Sara Morrison vs Belfast Film Festival

[NorthernIrishFeminist]

Employers seem to be slow learners when it comes to women's rights! There’s another employment tribunal case being brought by a woman who attended and took the microphone at a Let Women Speak event in Belfast last year and has been treated very badly by her employer Belfast Film Festival as a result.

Looks like we’re going to have to keep gardening until they get the message.

disclaimer. I don’t know Sara and have no connection to BFF I’m just a woman who likes donating to causes that make a difference

From NW

Good morning from Killymeal House, Belfast. We are here for Day 3 Session 1 of Morrison v BFF. Live tweeting will begin on this thread shortly. Here is Sara Morrison arriving with her Mum Valerie and her Mum's partner Ian this morning. First, some housekeeping...

If you are not familiar with this case, here is Sara's side of the story, written up on Sunday.

https://genderblog.net/sara-morrison-v-belfast-film-festival/

This is the hashtag, though I'm not sure people use them anymore #MorrisonvBFF
Sara (SM) has given evidence for the last two days. Today we are going to see witnesses from the Belfast Film Festival (BFF) give evidence. Last we were told, Michele Devlin (MD), BFF CEO is giving evidence first.
SM is the Claimant (C)
BFF is the Respondent (R)

The Good Law Project is trying to getn judicial review of the SC ruling and TT are hoping to tweet from the hearing today and tomorrow.

I will attempt the impossible very hard to do and paste from both. Please bear with me for any delays - I also need tea and the look from time to time.

From NW

Barrister Naomi Cunningham (NC) will be cross-examining (xe) on SM's behalf. This is an employment tribunal. SM is claiming discrimination for her gender-critical (sex realist) beliefs and constructive dismissal. BFF are "vigorously" defending both claims.

This case is being heard before a three person Panel led by Employment Judge Lisa Sturgeon (J)

NB: EVERYTHING I TWEET IS A SUMMARY OR CHARACTERISATION OF WHAT IS BEING SAID OR IS HAPPENING IN COURT. NOTHING IS A DIRECT QUOTE UNLESS IT IS IN "DIRECT QUOTES"

I am here thanks to crowdfunded donations. I am hoping to keep going into next week. I'll definitely be here all this week. If you would like to receive my nightly updates on the trial, please consider making a one-off donation:
https://genderblog.net/donate/

The panel on the right (or below if you’re reading this on a mobile phone) is a secure payment portal set up to accept donations for my work. If you donate you will be subscribed to the Gende…

Ok. MD has been sworn in - she is confirm the contents of her Witness Statement (WS) are correct and true to the best of her knowledge. Sean Doherty (SD) is the BFF barrister.

From NW

SD what happened at the Errigle Inn -
MD I asked if SM had screened Adult Human Female - as I had heard it was a controversial film - she said no, but she was at it. There was a boycott of the Errigle after it was screened there.
SD did you talk to MD about it

SD I knew it was a controversial film, screened at the Errigle Inn by the WRN NI
SD what's the relevance of this to C -
MD I know it's something she watched to maybe learn from, I don't know
SD what else
MD there was a She Heard exhibition at a gallery in 2023
SD what was said

MD we walked through the gallery and the installation involved someone doing manicures and I said it would be nice to stop and get a manicure and she said "Eurgh - not with it"
SD what was she referring to when she said "it"
MD the transgender person doing the manicure

From NW

[xe from NC]
NC morning MD
MD morning
J intervenes to ask NC to speak up
NC "if we look at pars 4 to 5 of your statement first of all... we see from that that you learned on 18 april C was being bullied online"
MD yes
NC and you learned at that time it was serious enough to be...

... a police matter.
MD yes
NC and you learned later that day that from the response to your tweet about the GooD Friday Agreement (GDA) event that SM had spoken at a Let Women Speak (LWS) event

From NW

We go to a @perrycombover tweet
NC makes it very clear that the LWS event was being criticised as transphobic and the video of C speaking at LWS was embedded in the tweet
MD yes
NC and you very sensibly hid that tweet
MD yes
NC because you thought it was encouraging...

... of an online lynching
MD I don't know
NC but you were being protect of C
MD protective of BFF and my team
NC which includes Sara
MD yes

[NC takes her to her WS pars 5 - 12]
NC you're telling the story chronologically
MD "as best as I can recall"
NC 5 - 12 are all about the events of 18th April, then in par 12 you switch to what happened on 4 May

From NW

NC so by end of 18 April you'd heard SM's speech
MD not by then
NC when
MD can't say - "she asked me not to listen to it"
NC let's look at par 8 - you've agreed you're telling the story chronologically
MD "to the best that I can recall"

NC you tell the story in par 8 of watching the video in the middle of 18 April
MD I do, but I did not watch it that day
NC so you watched it some other day
MD when you did what did you do
"I sat on my desk and I put my head in my hands because a number of our client orgs were mentioned - people we'd worked with, continued to work with and wanted to work with in the future"
NC you were appalled by it were you
MD "shocked"
NC "what did you do next"
MD "not much - I kind of thought I had a lot on, I was incredibly busy, I spoke to our marketing person and asked her if she'd watched it and then I continued with my worked because we were incredibly busy, so I parked it"

From NW

NC why head in your hands and shocked - that it might cause your reputation damage
MD "real reputational damage"
NC if she's done something like this - wouldn't you tell her to stop
MD she told me she wouldn't
NC and you didn't think it was nec to notify the board take some action
MD I did, but I "was incredibly busy... and I needed time to take in the information"
NC if it was as you're saying now shocking, wasn't it wise to alert them
MD I spoke to our marketing person
NC note of that?
MD no
NC notify the board
MD I wanted to process it first

NC I think you did watch it on 18 April
MD I did not
NC and it didn't strike you as so shocking at the time
MD I don't accept that
NC and you didn't think you had a "rogue employee" on your hands there was any reason to do anything at the time
MD I don't accept that. It was serious"in terms of reputational damage and damage to partnerships"

From NW

NC SM says at the beginning of her speech that people couldn't be at LWS because they were "frightened" - do you accept that
MD no
NC so you're telling the tribunal people were not frightened of being there
MD It seemed tense from what I read in the press
NC so women might not turn up because they are frightened of violence
MD anyone
NC so I think you're agreeing that it might be credible that SM's friends might be frightened to turn up

MD yes
NC C talks about women being frightened into silence and that's exactly what happened to SM after having the temerity to speak up. were you part of that?
MD no
NC did you tell her she's free to speak and stand up to bullies
MD I offered her any assistance she wanted.

[we go to the bundle]
NC SM mentions songs for solidarity - this is what it says it is "Songs for Solidarity are a collective of Activists,
Unions, LGBTQIA+ and Women’s Sector
organisations across Nl.
We are and we love trans, non-binary and other
gender creative people. We want to spread big
dollops of trans joy and solidarity in Belfast."

From NW

NC goes to more of SM's speech "I started this new iteration of Rape Crisis Nl, this is not the rape crisis I wanted. We need to keep men
out of women's spaces-
They have morphed into a deliberate campaign of bullying and intimidation into silence through
harassment and bullying the very women they should be protecting and [inaudible]."

NC what SM is saying there is exactly what SfS were doing on that day
MD this is the first time I've seen that tweet
NC at the time you were supportive - "you were quite right not set sirens wailing within the organisation - you didn't regard this as a panic stations situation...

... when you first heard it"
NC there was nothing in that speech which required action
MD no the refs to our partner organisations as I've said already... "and I needed to gather our thoughts - we are a small under-resourced arts charity, a lot of the work falls on my shoulders and I was incredibly busy."

From NW

NC I am saying to you you heard it and though it was a perfectly legitimate political speech
MD "I didn't understand the half of it to be honest" I only watched it once
NC looking at it now - what's the very worst thing in that speech
MD Sure "Do these so-called women's organisations speak for you? Do these self-styled messiahs
represent us? These organisations are paid thousands of pounds through the public purse to sing
songs to silence women Speaking. Is that where you want your money going? These organisations,
these women's organisations WRDA, Alliance For Choice, Wohten's Policy Group Northern Ireland,
The Women's Sector Lobbyist, Rape Crisis Nl."

From NW

NC but that's exactly what SfS were doing
MD I don't accept that
NC you weren't there - so you can't say
MD "I can neither deny or confirm" I was shocked that she would say this about partner organisations
NC you say that now, but then you thought it was perfectly legitimate...

From NW

... political speech. The reason you didn't raise the alarm or set things in motion was because what you were hearing was obviously perfectly legitimate political speech
MD it was a speech
NC this is how freedom of speech works, isn't it - that people can say things you don't agree with - and you're now saying she can't do this
MD she's perfectly entitled to her views

From NW

NC and your initial response was to try to shut down the online "gathering storm"
MD I wanted to protect my staff member and "respond with compassion"
NC If there had been a lot of further online bullying or online crit of BFF before July you would have mentioned it in your evidence.

MD yes
NC and there wasn't was there
MD no
NC so the tribunal can conclude you did a pretty good job of damping out the fire
MD possibly
NC SM's speech has been criticised for being transphobic - was it?
MD "there didn't seem to be any transphobic statements within it"

NC and if you look at the par "I started this new iteration of Rape Crisis Nl, this is not the rape crisis I wanted. We need to keep men out of women's spaces" - "do you understand what that means and why that's relevant"
MD I'm not sure if it means keeping men out rape crisis...

From NW

... centres
NC that's an example of what it means - keeping men out women's spaces
MD it's not a particularly well-crafted statement
NC and it's not transphobic to make that statement is it
SD what's that got to do with this - the R has never said the speech was transphobic

From NW

NC pushes back]
NC turn to p200 - this is a couple of tweets from Progressive Politics Northern Ireland "Unfortunately this Sunday, there is a hateful
transphobic event taking place in Belfast
masquerading as a women’s rights event. It isn’t.
Women’s rights organisations here are
overwhelmingly trans-inclusive."

AND

"Therefore, we encourage everyone to attend this
other event - SONGS FOR SOLIDARITY - set up
by a collective of Activists, Unions, LGBTQIA+ &
Women’s Sector ergs. It will be a positive & joyful
rebuke to any oppressive negativity happening in
the city"

From NW

NC It says "Women’s rights organisations here are overwhelmingly trans-inclusive." You know what that means, right - that means women's rights orgs in NI operate on the basis that transwomen are women, doesn't it?
MD I don't know
NC do you understand what that statement means
MD I don't know the policy of every women's org is
NC I'm asking if you understand what the statement means - do you know what it means?
MD yes
NC what does it mean
MD reads the statement out - "it's self explanatory"
SD I don't think this is relevant - MD runs a film festival
NC I would like to pursue my point in the manner I see fit without constant interruptions - SD's interventions are going to slow us down a great deal

NC I would like to pursue my point in the manner I see fit without constant interruptions - SD's interventions are going to slow us down a great deal

Naomi politely putting SD in their place.

I can actually hear NC’s voice saying that.

From NW

J I will allow her to pursue this line
SD if she didn't interrupt me that's her business but if I hear something I don't like I will chirp up
NC do you think that statement means that womens orgs in NI operate on the basis that TWAW
MD I imagine it may do
NC so if a man says he is a woman they have to take his word for it
MD is this another hypothetical
NC if a man or transwoman presents themselves at a rape crisis centre he will be treated as a woman
MD yes
NC yes - whether or not you agree with it, that is a controversial point and women have the right to feel very strongly about it don't they
MD anyone can
NC and what that means is that women who have been abused can encounter men

From NW

SD this is irrelevant
NC I say that women were entitled to make this point and that trying to shut that down is illegitmate
J my difficulty is why are we exploring this with MD - she's not the person who said it
NC MD is the person who decided to start an investigation which was sparked by allegations of transphobia so it's important to explore how important or legitimate they are
J rises as she wants to speak to her panel

[break]

This feels quite ironic...

From NW

[according to observers, the female Panel member to the right of Judge sturgeon, Professor Deborah Boyd, started to get twitchy when NC started speaking about men who think they're women and trans and it might be why J has called a pause]

Hmmm. Sort of proving NCs point right there really....