidence be written off and a much more carefully thought out PR version accepted unquestioningly instead.

No. Fuck off with that. Own it.

I just keep wanting to post again and again:

This is jaw-dropping.

Mr Cooper, we've explored this point thoroughly and quite helpfully - EJ

MS saying "it doesn't say anywhere in the workshop blurb about coercion".

As if coercive people just announce and state outright like... "yes, this in an event in coercion"

EJ - I think we have explored this point quite helpfully!

YES!!

It is clear that MS has not given AB's complaint the due attention she claimed she did.