Page 5 | Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 10

ickky · 2022-05-21T09:36:49+00:00

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 Centrallondonetpublicaccess@justice.gov.uk 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 https://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 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4529887-Allison-Bailey-v-Stonewall-Employment-Tribunal-hearing? Thread 2 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4542466-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-2 Thread 3 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4545725-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-3 Thread 4 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4546945-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-4 Thread 5 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4548160-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-5 Thread 6 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4550451-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-6 Thread 7 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4551757-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-7 Thread 8 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552521-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-8 Thread 9 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4553181-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-9 Allison Bailey - claimant (4-9, 11-13 May) Witnesses for the claimant: Dr Nicola Williams - Fair Play for Women (29 April) Dr Judith Green - A Woman's Place (29 April) Kate Barker - LGB Alliance (3 May) Lisa-Marie Taylor - FiLiA (4 May) Witnesses for the respondents: Stephen Lue - barrister for GCC (3-4 May) Zainab Al-Farabi - ex Stonewall (10 May) Kirrin Medcalf - head of trans inclusion Stonewall (10 May) Leslie Thomas - barrister at GCC (13 May) Sanjay Sood Smith - Stonewall (16 May) Shaan Knan - LGBT consortium - on STAG (16 May) Rajiv Menon - joint head of chambers (16-17 May) Maya Sikand - barrister at GCC (17-18 May) Mia Hakl-Law - HR senior for GCC (18 May) Judy Khan - barrister at GCC (19-20 May) Charlie Tennent - clerk at GCC (20 May) Luke Harvey - clerk at GCC (20 May) Louise Hooper - Barrister at GCC (20 May) To come? David Renton - barrister at GCC (20 May, to continue on 25th May) Stephanie Harrison - joint head of chambers Michelle Brewer - barrister at GCC at time, now left and a judge. David de Menezes - GCC, Head of Marketing

Redshoeblueshoe · 22/05/2022 12:19

thanks for the new thread ickky

IHadToEducateMyself · 22/05/2022 12:19

Once again, thank you @ickky for setting us up with another thread.
Through the threads, I've seen the occasional poster who said they were reluctant to log into as an observer because they are worried about mic/camera issues. If you use the easily downloadable Google Chrome app (for computer or phone) and log in from the emailed link, you are given an option to set both camera and mic before you enter the meeting. Mic and camera are already set on off, you would have to change that to turn them on. The audio choice is preset on "default," by leaving it as is should leave you able to listen only. You also have a chance to enter what user name you want to use. The first time I did that from my phone I was worried my phone number would appear on the list of observers, but the name I had entered did. Also, you can log in before the meeting starts, and reassure yourself about mic/camera settings.
I wish everyone could be observing.

CuntAmongstThePigeons · 22/05/2022 12:25

Thanks Ickky!!!! Absolutely smashing it, keeping the threads running and running smoothly at that.

Wow, what a week. I have got absolutely NOTHING done all week as I've been glued to this case. I've been literally (and actually literally not figuratively literally) taking my laptop everywhere with me and if I can't have my laptop then listening to the audio on my phone.

This case is so important and Allison is a bloody force of nature isn't she. I'm so grateful and in awe. Very excited for this week to commence. Thanks vipers!!!!

Original poster

ickky · 22/05/2022 12:28

IcakethereforeIam · 22/05/2022 11:34

I hope you're not tired of thanks @ickky because here are mine.

Got my groceries in this morning, just in case anyone was worrying with some emotional support picnic bars. I may have already had one. I might help myself to an ES virtual twix too.

I appreciate all the thanks, but it's really not necessary and praise is very embarrassing for me, it's the least I could do to highlight this important hearing and it's not a hardship to put up a few threads.

I'm very grateful to the other posters that post interesting, enlightening information and insights on these threads.

OP posts:

Original poster

ickky · 22/05/2022 12:36

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus · 22/05/2022 10:11

I've been reflecting on testimonies from last week in general and Friday in particular. I was struck by the indifference of some speakers as to whether they rendered accurate accounts of some events (e.g., DR on FPFW and the MoJ FOI) and the general lack of understanding that women's rights are worthy of respect and dignity.

As ever, Harry Frankfurt's essay, On Bullshit, offers some insights.

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose. [pp 55-56]

Both in lying and in telling the truth people are guided by their beliefs concerning the way things are. These guide them as they endeavor to describe the world correctly or to describe it deceitfully. For this reason, telling lies does not tend to unfit a person for telling the truth in the same way that bullshitting tends to. Through excessive indulgence in the latter activity, which involves making assertions without paying attention to anything except what it suits one to say, a person’s normal habit of attending to the way things are may become attenuated or lost. Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the respond of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are. [pp 59-61]

www2.csudh.edu/ccauthen/576f12/frankfurt__harry_-_on_bullshit.pdf

Socially and globally, there is a blindspot when it comes to sex-based rights and the logical consequence of the erasure of women as a sex class plus wider implications for safeguarding.

Genevieve Gluck has some interesting speculations as to why there is a concerted effort to disdain and attack the viewpoint of lesbians and feminists. Gluck argues that previous attempts to normalise various paraphilia and to remove the age of consent by forced teaming these campaigns with gay rights etc. were successfully halted by actions from women, feminists, and particularly lesbians who spoke up about their concerns, especially around safeguarding.

There seems to be a recrudescence of concerted action to normalise these ambitions again. Gluck comments on the strategy of the pre-emptive attack on feminists and lesbian by ostracising them and "slandering them as TERFs from the start": the segment lasts for about 2 mins from this point.

This is a very interesting view. It is an old tactic to devalue and dehumanise your enemy so that when they are attacked, no one stands with them or cares.

I really think that the shadowy figures behind this movement are funding it and pushing it, with the eventual end game of normalising paedophilia as just another kink.

Trans people were doing just fine before all this self id and umbrella bollocks started.

OP posts:

CriticalCondition · 22/05/2022 13:00

I'd like to add my thanks to @ickky for what is frankly a hugely valuable public service in running these threads. TT are doing a sterling job and there is no substitute for watching live but these threads have all the comments and insights.

I served on a jury a while ago and the reactions on these threads are the sort of discussions that were had in the jury room. How a witness came across, real life experience and common sense being used to judge character, motivation, the likelihood of X happening, the tricks of the trade that counsel use. Thank you everyone for your contributions and hugely enjoyable humour.

Off to lay in stocks of support snacks for the coming week. I suspect we are going to the next level with the witnesses.

TheBiologyStupid · 22/05/2022 13:21

Do we know which witness is appearing tomorrow since DR is unavailable to complete his testimony?

CriticalCondition · 22/05/2022 13:29

And talking about how witnesses come across, I would add, like a recent PP, that I also had a physical 'hairs on the back of the neck' reaction to LoHo, and that's the only one so far. I sadly missed DR's Friday evidence so will be interested to see on Wednesday if he induces the same kind of feeling.

nauticant · 22/05/2022 13:32

As I heard it, LoHo was more about people needing to be silent, or to be silenced, while DR's focus was on people campaigning for single sex spaces being transphobic. DR came across as more worrying for me, but maybe that's because he's male.

EmotionalSupportWyrm · 22/05/2022 13:54

EmbarrassingHadrosaurus · 22/05/2022 10:11

I've been reflecting on testimonies from last week in general and Friday in particular. I was struck by the indifference of some speakers as to whether they rendered accurate accounts of some events (e.g., DR on FPFW and the MoJ FOI) and the general lack of understanding that women's rights are worthy of respect and dignity.

As ever, Harry Frankfurt's essay, On Bullshit, offers some insights.

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose. [pp 55-56]

Both in lying and in telling the truth people are guided by their beliefs concerning the way things are. These guide them as they endeavor to describe the world correctly or to describe it deceitfully. For this reason, telling lies does not tend to unfit a person for telling the truth in the same way that bullshitting tends to. Through excessive indulgence in the latter activity, which involves making assertions without paying attention to anything except what it suits one to say, a person’s normal habit of attending to the way things are may become attenuated or lost. Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the respond of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are. [pp 59-61]

www2.csudh.edu/ccauthen/576f12/frankfurt__harry_-_on_bullshit.pdf

Socially and globally, there is a blindspot when it comes to sex-based rights and the logical consequence of the erasure of women as a sex class plus wider implications for safeguarding.

Genevieve Gluck has some interesting speculations as to why there is a concerted effort to disdain and attack the viewpoint of lesbians and feminists. Gluck argues that previous attempts to normalise various paraphilia and to remove the age of consent by forced teaming these campaigns with gay rights etc. were successfully halted by actions from women, feminists, and particularly lesbians who spoke up about their concerns, especially around safeguarding.

There seems to be a recrudescence of concerted action to normalise these ambitions again. Gluck comments on the strategy of the pre-emptive attack on feminists and lesbian by ostracising them and "slandering them as TERFs from the start": the segment lasts for about 2 mins from this point.

I could only watch half of the video - need to take a break and get a shower. Shocking stuff

TofuDelights · 22/05/2022 16:39

Thanks yet again for the new thread and all the helpful comments. Thread 10, unbelievable! Offering mini support samosas as snacks.

ZandathePanda · 22/05/2022 17:04

You know that 6 degrees of separation game? I have double-checked and I have 2 with DR!

I went to school with an ex SWP member that DR has written about. In fact I was looking at an article about my schoolmate and noticed the name.

DR also wrote about Rolf Harris.
I met Rolf Harris through work (he was pleasant but sweaty) and during the conversation, I told Rolf that I remembered the great video [about sexual abuse] he did as it had the catchy ‘My body’ song we all used to sing in the playground. He sang the first line to me and we laughed. Shudder.

DR wrote about Rolf Harris:

‘The task for the left, now, is to show Harris’ victims, and all the victims of sexual harassment, that we are on their side, that we start by believing them, and that their struggles for justice are just as central as any strike to our vision of socialism.’…..
‘Harris’ conviction makes it harder to sustain the cliché that “good men” don’t rape, and makes it easier for women complainants everywhere to be believed.’

I agree with DR on that.

ifIwerenotanandroid · 22/05/2022 17:56

I've been catching up with 'Inside No. 9' & reached this episode last night, which was hilarious & made me think of this thread.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05qkfzy/inside-no-9-series-2-3-the-trial-of-elizabeth-gadge

Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 10

SidewaysOtter · 22/05/2022 18:03

Thank you to Ickky for the ongoing threads and for everyone posting. It’s been quite a task to keep up with the threads (I even found myself dreaming about them last night - in my dream they got faster and faster and I couldn’t keep up…) and between this and Wagatha Christie I am getting nothing done.

Keep up the good work!

WatchingTVagain · 22/05/2022 20:42

Another one adding thanks for all the threads and I've eventually caught up ready to start again tomorrow.

Does anyone know if this case is getting any coverage in main stream media?

Have to say after our gender equality training a week ago (school based) by an outside agency I'm becoming more and more frightened for the safety of our children and women's rights.

oviraptor21 · 22/05/2022 20:55

There has been coverage on BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Times, Independent and Daily Mail websites. I don't know if it has made it into print editions.
Also many other smaller websites.
The day that got most coverage was Stonewall's Kirrin Medcalfe and their support entourage.

GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder · 22/05/2022 21:42

This is a handy wee summary of Allison's case - detriments, protected acts, victimisation etc. printed by Tribunal Tweets

https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/understanding-allison-baileys-claim?sd=fs&s=r

MagnoliaTaint · 22/05/2022 21:58

Fab, thanks GMWW.

Lougle · 22/05/2022 22:13

I think it's sobering that we are all watching, all 'enjoying' listening to the testimony, etc., but that actually, this was AB's life. This is what she was dealing with, day in, day out. Whether she wins or loses, there can be no doubt that she had a very hard time.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 22/05/2022 22:28

This is a handy wee summary of Allison's case - detriments, protected acts, victimisation etc. printed by Tribunal Tweets

That's really useful, thanks.

AnnieLou12 · 22/05/2022 22:41

ZandathePanda · 22/05/2022 17:04

You know that 6 degrees of separation game? I have double-checked and I have 2 with DR!

I went to school with an ex SWP member that DR has written about. In fact I was looking at an article about my schoolmate and noticed the name.

DR also wrote about Rolf Harris.
I met Rolf Harris through work (he was pleasant but sweaty) and during the conversation, I told Rolf that I remembered the great video [about sexual abuse] he did as it had the catchy ‘My body’ song we all used to sing in the playground. He sang the first line to me and we laughed. Shudder.

DR wrote about Rolf Harris:

‘The task for the left, now, is to show Harris’ victims, and all the victims of sexual harassment, that we are on their side, that we start by believing them, and that their struggles for justice are just as central as any strike to our vision of socialism.’…..
‘Harris’ conviction makes it harder to sustain the cliché that “good men” don’t rape, and makes it easier for women complainants everywhere to be believed.’

I agree with DR on that.

How can DR have said all those things about believing women and recognising that “good men” rape and yet now seem incapable of acknowledging the logical conclusion that female only spaces are essential?

Waitwhat23 · 22/05/2022 22:46

Lougle · 22/05/2022 22:13

I think it's sobering that we are all watching, all 'enjoying' listening to the testimony, etc., but that actually, this was AB's life. This is what she was dealing with, day in, day out. Whether she wins or loses, there can be no doubt that she had a very hard time.

I've been thinking that this part is possibly the hardest for her. All the emails which were sent talking about her behind her back, the knowledge that her Chambers mate was spying on her etc - it must be intensely hurtful to see that all that being aired and discussed. I would find it gutting.

vivariumvivariumsvivaria · 22/05/2022 22:59

My take on this is that I have a LOT to learn about how to be a woman with strength, resilience and dignity, and oodles of them all.

Thank you, Allison.

Gaun' yirsel'.

ZandathePanda · 22/05/2022 22:59

AnnieLou12 yes I am glad you came to that conclusion too.

ZandathePanda · 22/05/2022 23:04

…but then I suppose if twaw then it’s only men who think they are men that could be bad pretending to be good??