Scarlet Blake trial - the thing that never happens....

[CousinGreg55]

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/24129077.oxford-murder-accused-not-accepted-transgender/

There was a thread a couple of weeks about this case that got deleted. Obviously it's an ongoing trial but it's as we suspected with the defendent.

If the worst our society does to Blake is to refer to him as 'he'and a'transwoman', our society is damn noble.

Ciaran Curran's obvious distress about the dehumanising language she endured around her wretched experience and handling by healthcare staff strikes me as far greater trauma than SB's or that being affected on SB's behalf.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5012863-the-reality-of-losing-sex-based-language?

I am also confused as to why the second transwoman aka male - Ashlynn Bell - is not being implicated in the murder. Because Blake’s main defence was that he was essentially groomed into killing by this Ashlynn. If that is the case (or at least until it is proven not to be) Ashlynn should be investigated as at least some kind of major contributor to the murder.

He (Ashlynn) is not being called as a witness in the trial as he has self declared he is too mentally unwell to be involved. Which in itself I have concerns about. But if not a witness, why has he not been investigated?

There are plenty of messages shared in the trial where Ashlynn is majorly hyping Blake up & encouraging him to kill.

I'd imagined something to do with jurisdiction?

I thought that but police did interview him in the USA. I admittedly know nothing about international criminal law but i am sure if a US citizen is implicated in the murder of someone on UK soil they can be made to attend trial. We do have an extradition treaty with the US.

Also, with Bell having dobbed Blake in, would it have collapsed their whole case if that statement was withdrawn? Anyway the prosecution's case was more "And this person was in America? So you didn't have to do what they say, did you?"

Hmm yes maybe. Although I think once the DNA evidence came in that would have been the driving force in the conviction, rather than the statement.

As an aside, I do think Ashlynn is as bad as Blake. He only dobbed him in because they had a falling out - if they never fell out the crime would be unsolved to this day.

Disgusting

UltraLiteLife · Yesterday 21:52

#RapistHill exchanges 2018

Cheeringly, there's a Toby Young tweet about LOJ being reported for homophobic abuse and getting a letter from Plod.

It was me who posted a thread on this a couple of weeks ago.

Back then the newspapers just referred to him as "she" and "a woman".

Mumsnet deleted my thread because "it wasn't in the spirit".

The Mail leading with a long article - and the longest headline I've ever seen!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13119563/cat-killer-murder-oxford-transgender-victim-random-escort-called-police.html

Why is the Mail using "she" to describe this person? I can understand why the court reports from the Guardian and Times use "she" because they are based on what was said in court, but there is no excuse for using "she" in a story like this, let alone the word "daughter" in the headline. It's idiotic.

I imagine it's the IPSO guidance effect.

Though I'd love the Mail to challenge the guidance on the grounds of accuracy.

Fat chance of any other media outlet doing it.

In the article it states that the murderer liked being referred to as "we" and "us", so surely using the correct pronouns would be to use "we" instead of "she"? Obviously "they" could be used, but the killer never said that so "we" it is then.

Also, female descriptors were used throughout the court proceedings.

I'm not sure how much trouble a paper could get into for changing details of what was actually said in court.

There's evidently something about IPSO that means they're all reluctant to challenge it. Not as if there aren't enough cases like this where only the most tone deaf transactivist would rock up demanding she pronouns 🙄

IPSO's guidance changed last year. It's perfectly fine for newspapers to use sex-based pronouns.

This is what the guidance says - note that it says journalists should take care "not to publish inaccurate and misleading information":

Journalists may use various methods to ensure coverage of sex and gender identity is accurate. These may include, but are not limited to, providing information, presenting different opinions where relevant, and approaching second sources.

Journalists should consider whether information about an individual’s gender identity is genuinely relevant to an article. Examples of relevance could be where a quote needs to be contextualised or to explain the inclusion of a source.

Language relating to gender and identity is nuanced. Journalists should take care not to publish inaccurate and misleading information.

https://www.ipso.co.uk/media/2423/guidance-sex-gender-identity.pdf

Also, page 10 of the guidance relates specifically to reporting court matters, but it is so wishy-washy that it is worse than useless as a guide. What are IPSO going to do if the Mail or anyone else refers to Blake as "he"?

Cancelled my times subscription this morning, the call handler (sounded middle aged male) was very sympathetic and encouraged me to write to the editor. Sad to give it up but I am not paying to be gaslight to, the referring to a previous female name (but no mention of previous male one) and closed comments pushed me to cancelling

"Journalists should take care not to publish inaccurate and misleading information" is why I would like to see a challenge on the grounds of accuracy.

However I think "Journalists should consider whether information about an individual’s gender identity is genuinely relevant to an article" might pose a problem in this case and others. I can see IPSO arguing that the offender's real sex and transgender status is not relevant.

If his sex is not relevant then they should not report anyone's sex, ever.

If his sex is relevant, then it needs to be accurately reported.

To make that broader:

If sex is not relevant then they should not report anyone's sex, ever.

If sex is relevant, then it needs to be accurately reported.

Yes - if it's not relevant in a case of murder, then when is it relevant? Criminal justice is quite obviously an example of an area in which sex is almost always relevant.

If Scarlet Blake was in the news because he'd won a prize for flower-arranging, then perhaps his sex wouldn't be relevant.

Also: I really think newspapers should show some backbone and take on IPSO if necessary. Janice Turner used male pronouns for Isla Bryson and there wasn't any action taken against her for it. It really makes me despair that the Mail, one of the few papers to take a stand against gender ideology, is going along with this.

FFS, even GB News uses "she" after a few paragraphs of using the name Blake and his age to refer to him.

If sentencing hasn’t happened yet, are there still reporting restrictions that might lead to closed comments?