NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #42

[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 #40 can be found in this thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 41: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379334-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-41 24 July 2025 to 25 July 2025

Expert witness uses exclamation mark. Weird. Expert witness uses two exclamation marks. Sad times.

JB very obviously knows his shit and he seems to be the go to forensic computer expert for court cases across Scotland. He must be baffled as to why JR is being so bloody rude. I liked his comeback about her being paid too.

Someone earlier mentioned the 'bashing the keyboard with my tits' thread. For anyone who hasn't seen it, it's very funny-

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/mumsnet_classics/2307274-I-am-everything-you-hate-about-people-on-the-internet-I-am-here-to-help

Uggh she is so smarmy, snarky and patronizing. She talks to people as though they are dim or small children

J - give wide range of qu, permissible qu only
JR - he strayed outside of skilled witness role, can't be an advocate, must assist court in areas they are expert. By commenting on fairness, opinion and !!s is straying outside that.
J - further?
CE - submissions may be needed

I think saying he's perplexed is fine. He's deliberately not said Upton is a liar, even though he can see from the evidence that he is, as that would be biased. So he's turned it on himself.

He's been around the block more times than he's had hot dinners.

This is astonishing stuff. Providing edited screenshots as evidence? Oh he's fucked up badly.

Haha I was just thinking about that post

This is just insane!

Surely the inclusion or otherwise of his opinion - and arguably he's being asked for his bloody opinion - does not alter the cold hard facts of what the forensic examination of the screenshots etc. found.

She’s gonna get his testimony thrown out for exclamation marks !!!

Omfg, is she trying to get his evidence chucked out for exclamation marks?!!!!

!!!!!!!!

Sad times ! !

Hold on how was her witness allowed to say he believed Dr U but JB isnt allowed to give actual expert opinion?

From TT

JB - yes
JR - 3rd sent. Once again, describe being perplexed and another ! at the end

Fifer : Pronouns have drawn nae blood. She's after the punctuation merks noo.

JB - yes
JR - opinion?
JB - yes
JR - 1899
JB - y
JR - last sent. you make a comment on fairness
JB - yes
JR - 1700 - 4th para, starts DU produced a series of scshs and go on to say, attempting to produce, at a loss about producing imp evidence
JB - y
JR - du silent on scsh being rearranged with relative ease
JB - y
JR - not your role to give your opinion on any of this
CE - object, expert in chief, all 3 of my sections he gave evidence and those are prof opin on those

Fifer : ahm gonnae rest ma case here. JR is gettin nae where. That bus's been cauncelled hen. Yer no gettin tae Newburry the day, nor the morn neither. Ca it a day.

J - give wide range of qu, permissible qu only
JR - he strayed outside of skilled witness role, can't be an advocate, must assist court in areas they are expert. By commenting on fairness, opinion and !!s is straying outside that.

Fifer : so whit she's sayin is the mebbe definitely edited digital pictur n impossible timestamps are supposed tae be conveniently ignored. Aye you wish hen.

J - further?
CE - submissions may be needed

Oh no! The witness is wobbling now.

Jinx 😆

Jim seems to be holding his own quite well.

JR is back to the exclamation marks. Sad times.

I am so looking forward to the written judgment.
Happy Times

This is what I mean in my previous post when I said any re-X would only make things worse…

should have stayed firmly seated, JR

JR just scored a point to get JB to say that he made a comment in his report that wasn't wise.

Because he's a big old transphobic meanie.

Jim Borwick Day >>>> Kate Searle Day(s)

While some people might well be willing to work pro-bono on a case they feel
is worth doing that on, the reality is that if you want strong independent expert’s opinion & to ensure that expert will attend court & submit themselves to cross examination, you need to pay - a lot - to secure that evidence. On a case as large as this one, that’s a cost SP’a team will have decided is well worth incurring. The fact NHSF have decided not to secure their own independent expert, is them gambling on their own employee being able to give a reasonable account of evidence presented. I think we’ve all seen how many holes there are in his evidence, because he’s not able to explain the discrepancies. Plus he chose the 6th best option in how he approached securing the evidence he’d be asked about in court. Not really a great rebuttle witness IMO.

JR trying to discredit the witness and I assume get his entire report thrown out. Oh grasping at straws.

The evidence is the evidence though.

Seriously? She talking about punctuation?