NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #33

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 February 2025 and was expected to last 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It resumed on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July and then there will be 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing will end on 30 July.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February.
Access to view the hearing remotely was obtainable by sending an email request to [email protected] by 5pm on Wednesday 9 July. Detailed instructions were provided here:

drive.google.com/file/d/16-9POEZ7yHWUr6EmbfquJZO18Gv78bSm/view

The hearing is being live tweeted by x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-005 and tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.ph/WSSjg.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: nitter.net/tribunaltweets or nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Links to previous threads #1 to #29 can be found in the header of thread #30.

Thread 30: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5375337-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-30
Thread 31: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5375819-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-31
Thread 32: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5376072-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-32

Potentially salient info about Lord and Lady Russell here: www.wellbeingatthebar.org.uk/2021/02/25/what-worked-for-me/.

@NebulousDog re 'I don’t have a Times sub, but I imagine that there will be quite a few raised eyebrows at breakfast this morning. So many damning articles.' I've noticed there are several of the links which include the phrase 'share token' and these open without needing an account.

Hope that's not stating the obvious, as it too me a while to suss it out.

Having triggered other pp into dark thoughts about corrective rape on a previous thread - it’s worth clarifying that a good thought experiment for this would be to simply open the door to a small women’s toilet (in a slightly isolated location) and then see X or Y person standing there - what’s your reaction? Do you hold your breath or not?

I've just realised that it was Naomi Cunningham who made a FOI request in 2021 to the Judicial College, asking if judges had received training from Stonewall et al.

(To make it clear, I am not trying to insinuate anything about this case at all)

Here’s the image for those not on x

I've mentally cast Helen Mirren as NC and Anna Maxwell Martin as Sandie. That Game of Thrones actress who's getting all the adulation for being non binary can be Isla Bumba, since she looks a bit like her and also doesn't know she's a woman, so no acting required.

will KS be aware that DrU has very much rowed back from what he initially said - that SP was actually not aggressive, didn’t compare to Isla Bryson etc?

In theory she shouldn’t be - witnesses in Scotland are not allowed to watch the trial until after they have taken the stand and shouldn’t be discussing the case with others. But the gap in proceedings means it seems very unlikely that the current crop of witnesses are unaware of what was said by earlier witnesses.

The stuff about the conflict of interest makes me wonder.

We are looking at the idea of that from a logical pov. But none of this case is logical.

And here's the thing; we understand what the best interests of NHS Fife are at this point quite clearly. Does JR and NHS Fife too? Or do they think their best interests are different to what we think their best interests are?! This is a mad question but one I have to reflect on at this point.

'Best interests' is defined as what is your priority and what is most important. We see it as reputation and integrity. But is it possible they view their integrity as a trans employer and their reputation as someone who supports trans rights as the most important thing even now? The statement on Friday would suggest that and reading through the history of JR on this, she may feel the same. In order for NHS Fife to remain in that position they have to keep fighting as they have to retain control of the narrative. They loss control of power over staff if they lose this. They will still have a scenario where key heads will roll and if those key heads think it's an all or nothing situation for them, the danger is they will carry on because they don't see it as self interest - they see themselves as integral to the Trust and how they can not be lost because otherwise they have failed the sacred caste! Are they all so locked into this bubble that they can't see the world as it looks to everyone else?

I just don't know at this point.

I think there is definitely a high chance that come Monday morning we will see another significant development in the case and another delay as new council is sought due to conflict of interest.

But I also have my doubts as to whether any of the above parties will see it that way too either! It's true 'through the looking glass' stuff and it's hard to know which way is up in the heads of these people.

That's how messed up this all is.

NHS Fife are gonna run out of magenta printer ink at this rate.

Oooh! They are going to crash so hard come lunchtime!

Honestly though a squirrel PR team is just about the only thing that makes sense right now

That Times article on JR is illuminating on so many levels and plays directly into the underlying class issues of this case. Married to a Lib Dem peer? Am I surprised? Not at all.

Russell? The Russell who was Prime Minister while a million people starved to death over five years? That Russell?

Could any of you posters who are good at asking AI to produce images get it to create an image of a KC charging on horseback through the streets of London in defence of Humpty Dumpty's right to make words mean what he chooses them to mean?

Me too!

But then on the other hand if they are truly concerned for the wellbeing of their employees they could avoid putting them on the stand… they can’t have it both ways now can they? Although JR preferred to have a dig at the judge about privacy.

I do hope the NHS FIfe suddenly don’t grow up tho… it’s morbid fascination for me now

This is surely a key point - Dr U is being shown to be unreliable in both what he claimed about SP's verbal comments in the changing room and a potentially an unreliable witness in court. Fife employees are also being shown to be unreliable in their investigation of SP's conduct and potentially unreliable in court.

If Dr U is found to have made up the patient safety allegations and lied in court then I would be expecting him to be struck off.

Here she is, lance of lexicological liberty raised high, off to court to debate whether “quangle” can legally mean both a marshland and a philosophical dilemma.

It's not at all uncommon for barristers to be upper class and privileged. It's probably most of them.

It does make me wonder, again, why Fife thinks sonething is corrupt in NC being chair of Sex Matters. That's quite the opposite of a conflict of interest. It's just proof that she's committed to and sincere about what she's advocating.

Maybe in my TV series starring Mirren and Maxwell Martin, there'll be a plot twist where it turns out JR was a double agent working undercover for Sex Matters and women's rights, as was everyone on the Fife press team. It's starting to look like the only explanation that makes sense!

KS yes, grilling awaits, barrister v consultant, could be epic!

VV excused as Judge & both sides have agreed that her written statement is sufficient. (Anyone know what it says, offhand?)

I believe her '2nd chair' (Excuse my American) is actually a solicitor. Doesn't mean she can't represent one client or the other (I think).

But which one?

Do they play rock/paper/scissors to see who keeps JR?

It may be in the best interest of current witnesses to stick with the line of 'Dr U said SP compared him to Isla Bryson' because a) that's what Dr U told them
and
b) it puts more blame on Dr U for making false allegations

Fife have clearly still majorly screwed up their response to Dr U's claims - Dr Searle's email really is indefensible.

I have it on good authority (as if) next week's NHS IT guy will be given visual demonstrations as to how NHS Fifes computer system works

Wonderful! Thank you very much.

We really need the laugh emoji back!

I was so close to being caught up on Friday afternoon - and then they released that fucking press release and all hope was lost. I've had to skip most of thread 32, or I would end up done for child neglect.

That press release. I think I've seen all the versions. I don't think there was anything in there untrue, was there?

I mean, it's totally mad, akin to:

"In March 2025, a horse died on day 3 of the Cheltenham Racing Festival. That same month, JR rode a horse for two miles through Central London. The royal family, with whom JR has connections, are regular attendees at Cheltenham. SP, who has never ridden a horse, fraternized with royalty or been to Cheltenham, was 450 miles away, in Fife throughout March 2025.

• ETA: We are not suggesting that JR had anything to do with the incident at Cheltenham."

But all the sentences on their own are true [unless SP went on holiday in March or something]. Can it be defamation? Does the addition at the bottom make a difference?

Or does the whole thing just make them look even more like knobends, but have no legal consequences? (Apart from the bit about maybe lying to the info commissioner, but I'm not even trying to find an analogy for that one.)

You have a point there - it totally depends on what KS says. If she describes DU as completely distraught and that he asked her to let everyone know - and she now realised that was foolish… I can’t imagine that’s what she will say but it’s possible she was emotionally blackmailed into it. On the other hand she could be twice the TRA that is Isla Bumba… can’t wait to find out