Just to add, LN’s evidence revealed that her sons are gay and she seemed to believe that T was a natural evolution of the LGB. When SP asked for advice about how to process the idea of her daughter being gay, LN judged SP for this. LN didnt seem to be able to account for SP being able to question her feelings but ultimately accept her daughter as gay.
Other chats obtained by NC indicated that LN didnt like SP much and she wanted to let everyone/the world know what SP was like. She also expressed jealousy about SP’s possible payout and was seen speaking to the other witness at lunch when they’d been told not to.
During cross NC revealed that LN had gone along with all the racist remarks through the thread and not protested or left - herself adding a laugh emoji on something inappropriate that SP had posted. NC then asked “is this the worst thing that we will find that you’ve posted?” and unfortunately for LN - because she’d been so unreflective on her own actions - NC showed that LN had named a patient, described their condition/medical details and then criticised them making a complaint about her (LN)?! She also had voluntarily brought this private chat to the Tribunal as evidence so was happy to ignore the privacy of friends as well as patients…
After that NC asked again - is this the worst we will find… but she then paused and didnt proceed. So it seems that there’s something even worse that LN posted compared to seeming to laugh at racist comments and breach regulatory guidelines on patient confidentiality…. But we will never know what.
LN had volunteered to bring this evidence it seemed she did it to tell the world how bad SP was. As a result she came under scrutiny and revealed her actions as far worse than SP with the added dash of disloyalty. The mudslinging was bad for SP but it maybe rebounded on her much worse.
As well as possibly facing regulatory sanction, I’m wondering if she will also be ostracised at work after publicly revealing that ALL members of the Benidorm (?) Party Chat were racists?