Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and Charity Commissioner - First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Thread 3

[nauticant]

The Tribunal started on 9 September, witness testimony started on 12 September.

To obtain access to view the proceedings, send a request email to [email protected] about case CA/2021/0013 - Mermaids vs Charity Commissioner and LGB Alliance and ask for permission to join. You then have to provide certain information and agree to a judge's direction in order to be able to join.

There is also live tweeting from twitter.com/tribunaltweets.

Abbreviations:

J or judge: Presiding Judge, Judge Lynn Griffin
AJ or Judge: Assisted by Judge Joe Neville
MG: Mermaids counsel is Michael Gibbon KC
KM: LGB Alliance counsel is Karon Monaghan KC
AR: Karon is assisted by Akua Reindorf
IS: Charity Commission counsel is Iain Steele

(Also the witnesses, PR: Paul Roberts, JN: John Nicolson. BB: Belinda Bell, BJ: Beverley Jackson, KH: Kate Harris, and EG: Eileen Gallagher.)

Thread 1: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4629679-mermaids-versus-lgb-alliance-in-court-today
Thread 2: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4632780-mermaids-vs-lgb-alliance-and-charity-commissioner-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chameber-thread-2
Thread 3: ongoing

Witnesses for the applicant (Mermaids):

Paul Roberts - CEO of LGBT Consortium (12 September)
John Nicolson MP - Deputy Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Global LGBT+ Rights (13 September)
Dr Belinda Bell - Chair of trustees of Mermaids (13 September)

Witnesses for the respondent (LGB Alliance):

Beverley Jackson - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (13-14 September)
Kate Harris - Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance (14-15 September)
Eileen Gallagher OBE - Chair of trustees of LGB Alliance (15 September)

Witness Statements:

Paul Roberts: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Paul-Roberts-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
John Nicolson MP - lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/John-Nicolson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Dr Belinda Bell: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Belinda-Bell-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Beverley Jackson: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Bev-Jackson-Witness-Statement-Exhibits-1.pdf
Kate Harris: lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Kate-Harris-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf
Eileen Gallagher (two statements): lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Eileen-Gallagher-Second-Witness-Statement-Exhibits.pdf

Submissions:

lgballiance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Volume-4-Submissions-CA.2021.0013.pdf

(Header format follows the gold standard established by @ickky)

post updated by MNHQ at OP's request

something cannot be a lie if people believe it?

That seems fair enough to me. If you believe what you're saying then you're mistaken, not lying. Lying means trying to mislead people, and knowing that you're misleading them.

Yeah sorry I thought it meant if the lie was successful!

Some people are true believers. Some people don't believe it but act as though it's true because either it's to their advantage or going the other way would be to their significant disadvantage.

There's also a significant number of people who don't believe it, and know that the safest thing for them to do is to avoid any engagement with others about the issue.

"Lie" (verb or noun) incorporates "intent to deceive".

A person could certainly unwittingly repeat a lie. They may not be intending to deceive themselves, but the statement could have been constructed by someone with an intent to deceive.

I think that distinction came up yesterday and I agree with MG, I think - or at least it's injudicious to say e.g. that Catholics are lying to kids about transubstantiation, even if it is essentially a lie that bread can physically become flesh...

I would certainly say "humans don't come in two sexes" is a lie. The people who came up with that were not making a scientific mistake, they were specifically trying to be deceptive using DSDs or whatever to justify an ideological position.

Not all of those repeat it know it's a lie.

I think they know they're lying, because otherwise they could answer a straight question, with a straight answer.
Instead of 'i'm not an expert/statistician /medical doctor', all the fucking time.

And they're such transparent lies, which wouldn't fool a 10 year old.

The assertion could be a lie but the person making it could be mistaken?

MG: [reads about CT harming to LGBT youth...huge CT happening now] Ur using the political access to seek to influence government against MM and trans rights. Accept?
KH: yes

Not sure about this. Which trans rights is it against?

There is an inherent complicity in the lie by many though, isn't there? This isn't merely an opinion.

The assertion could be a lie but the person making it could be mistaken?

But at what point of closed-mindedness to counter evidence can you no longer accept that they're repeating the falsehood in good faith?

It becomes something else. The intent is not so much to "deceive" as, well, stay "on side for the team". They don't care whether it's true or not, they just know they have to say it.

It's kind of like Santa. Many children believe this lie...

Not so much a lie as an article of faith.

in this scenario it’s the unwitting spreading of untruths, which is just as damaging to society as deliberately telling lies.

which is why freedom of expression to dispute any untruths is so vital.

Expect a belief in Santa is harmless!

Gibbons is scraping the bottom of the barrel here

Don't understand Gibbon's emphasis on lobbying - as if that negates their charitable status. Their case is wafer-thin if that's the best they've got.

What I'm saying is that a lie is told and when the truth becomes clear to them there is a period of grief. It doesn't matter that in this particular case it's "harmless".

What does CT stand for here please?

reads about CT harming to LGBT youth...huge CT happening now] Ur using the political access to seek to influence government against MM and trans rights. Accept? KH: yes MG: when u say 'huge CT in UK' that's what u ref as transing gay away? KH: yes

Conversion Therapy.

Thanks

MG's argument seems to be that LGBA have done actitivies which alone without them conducting any other activities would not justify them being a charity. But much of the situations seem to involve Mermaids doing activities which are a mirror image of those of LGBA.

While following this I've been thinking what would happen if all charities had to go through the process of this tribunal?

In that case, maybe one could claim faith for anything. I really believed I was the Council rent collector when I entered all those properties and asked the residents for the rent. It was not robbery.

What do you mean I cannot travel free as a child. I have faith in my juvenile status.

Tone! WONEN, SHUT UP!