Custody officer job withdrawn for GC beliefs - Gribbon (SP legal team) is his solicitor

[InterrobangsArePureBias]

I wonder how many more of such actions will be launched. To adapt Jimmy Doyle’s phrase, “the spectacle of this nation’s [lanyard classes] enforcing moral auto-lobotomy as a condition of entry to [employment]”.

A prison custody officer who was sacked for saying he would not address male-born transgender inmates as ‘she’ or ‘her’ has launched legal action against one of the UK’s largest security firms.
Army veteran David Toshack, 50, was dismissed by GEOAmey during a training course only days before taking up a role as a prison custody officer (PCO) at Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court.
The father of three told a safeguarding workshop that he would not be comfortable using a transgender inmates’ preferred gender pronouns and expressed his belief that a man could not become a woman.
It sparked a horrified reaction from bosses at the firm, which employs thousands of justice workers across the UK, who said his views were against the law and company policy.
…
He said: ‘I’m just a normal, working class person who’s never been in trouble with the law before, not got a criminal record, lived a good life. I’ve been prepared to go and fight and die for my country, and then I have come back here and been told that there’s certain things you can’t think or can’t say.’

https://archive.is/bxjqC

Original story about David Toshack in Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14963309/Prison-custody-officer-sacked-refusing-call-male-born-trans-prisoners-her.html

Thanks @Another2Cats

[my added emphasis]

CH Yes, with an MPV. Could be due to custody issues or pregnancy or self harming needing precautions. Lots of scenarios when appropriate
MM Can u describe an incident
CH I wasnt there but heard of the violent incident later

MM Lots of discussion afterwards
CH Yes. A self harmer TG was being moved. Had lots of sensitive information. They wrote 'he' and the PCO was assaulted.
MM The PER form generally is important?
CH Very
MM Turn to p461.

MM U say it's better to not complete PER in fron tof prisoners. For all
Yes
MM Can they get to see a PER. By accident
CH ?? [they can see legally]
MM DT saying he wldnt need to fill in a PER
CH He has to. Every PCO must
MM He'd be in Krkcaldy courts. SO he'd have to write on form

CH 100%
MM Why is this document so long, over 100 pages
CH In some cases there may be changes. They need to know all this information. We spend the whole day on ITC teaching about this form

CH Yes. A self harmer TG was being moved. Had lots of sensitive information. They wrote 'he' and the PCO was assaulted.

Which is why you don't let prisoners see the paperwork! The conclusion should not be 'therefore we must lie to stop the prisoner kicking off'.

I'm glad SPS have binned them off.

I might have to step away for a minute. This level of utter incompetence and stupidity is making me really cross! 🤬

MM Back to p571. DT said he wasnt going to call a M a woman as against his beliefs. What did u mean by saying you understand
CH He can have his beliefs but has to apply the policy
MM It says as u cant follow policy we have to terminate his employment
Yes
MM He said he wldnt be disrespectful. He cld use them or they here
CH Yes

MM what egs did u give of using thems instead
CH It's treating ppl as how they ID for respect. They or them isnt how they ID
MM SO creates the same risk as u described earlier
Yes
MM Re it taking too long to write they /them
CH I didnt say that (??)
MM U seem to ask DT re searching a TG with a GC. WHy did u ask this Q?

CH [about putting himself in danger]
MM But he said he'd do the search
CH Yes
MM He says he's not going to lie about their gender even if I'll search them
CH He wld treat them as the sex they were

MM U say we have to treat acc to GRC but it's wider than that
Yes
MM Why did u say y're entitled to yr strong views?
CH [missed]
MM How was his tone
CH He was upset. Had quite a sharp voice.

It seems mostly relaxed.

TBF to TT, I think it is the distortion and static sounds that are making it difficult to hear, rather than the accent.

CH How can u ID if someone was born a M if IDs as F.
MM He says it's a lie. He's recorded as saying he'd comply w searching. He said it's an ideology
CH Yes
MM You said it's inconsistent what he'd be willing to do
CH Yes, It wldnt add up
MM He wldnt write in the paperwork

CH Yes
MM [reads re following policies and not his personal beleifs] He argued about personal beliefs
CH I cant remember exactly
MM U record it being about the law. At this stage, DT is said to have asked why he cldnt write the name
Yes

MM It might be put to you that DT was offering to use a chosen name rather than the legal name
CH No.
MM Yr saying he didnt say that
CH [unclear]
MM That's not recorded in the note
CH No
MM Explained the need to apply policies

MM You said he failed probation as wldnt comply with the policies and expressed regret
CH Yes
MM PCOs dont carry out operational work but paid full salary
CH Yes
MM So 5.5 wks
CH Yes
MM So put up in H Inn every week in his own room
CH Yes. The company pays for meals

The sound is dreadful, cutting out and distorted, regardless of accent. The microphone placement is particularly bad for the witnesses.

I don't remember there being TT problems with eg the Sandie Peggie tribunal.

MM And the car hire
CH They have for the duration if live far away
MM For the duration of his ITC
CH I dont know
MM ALso cost of the trainers
CH Yes
MM So a signif investment in an individual
CH Yes
MM How many are dismissed
CH Not frequent although they may leave the course otherwise

MM Re DTs views, he describes as GC. Have other ppl his views in the system
CH Yes
MM How common is this
CH [missed]
MM As far as u know ppl with his views work for GA
CH Yes

MM Do u remeber SW
CH Yes
MM Do u remember him discussing his views on sex and gender
CH ??
MM [new page] It says yr refusal to work within eqaulity legislation and policies related to TG ppl in our care
CH Yes
MM Y're responsible for protecting TG ppl and their rights under legisaltion

CH It was the fact he'd refuse to treat TG ppl the way they were that led to his dismissal
MM What about SHs reaction (??)
CH He'd put himself at risk and his colleagues at risk by not following policy

You'd think the company would had better things to concern itself over... Especially given they've 'lost' their contract after allowing a violent prisoner to escape and other such incompetences.

MM Between 30-60 mins after the encounter u told him he was being dismissed. U were acting too fast?
CH He was firm he wldnt follow the paperwork so we had no other choice
MM On p573, notif of leaver form. It says on behalf of John Sinclair your name is typed
Yes

MM [reads re breaking the code of conduct. His SM has been checked and he has extremist posts so he shouldnt be employed in the future]
CH I didnt look at his SM but was told about it by HR

J I'm going to suggest an early lunch and we then go to cross exam. Return at 12.50

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/2018252222736351345.html

Thanks @Another2Cats !

It's always the low hanging fruit.

Go hard after stuff like this whilst studiously ignoring fundamental problems. Trying to look good rather than be good.

I hadn’t realised that the form they were discussing was 100 pages long - I was presuming a couple of pages. In which case plenty of room to include both sex and gender identity - which I’m sure DT would have been happy to complete.

I think the guidance on the form was 100 pages long.

Did I misunderstand that?

No tweets yet from TT

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/690389d292779f89baa52036/per-2025-generic-annex-i.pdf

This is a PER for those interested. It's 20 pages.

The form has tick boxes for Male, Female and a write-in for "Legal Gender if different".

Doesn't that rather support DT's interpretation of how to complete it? If you were to interpret M/F as self-identified, then the write in would be "Biological Gender if different".

No?

Yes I wondered the same. This is the one used in Engand/Wales. Perhaps the Scottish one is different?

This one seems clear to me.

From TT

People are returning to the room.

The sound has not been good so far today, but we will do our best.

David Hay for the claimant, cross examining Chris Hutton for the respondent.

DH Good afternoon Mr Hutton. Some general qs. You are an experienced trainer. Miss Harvey operates in a different unit, but evidence was about same level of seniority as you.
CH I report to training

CH manager. Sarah reports to a different manager.
DH Suggest that GC view is that individual cannot change sex born, and born as one or other. You understand.
CH yes
DH So when DT refs to GC beliefs to you, you understood those
CH yes
DH And views did not come as surprise to you

DH as DT had expressed views earlier in training
CH Not exactly, no.
DH DT views around searching. During course there were slides about that and a discussion with DT expressing views that M is man and w is woman
CH yes
DH Not saying DT used term GC but expressed those views

CH yes
DH And if you had issue with way DT expressed himself during course you had chance to raise this with him. In interviews for eg
CH yes
DH And you also remember DT when expressing view making connection with his religious belief
CH yes
DH Mentioned Christianity?
CH no

DH Good discussion had. You made ref to fact training course was safe space and ppl should be able to say what was on their minds
CH yes
DH You are experienced trainer on course
CH So staff can open up and discuss
DH Safe space - encourage staff to be open about matters on their

minds
CH Depends on what subject
DH Open, trust - helps towards resolution if needed
CH Yes
DH Your ref to particular TP
CH Yes
DH Consistent with your practice to give examples
CH Yes
DH You don't remember the ref to her testicles
CH Didn't say anything like that at all

DH People remember
CH Didn't say
DH Discussion - DT introduced discussion about ??
CH no
DH Perhaps that was meeting when DT expanded his GC views. You say it was earlier stage in course. Day 1?
CH Day 2 or 3
DH That early?
CH Yes
DH Re interview sheets. You did at least two
CH yes

DH No issue recorded by you re DT on course
CH no
DH Re DT said to be a nightmare?
CH I had no enounters with DT like that
DH Do you remember refs to Tiffany Scott?
CH No. You'd have to tell me which session that was
DH On second occasion DT said you changed use of PP from she

to he re Tiffany Scott.
CH No. You'd have to tell me which session that was.
DH Poss you would make that change of PP
CH No. I wouldn't. No professional.
DH Sure?
CH Yes
DH Miss Harvey and Miss Pollock - information conveyed to you. We have heard evidence in this case that a

view was taken re DT very soon after incident with DT.
CH Yes
DH Here is says after c 15 minutes in total. When SH talking to you and Miss Pollock couldn't be more than c 10 mins.
CH Can't say.
DH DT remembers canteen meeting wasn't long
CH Possibly. Can't tell.
DH How long

between Miss Harvey talking to you and DT into room.
CH Don't know
DH Matter of minutes.
CH More than that - would need to find available room and find someone to take notes etc. More time that a matter of minutes but don't know how long.
DH Did you undertake any form of

disciplinary in the past
CH yes
DH as a manager
CH yes
DH We know DT was still on probation period. Contract says a week's notice as probationer. Would you know c DT's employment rights?
CH no
DH This meeting with DT looks like a disciplinary meeting. Fair comment?
CH no

This guy isn't coming across as credible to me. He's out of his depth.

TT should attribute these difficulties to 'audio quality' rather than repeatedly mentioning 'accents,' which feels like a form of linguistic snobbery. If you aren't Scottish, it’s easy to dismiss my complaint—but that dismissal is exactly the point. Having frequently been told by English colleagues to 'speak English,' seeing TT frame a native dialect as a barrier rather than a technical issue really rankles. TT do a great job giving us access to these tribunals and I know they are volunteers but that doesn't excuse the clear accent bias that is coming across this week.

@BettyBooper Agree. He doesn't seem to remember the Tiffany Scott discussion which I think even the respondents witness recalled, though not in detail. He wont even say it's a memory problem, just flat out did not say it.