"If you see a terf ... " Sarah Jane Baker thread 2

[IwantToRetire]

Not sure if anyone wants a second thread but as the issue is still live thought I would start one

Original thread https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4844898-if-you-see-a-terf-punch-them-in-the-fucking-face-speech-at-trans-pride-london-8-july-2023

I didn't know about the rape.

Jesus christ.

Gang oral rape at knifepoint, according to Mr Sheridan’s recent account.

And he probably would never have encountered SJB at all if his sister hadn’t married SJB’s dad.

I can barely even imagine the psychological damage a crime like this would do to an entire family.

I had read the account but presumably had blocked some parts of it.

Highly upsetting to even read about, let alone experience. Traumatising for life, let alone physically scarring for life.

I do wonder whether the people parading around calling SJB a political prisoner have any idea about his history. Or the slightest sympathy for his victim.

@ArabeIIaScott
I think some people are a bit confused. As I said upthread, in the UK a life sentence is a life sentence. If released they can be recalled at any time for any reason. I'm not sure many of SJB's supporters get this.

I reckon Alan baker only got seven years for his original offence because of his age at the time of the first offence, (He was born 1970) as he was sent you a young offenders institute

in September 1989 Alan Baker was sentenced to seven years imprisonment for kidnap and torture. In December 1989 Baker tried to murder another prisoner at the young offenders institute he was at. For this crime his sentence was extended to a life sentence. He was then moved to His Majesties Prison (HMP) Birmingham, and just two weeks after he had arrived Baker raped his cellmate. He received a further sentence of six years, to run concurrently to the life sentence he was already serving.

He also escaped from an open prison at one point and managed to stay on the run for over three months and fathered a son. So whilst his crimes as Alan were against men, he obviously didn't have an issue with having sex with women, so Sarah Jane baker is every bit as dangerous as Alan was!

And this is the person they are touting as political prisoner!!

He raped his cellmate?

How on EARTH was this man turned into a figurehead?

Because if you are male and identify trans you automatically get treated as a harmless victim despite any and all evidence to the contrary.

His supporters are arguably insane.

Seeing it laid out like that in date order it is even more depressing than hearing parts of it.

And clearly shows more than an element of planning and forethought.

Down to giggling at the magistrates hearing and getting the buffon who was meant to be assessing his crime to accept it was just done for effect. Oh silly me for not thinking it through - as if.

We need to have a web site or facebook page or something where these histories can be made public.

@Boiledbeetle can I make a copy of the chronology for future occasions when someone (not on FWR but elsewhere) starts trying to pretend this is a brave and gravely misunderstood person, not a dangerous criminal.

My point is, maybe I didn't make it clearly - if he is vulnerable, it's due to his own violent tendencies which he has used against himself in the past. Of course he's to be considered dangerous to other prisoners (and the staff) due to his history of serious violence.

Knock yourself out! It's mainly a cut down of the stuff on wikipedia!

Knock yourself out! It's mainly a cut down of the stuff on wikipedia!

Thanks - I amazed that wikipedia hasn't been totally re-edited by TRAs to paint a very different picture!

I idly read this article from the Critic this morning. Wasn't expecting what appears to be an activist judge (wielding his double standards) and SJB!

https://thecritic.co.uk/britains-arbitrary-authoritarianism/

This is very concerning.

Well that's slightly horrifying! So calling for people to punch women fine. Beating a person unconscious fine, but putting out a meme that had no racist connotations is worthy of a guilty verdict.

And then talking about cases afterwards and being involved in the handbook they use, this guy is no longer impartial and shouldn't be in his position any more.

I agree with the article. Disturbing.
Except that meme/joke does have racist connotations. It relies on the person making the connection to the stereotype of a particular racial minority associated with stealing bikes. If you don't know that stereotype then the joke doesn't work. Of course you can't prove that the person telling it is racist. They might be, or they might just like inappropriate jokes. I definitely can't understand why anyone would think a prison sentence was appropriate. Insane.

Tan Ikram strikes again. This man is quite concerning. It seems he had a hand in writing parts of the Equal Treatment Bench Book, which is an Orwellian title.

Do people ever get removed from the bench (if bench is the correct term)? 🤔

It's a racist joke, I don't think you can say otherwise. But the piece is surely not wrong on the extent to which we should seek police private communications. He so sounds like he believes he is on The Right Side Of History. That's not his job, his job is to treat every equally under the law.

As if that weren’t authoritarian enough, consider Ikram’s conviction last month of Michael Chadwell, the only of the six to plead not guilty. Chadwell had shared an image showing parrots of different colours and children of different ethnicities, with the words, “Why do we cherish the variety of colour in every species except our own?” Below this was a Facebook comment: “Because I’ve never had a bike stolen out of my front yard by a parrot.”

I read it as the photo being innocent but that someone else had then responded with the comment below what he posted, but reading it again its not clear whether he reproduced it with the comment attached or not.

Yes, it's the addition to the picture that has racist implications. The picture, and original caption, has a rather lovely interpretation. Unless Chadwell wrote the addition, reproducing it without comment can be interpreted anyway you want. From 'ha! Good one!' to 'ffs, talk about missing the point!'.

I think he must have written the additional comment otherwise his sentence, though still harsh imo, makes no sense.

I think his sentence is harsh considering the additional punishments of losing his job and of being a former copper behind bars. But also compared to the lenient treatment of other cases that have come before this judge, it seems particularly disproportionate.

I idly read this article from the Critic this morning. Wasn't expecting what appears to be an activist judge (wielding his double standards) and SJB!

Wow.

s

'I'm the deputy senior district judge for England and Wales, and I sit at Westminster. I deal with extradition cases. I also deal with something called the special jurisdiction of the chief magistrate, which are sort of highly sensitive cases in cases involving members of parliament, that sort of thing. I also deal with terrorism cases which all come to to Westminster as well and currently I'm also sitting in the Crown Court'.

Good grief - are there no limits to judges using their position to act out their personal political preferences - and boasting about in in plain sight.
Is there any way of challenging this- or is it what we see with so many transactivist men - no insight or self awareness, even when they breach boundaries.

And then talking about cases afterwards

https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/makeacomplaint/

Time limit is three months.

Everybody panicking about racism, everyone frantic not to be transphobic, but misogynist/sexist?

Yeah that one's absolutely seen as cool and fine isn't it? It's almost virtuous. A look at how good a person I am signal, 'I love this group so look how I spit on women to demonstrate it'.

Yes. Disturbing. But then I grew up in the 70s where comedians mercilessly lampooned out of touch judges with very odd views.

I'd forgotten about this particular person, but the article does raise real issues.

I suspect all sorts of people are influenced by their personal beliefs, but one of the points of having professionals take decisions, or even judgements, that they are meant to happen with the accept framework.

So how is it possible that a person who is meant to represent the fairness of the justice system, has (1) been allowed to make judgements based on his personal values, and (2) be allowed to boast about it in public.

How can any of us respect the Justice System if he goes if not punished, reprimanded.

I know someone who loves barge holidays. They often bump into a couple of judges who also enjoy canal life. Dressed as women, like you do. So I will never expect women to get a fair deal in court. Unless they are not really women, in which case they will probably find like minded men in the court system.