From TT
JR - I need 15 minutes, but not now
J - before witnesses?
JR - I should see before calling witnesses
NC - should I wait or do you want to hear now
J - now please on these points
Big Sond has completely given up on playing Tribunal Court Bingo, there are much more important matters. Whae's cryin shotgun in the gowf cart being the first ae them.
NC - the difficulties have been in the manner that which Rs have conducted case
JR says that we knew about other objector a long time ago, we knew about many objectors long ago, but the price of objecting was obvious, it is important that the Tribunal hear from this witness. R's treatment of C is the most obvious sign of how any other wits would be treated
C is the only one who came forward.
JR says C has known about LN since early July. We did not see material from group chat until last week. And other participant to that 2 way chat, is the only other person who can give evidence about that is our other witness. It would be strikingly unjust to allow the R to call one of parties to that chat and not allow C to call the other. On JRs general point about productions before she's seen them, in the 26 pages we have provided we have already redacted them, only 2 indvs are identified, so no problem.
And there are patient details in one, LN needs to see the unredacted version, but that is simply done.
J - how long until available, given difficulties here.
NC - it will take us some time to get out to a print shop.
Fifer : runs oot hoose wi desktop laser jet and jumps in the caur, gonna be a hero like Gazza and the KFC.
J - and on submissions
NC - majority of evidence has been given in last 2 weeks. There is a great deal to be done, compare evidence, find alignment, it is unrealistic to expect C to be ready.
J - in Scotland we do that all the time, including complicated cases, doesn't mean that we need to do in this case. How long do you propose?
Big Sond disnae mind, he jist needs tae ken so as tae no lose the comfy seat in the Gowf Kert.
NC - 2 ways; adjourn for written subs then come back in person for questions from Panel and/or brief oral argument. Our pref'd option. Failing that we could proceed to oral submissions but would ask to supplement in writing by end of August. It is not merely a complicated factual case, it is a case of real importance, it is likely that the losing party may appeal at least once, it's the first case since the practical working out of FWS judgment will have to be addressed for single sex spaces. It is being avidly watched by press and general public
It really is