M Newman V Met Police Employment Tribunal

[Justme56]

Just wondering if anyone is following this on TT. It’s quite bizarre. The first witness attended the Trans Training session which I gather is where the discrimination stems (see attached statement) and has been questioned by AM the barrister for the police. AM is referencing the Wikipedia page of Kellie Jay Keen as evidence. Apparently wiki is not anti gender critical. 🤷🏻‍♀️. It seems to be covering a whole host of other stuff too - quite an eye opener.

https://x.com/tribunaltweets/status/1899460916191597049?s=46&t=ZX_bLozRqm8etdGICMcAvA

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10x1bvutNvphHgxMtTdBc7n8s4wA2i_1u/view

Gosh this silly BBF refusing to acknowledge that she would be more worried about men than women. NC being forced into taking her through the relative risks of being trampled by cows and by rabbits.

Genderwoo genuinely makes people lose their minds.

That weasel of a superintendent is talking out of her arse. Earlier on agreed that a lot of the time they are making on the spot dynamic risk assessments.

Next thing you know she can't make an assumption that a Womens Institute protest wouldn't potentially turn into a violent disorder, and would have to look at intelligence!! So much for dynamic then! Maybe it was the banners NC mentioned....

Agrees that if all the passengers on a nightbus were female she'd be more relaxed, but her assessment of female is "manner and demeanor" So a bus full of Emily Howards are all female and therefore absolutely fine then 🥴

trampled by a rabbit! I literally snorted.

I'd take my chances with the rabbits 🤣🤣🤣

So she accepts she can use her intelligence to differentiate between the danger posed by rabbits v cows, but not men v women

This witness is even more depressing than the witnesses in other trials

OMG is this person really a police superintendent? We are truly...
..!

She's a bit disingenuous isn't she? Still can't get over how they thought Jane Fae was considered acceptable as a speaker!

She’s clearly changed her whole approach in response to what the ET documents have revealed and is applying it retrospectively to her original approach which is clearly a nonsense and NC finding ways to establish that. She’s just used an opportunity to establish BBG had no idea of GC views even when she should have done given the processes and procedures she was in charge of. Utterly disingenuous

"Not an expert" now making a few appearances....🙄

AM - Think witness should have a break
BBF - Getting to the point where we need cake.
[COURT BREAKS]

ha ha, its all a joke to BBF isn't it

Never helps if on is lighthearted in a tribunal. She pretty much dropped the Met in it by saying in effect we get it NOW

Agreed. Very outing to show the level of political capture by trans extremism in this way. The case is demonstrating the ease with which some of the most unsuitable people in the country were able to remove critical thinking, due diligence and the capacity for risk assessment in the Met. Apparently aided and abetted by some remarkably dense senior officers.

I'd be talking about cake, rabbits and anything else I could think of to distract from the shit show currently being showcased 😂

I'm a bit puzzled about "Mike" as he appears to have featured in BBF's statement/bundle (name now redacted, pre-trial, after complaint by claimant), rather than the claimant's.

Mike seems to have been disciplined because somebody complained about a suffragette quote sticker he had on his laptop (and two other complaints that didn't stick)?

The Met is a blooming mess. Is this minister the lady to sort them out (I've never heard of her)?: https://www.gov.uk/government/people/diana-johnson

It is too much to hope that one of the remedies would be to drape NYS in suffragette flags for a week each year, isn't it!

If a Chief Superintendent isn't an expert on crime stats, I'd suggest kindly that a career in retail might be more suitable.

Yes - you would have thought that male violence against women would be a topic of interest in the Met, particularly given the actions of their own male officers.

If they are ignorant of male violence and can’t spot it:
^ it explains a lot
^ it highlights an urgent need for a review of training and competence among senior personnel.

See para 61 of C's WS.

I mean, there's pretty much one in the news every day.

Today's Standard
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/met-police-officer-charged-rape-sexual-assaults-london-b1217149.html

I got the impression from reading tribunal tweets that Mike's particular role within the police was one that meant he shouldn't be publicly identified as a police officer.

This tribunal had largely passed me by so far, but the bits of today's evidence that I've seen posted have just made me go "WTF?!" repeatedly. Had to create a new username as a result.

Top user name, rabbits! Is it paused until 25 March now? Hats off to Naomi, who is doing this pro bono!

How is she getting paid?

Shame for me it’s paused, I could have paid attention properly today.