Stephanie Hayden

[BonnyBo]

The person who did a dive in Jack Monroe’s inconsistencies about her income has put together some information about Stephanie Hayden

https://grift.watch/stephanie-hayden/

I can’t go back and copy and paste bits as my browser is playing up and will erase the post but it’s eye opening!

Isn't Hooded Claw's court date Feb 16th?

Apropos of nothing, if I were to take a dozen or so trips every year to, oh let’s say, Australia, South Africa and multiple European cities, and use first class train travel / fly business class to at least some of those destinations, can I claim Help for Fees?

Does anyone have knowledge of how the Help for Fees system work?
Does it involve making a signed declaration about the applying individual's financial circumstances? And if you tell porkies, or bend the truth in that declaration is it considered fraud?

My understanding is that, amongst other things, you are automatically entitled to help if you receive certain benefits.

More info here: https://www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees

And you lose entitlement if you get a CRO.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/civil-restraint-orders--2

Help with Fees is based upon income, claiming certain benefits and savings:

https://www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees

You can apply on line or by using the paper form:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65cc8b5f39a8a7000f60d502/EX160_1123.pdf

The declaration states that giving false information has consequences.

Ah, I see there's a pre hearing at the High Court today.

The 16th Feb is (was?) Willesden County Court.

That is exactly the name I was trying to remember! In the end, I gave up and pressed Post without mentioning JY.

For readers unfamilar with JY: JY is a male transitioner from Canada. JY became internationally notorious after suing a female beautician because she declined to perform intimate waxing on JY's male genitalia. The courts eventually ruled that if beauticians hadn't been trained how to wax testicles, then they were justified in saying that wasn't a service they could offer.

Previous to that case, JY had made hay by threatening to sue multiple self-employed beauticians/estheticians for refusing to wax JY's genital area. I don't know how many of them paid JY off, but some of them definitely did.

The final court case establishing their right to refuse male clients only went all the way to court because the defendant knew she wasn't the first woman to be sued for refusing to wax JY's genitals!

Unless I've misunderstood, the High Court action today relates to LegalGengar and the hearing at Willesden County Court on 16 February relates to someone else.

Yes - that's the Sean Doyle case. Hayden is suing Sean for libel, I think, ie for revealing spent convictions. I might be wrong.

From what I've gleaned, Hooded Claw is Sean Doyle, who from his Twitter I think I'd entirely disagree with on many subjects. He's being sued by SH and that's what the Willesden court dates are.

Legal Gengar is someone who writes about grifts and has now just been targeted by SH. Different people.

Might be wrong but it's my understanding is that today's hearing is Hayden seeking an injunction against Sean Doyle to stop him posting stuff online.

The hearing on Friday at Willesden County Court is a re-run of the £10k claim Hayden made against Doyle for harassment and misuse of private information - I think this was originally filed last year but Doyle was ill and didn't attend court so Hayden won by default. Doyle has appealed or applied to have it set aside or something and it's now being heard on Friday.

That would make sense for the occasional cryptic comments in the Xitter replies about the timing of Legal Gengar’s article appearing today. I’ve no idea about why injunction is being sought, but wonder if the legal arguments rest on Doyle saying things that are or are not in the public domain. It makes me wonder if there is an overlap between what Doyle has said and what Legal Gengar has said. Which may of course have a bearing on Doyle’s hearing.

Ahh, the High Court action today was, at least in part, LegalGengar as a third party giving an undertaking not to publish witness statements in someone else's case.

It might be that LegalGengar ends up as a defendant in a claim yet to be launched.

Thanks for the clarification SabrinaThwaite.

These are very courageous men. It's so frustrating that lunatic SH can so completely misuse the Help for Fees scheme. I wish a judge could block their access to that.

I'm just dipping my toes into the fruity farm on SH - wow.

Give the Farmers their due - it can get a little robust on there, but they are thorough in their archiving.

Beware of the bobble hat daps, once seen it can never be unseen

Erm ... ?

Don't follow any links without a stiff gin and some brain bleach.

no one wishes to see SH clutching their moobs, pouting in a bobble hat & not much else.....it's all out there in the public domain.

I do hope the Judge can stop this misuse of public court time & money.

This is excellent advice.
Even better advice would be not to click on any of the links.

If you aquire understanding to the point of no longer "Erm ... ?"ing then your life will have taken one choice at a fork in the road that you can never retrace your steps from. You will not be in Kansas anymore, and there will be no way back to Kansas.

I do wonder how long this thread will last. Especially as the last one about this person was discussing a widely read online article about SH and the thread was taken down for <reasons> that MNHQ never really explained. I seem to recall that, as in this thread, posters remain far inside the usual rules of this board.

I've just watched a clip of SH on GB News. SH's pic on Twitter/X is ... clearly very accurate.

Someone mention a bobblehat

And you can thank me for blacking out most of the image. The rest isn't for this type of board.