Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 10

[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

Thread 7 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4551757-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-7

Thread 8 www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4552521-allison-bailey-v-stonewall-employment-tribunal-hearing-thread-8

Thread 9 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

I'm not sure that we are, IYSWIM. I think the levity and commentary is to deal with the stress of just being an observer and witnessing what AB's colleagues are saying about her in addition to reading their statements. And, sometimes, it just is shocking to see deeply admirable people respond in the way that some have over the last two weeks. At best, some of the witnesses have been experiencing complex emotions and that's occasionally spilled over into their performance in a very mixed way. At worst, the behaviour on display, and the rhetoric and Frankfurtian bullshit (upthread), has been unsettling to the point of being disturbing.

I'm lost in admiration of BC and AB's grace under pressure and ability to maintain their focus and equanimity.

*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.’*

But IIRC DR essentially said on Friday that he didn't think a CSA survivor's wish to have a single sex space mattered. He thought their need for single sex space wasn't important, didn't matter and wasn't true, whatever they said (pretty much saying he knew better).

So he's obviously decided that women with male bodies and their desire to be validated is more important than the need for safety of female victims of sexual harassment and abuse.

Yes, Allison is remarkable. Only someone this remarkable could have done this.

Most normal women, even those who desperately need single sex spaces, would simply not be able to do what she's done.

She is doing such an important thing for all of us - but she is exceptional. How many are experiencing similar in the workplace but without the resources (personal & financial) to be able to challenge it?

I'm totally blown away by Allison's grace under pressure. And, on the other hand, totally stunned that supposedly intelligent barristers seem to be able to operate with a complete logic bypass.

Still haven't got over LoHo stating clearly that sex and gender identity were the same and then stating that transgender people were those for whom sex didn't match gender identity WHICH WOULD LOGICALLY REQUIRE THEM TO BE DIFFERENT THINGS.

My brain is honestly still hurting and it may never be the same again.

I'm lost in admiration of BC and AB's grace under pressure and ability to maintain their focus and equanimity. Absolutely, especially AB.

I don't think we're enjoying it. It feels like history being made and for me, as a one time admirer of Stonewall and a bisexual woman, this really feels like an era defining moment within the LGBT "community".

It's a fight that many of us have wanted to take on for years and haven't had the opportunity or the strength. This is Allison's fight, yes, but she's fighting for all of us and we're right there behind her, cheering her on.

I wouldn't call it "enjoying" watching this unfold. I don't know about anyone else, but I feel wrung out after watching.

Many of us have expressed our admiration for Allison Bailey. As a barrister, she KNEW what it was going be like, how gruelling and upsetting, but she did it anyway. I don't know many people that have such fortitude.

We are all willing her on and I hope if she ever reads any of these threads, she can take some comfort from all of our support and maybe smile at our silliness.

For me 'enjoying' is probably the wrong word for the case itself - it's nail biting and compelling and in some places totally soul destroying - the way Allison was treated was appalling.

I do enjoy a lot of the witty comments on here though.

Women enjoying themselves? Surely cannot be allowed (awaits a man to come and tell us off)!

David Renton was told not to post on social media, but I wonder if he is reading our comments and suffering cognitive dissonance between our critique of his evidence and behaviour towards Allison and presumably his own image of himself as a Social Justice Warrior.

I was going to add more invective but am aware this is an ongoing case. So if this is unsuitable I’ll as MN to delete.

They didn't mention a schedule for Monday or Tuesday as far as I can recall. We only know David Renton is appearing again on Wednesday morning.

At some point they will hear from Stephanie Harrison as they were trying to fit her in last week.

As there is only a week left, I wonder how many others they will need to squash in? Also whether David de Menezes (the Communications Head) and Michelle Brewer (judge) will make an appearance? Every now and again, we heard some witness say to Ben Cooper, "well I'm sure you can ask him about x" but I didn't catch the names referred to at the time.

Sorry that was in reply to @TheBiologyStupid

It feels like history being made and for me, as a one time admirer of Stonewall and a bisexual woman, this really feels like an era defining moment within the LGBT "community".

It is. It is vital that we could attend Maya and Allison's cases and that we observe them as so few people understand what's at stake.

If Marion Millar's or Ceri Black's cases had continued, we would have needed to turn out for them as best we could. We need to be able to attend as many of the cases as we can to support and be present for the proceedings.

In times like these, we're resisting when we witness.

I think it's an example of gallows humour really, isn't it. Trying to find the funny side in unpleasant situations is a fairly standard defense mechanism.

Thanks, GreenUp - then we'll just have to wait until 9.30 to find out. Sounds like being a hectic week, and the various summing ups to come, too.

I really hope this had led to a greater awareness of all the problems this ideology has created. Especially making the left more aware. And to think that my union wouldn’t even support me because I believe in biological reality? It is scary.

Alison has so much dignity and integrity.

Sorry, I didn't mean that we are behaving inappropriately, at all. It just occurred to me that I have been riveted watching this. At one point, I needed the loo desperately, so I logged on using my phone so I didn't have to miss anything when I moved away from my laptop.

The thought that all this stuff actually happened for AB is just awful. We are appalled by some of the responses that justify behaviour in retrospect, as a collective, but she was experiencing it alone.

It just magnified it all for me.

I think the levity and commentary is to deal with the stress of just being an observer and witnessing what AB's colleagues are saying about her in addition to reading their statements.

I agree - it's like the black humour doctors, many police officers etc have to develop in order to cope with the things they see and deal with. If they didn't distance themselves in this way they wouldn't be able to cope.

I have also noticed that while most men get aggressive and abusive (both when winning and losing), most women seem to turn to a sort of "silly" humour as a way of relieving the tension they are experiencing (there's tons of examples of this on these threads)..

Maybe there's a reason that “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.”.

Maybe it's because that's how the sexes tend to diffuse situations and cope with fear and stress.

I am sorry I shan’t be able to watch the rest of this week as I am away on holiday with the family…! But thank you for the posts here which are illuminating and thought provoking.

The discussion of DR’s evidence in particular gave me a lightbulb moment - helped me understand the way in which he and people like him literally just don’t hear our concerns. To him they are just not real. The only reason we could possibly be saying we want single sex spaces is because we are transphobic. He literally cannot even hear a woman saying she wants single Sex spaces because she has been abused by a man. Or fears abuse. He and people like him see themselves as really good, caring people, yet he just cannot see that we are people too. That our concerns are about ourselves: it’s not all about trans people. And that cognitive dissonance is at the heart of a lot of what I see from the TRA side.

The discussion of DR’s evidence in particular gave me a lightbulb moment - helped me understand the way in which he and people like him literally just don’t hear our concerns. To him they are just not real.

That's what happens when some come to believe that women are projections of what men think they are. Support humans can not have needs of their own when they inconvenience others: such needs can not be acknowledged.

09:30 start today, iirc?

I think that given how long some of us have been fighting this battle, we need the levity & silly humour to keep ourselves going. It’s like the dinosaurs and the nights in pubs after meetings.

Delurking to state my thanks to the fab posters here I am gripped by this and love the community.

I can't watch this week except for perhaps the odd hour after work. I'll catch up when I can

I think that given how long some of us have been fighting this battle, we need the levity & silly humour to keep ourselves going. It’s like the dinosaurs and the nights in pubs after meetings.

Yes, exactly.

Does anyone know what time they are starting today?

Yep, 9:30. 🕤

It's all a bit 'Victorian father' to me. Speak when you're spoken to, do what I say, here are a set of opinions you are permitted to hold. Behave and look decorative, and the governess may teach you some French verbs to improve your marriage prospects. Be demure. If you must join a organisation, Mrs Humphrey Ward has started an Anti-Suffrage League you may attend each Tuesday afternoon for one hour. Now do go away, my dear; papa is busy with his important papers.