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

Telegraph coverage:

https://twitter.com/safeschoolsuk/status/1580209812104572928?s=46&t=48x0QIzxedAA_TBlJnXlhWw

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/10/12/liz-truss-supports-calls-police-investigation-mermaids-trans/

Wrong thread! But you may wish to see it anyway

<thumbs up>

@ResisterRex

I was wondering about this with all that’s happened lately.
For example, one of mermaids arguments was that LGBA said that they shouldn’t receive lottery funding, and they cited this as hostility/acting outside their remit/trying to stop MM being funded etc.
But now what happens that the lottery have suspended funding?
Does that not effect mermaids argument?
Or does it not matter, as they hadn’t stopped it at that point in time?

Just a heads-up for 3 weeks' time:

The hearing phase of Mermaids vs LGB Alliance and the Charity Commission concluded today. Submissions are scheduled for 7 & 8 November. Our complete coverage here.

twitter.com/tribunaltweets/status/1570441511774613506

Then at the end of that week:

www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/an-uncharitable-alliance-mermaids-v-charity-commission-and-lgb-alliance-tickets-429586704397

The Liverpool event looks great. I had a quick read through in the hope that there would be a live video link but there doesn't appear to be one. I do hope it's recorded and we can watch later.

An email from the General Regulatory Chamber:

Please note that the link for the September hearing will not work for the 7-8 November one.
We’ll send a further email before the end of this week with a new link and PIN number.

The email isn't clear but it seems to be saying that previous attendees of the hearing need to confirm their continued interest in order to receive the new link and PIN number.

Thanks, Nauticant.

It says

'as a previously-accepted observer, you don't need to resend us your name and address, though you will be asked to confirm your identity again if and when joining the hearing'

But they will be sending out a new link with a new PIN probably tomorrow.

I see that Mermaids is really laying it on that they are 'under attack' rather than having to defend themselves from some justified criticism. The imagery is predictably hyped-up and emotive and I really can't work out whether the people in the following image are the 'defenders' or the supposed 'attackers'. It has all the gravitas of the final scene of a teen action movie or perhaps Harry Potter summoning Dumbledore's Army.

They absolutely do themselves no favours by portraying a very complex issue in this way. I think it also might make young people who are already potentially suffering anxiety and poor mental health, even more anxious. There's just no concession to the idea that many of us want to prevent harm, not cause it.

Sorry, a bit off-track for this thread but I didn't want to start a separate one.

That looks like a fundraising tactic to me.

Four major safeguarding disasters. And they frame that being challenged on them is them being 'under attack' and in need of saving.

FGS, there is safeguarding catastrophe number five.

It is. They have a crowd-funder currently standing at £13K and a statement that they've hit 50% of their target in 24 hours.

It's being touted as a fightback fund, and sold to would-be donors on the basis of taking a stand against transphobia. There is nothing more specific indicating what exactly the money will be funding.

Do Mermaids not hold the same safeguarding concerns as others then? Are they not delighted that thorough checks are being made to ensure the safety of the children they profess to support? Who do they think is attacking them exactly?

Are they not delighted that thorough checks are being made to ensure the safety of the children they profess to support?

You'd think, wouldn't you?

But but but

mermaids themselves kicked off these proceedings

'under attack' by whom - the Charity Commission?

And this is the thing. They can raise all the money they like, and I'm sure there are loads of people who would like to fund them. But if no one wants to buy what they're selling, because their reputation is in the bin, there's no point.

Thanks @nauticant I got the same email. I don't think we need to email again, they should send a new link tomorrow.

We’ll send a further email before the end of this week with a new link and PIN number.

If you’re no longer interested in following this case, we’ll remove you from the list of possible observers on request and delete your information from our records.

So only email if you don't want to attend online.

Absolutely - the ultimate DARVO.

But they will happily attack another organization, smear them by calling them a 'hate group', and pull out all the stops to get their charitable status removed. If that's not going on the attack I'm really not sure what is.

The DARVO is strong. They want carte blanche to go guns blazing for whoever they perceive opposes their interests, but any one of the people or organizations who remotely question their practices or logic is deemed 'transphobic', an accusation which can and has ruined people's livelihoods.

The aggressors? Liz Truss, who claimed their activities needed looking into. No doubt Hilary Cass, although they were quick to spin that one. The LGBA. MSM, who were printing articles about their activities. The Charity Commision, in response to a tribunal they themselves brought to try to destroy another organization. All, apparently, evil transphobes whose only motivation is to attack trans people and those who support them. It's prudent conveniently to forget the serious questions raised surrounding their safeguarding practices, the predilections and connections of at least one trustee, and the terrifying implications of affirmative pathways for children which have now resulted in the closure of the Tavistock.

These people are dangerous. The fantasy land they inhabit is dangerous, the lies they spout are dangerous, the exposure of vulnerable children to their disingenuous, warped worldview are dangerous. If they've ended up being hoist by their own petard, it couldn't have happened to a better organization.

I thought that, too.

“Under attack” v “held accountable”. Let’s ask Graham Norton

Could someone post the email address please? I got my link directly from LGB Alliance last time but don't want to bother Kerry unnecessarily.