Graham Linehan arrested on arrival at Heathrow Part 2

[IDareSay]

First thread here

Started thread 2 as this seems destined to run for some time...

Yes, in terms of evidence, I wonder if it would undermine his, if it's only hearsay.

As I said, though, GL could easily be convicted of chucking this twat's phone, but the win, as ever, is in exposing transactivism.

Not sure if Graham would see it that way, of course.

I should be at Westminster mags in 20 minutes or so and will resume from there.

From Nick. This was at 8.54am so he should have arrived now.

So women who are raped have to have a perfect case, the right kind of rapist, multiple strands of evidence, be perfect witnesses, never remember a new detail in case they’ve ’changed their story’, have their phones confiscated and forensically examined, and are made to go through their sexual history and the rape itself in front of tens of strangers. And even then the police and CPS refuse to more than take a tiny, tiny fraction of perfect cases to court.

And here we are watching this weasel shite of a case with full police and CPS support?

Sarah vine KC has done the police work for them and got Brooks on record admitting to operating various socks accounts and also dropping Watson in it by confirming who runs the Seen Police account.

Leaves me wondering whether people who have had previous run ins with the socks, will go back to the police with this new evidence. There is a massive but though, even if they do will the police do anything about it.

Wrong kind of women, innit?

Imagine being more concerned about a man who knocked your phone [which was in a protective case] out of your hand after you stalked and harrased herds of women, rather than the 5 men who are your best mates which include ex cons one of which allegedly castrated themselves and one who is an actual convicted paedophile, as well as a man with a sex dungeon who sent pictures of himself being fellated to a disabled women's rights activist, a man who posts pictures on line of himself with pegs on his nipples and a disgraced ex cop who spent his whole career trying to get into roles where he has access to vulnerable people.

And Graham is the problem in this picture? Catch yourself on fellas.

100% - the only credible woman is the one with the penis.

God it's just unbelievable, isn't it.

Spend decades creating laws and public policies that allow any man who wants to into rooms where women and girls are vulnerable, or undressed and then be shocked when it's all about predators, weirdos, fetishists, and nonces.

I’m not that hopeful, but I really want people to see that this activism is about people like Tarquin, & all the other twisted men detailed in Shedmistress’s post.

It’s not the sanitised version, the Kaitlyn Jenners & Dylan Mulvanneys, it’s grubby little men who claim to be women but who actually hate them.

I think one piece of the institutional capture puzzle are these middle aged and near-retirement blokes who are completely at sea in DEI world.
I'm not talking about racist arseholes or men who get off on making women feel uncomfortable whenever there's plausible deniability to allow them get away with it. I mean decent people who can see that it's a good thing to stop harassment and discrimination in the workplace, but there is no dovetailing with their personal experience or interests. They're in a constant near panic of "should I say people of colour or coloured people?" and "is holding the door open what I must do or should never do?" When they ask colleagues about it they'll be reassurred that if they treat everyone with respect they'll be fine. But they don't trust their own intuitions. Then along comes the trans liason and it's all, first you tug the right forelock twice, then the left, except if the moon is waning in the first half of the calendar month, and on Tuesdays in the Spring it's the other way around. And the relief is palpable - there's no subtlety to the art of doing the right thing according to the emergent trans worldview.

A question for those better informed than me (most people here!)

If GL is shown to have done the things he is charged with, but the actions of the complainant are demonstrated to much worse, does that have any mitigating impact at all?

Or is it the case that GL will be found guilty, and then there has to be additional proceedings against the obviously vexatious SB and the clear harassment and doxxing he has perpetrated?

Things are going to get a bit worse as the TG people are starting to lose their grip. What they were asking for was always going to be dysfunctional. They are going to be more desperate with trying to assert their dominance.

It’s also starting to affect men now, their free speech and there is the court case about the man who was SA’d by the TW.

this is one reason why some of the breakthrough and return to sanity has been sports. Most of these regular blokes can clearly see the issue there.

It leaves you thinking 'what did the police actually do in this case apart from arrest Linehan?'

But let's not forget the CPS here, who green lighted the whole thing when they won't pursue so many cases relating to domestic violence and didn't really ask the police some fairly crucial questions here by the looks of it.

Prosecutors must be fair, objective and independent. When deciding whether to prosecute a criminal case, our lawyers must follow the Code for Crown Prosecutors. This means that to charge someone with a criminal offence, prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, and that prosecuting is in the public interest.

There's lots in this case which make me wonder if it ever has been in the public interest to go ahead with this.

If there was a threat of a judicial review in order to force the issue, it doesn't really sound like there was much fair, objective and independent does it?

Have we heard anymore from Nick? (I’m not on X)

Not since 8.54am

JK nails it as ever.

Not anything yet, other than

Yesterday the prosecution set out the case and the complainant (an 18yo male called Sophia Brooks) gave evidence, and was cross-examined. Read the tweet thread on that here:

And then yesterday's thread.

Why such a surprise that anyone inciting violence is arrested?
Shouldn't anyone be, regardless of who they are inciting that violence towards?

I'll stop checking X now @SabrinaThwaite is here!

Nick's last post as of this minute was at 8.54am:

I should be at Westminster mags in 20 minutes or so and will resume from there.

I like Glinner's use of 'Tarquin' which doesn't expose the lad's original name but does say 'posho' and English. Not sure what the Irish version would be - Conchobar or Maelseachlin maybe?

He wasn't inciting violence. He was inciting self-defence.

GL would have to demonstrate that he was put under such levels of harassment that it his reaction wasn't unreasonable and his response was proportionate that.

It's a tough line tbh, though this guy has done wonders in making that case.

Linehan is a hot head who hasn't been able to rein that in when needed. He bites when baited. This is a subject that needs cool heads and measured responses unfortunately.

What he's saying and what he's exposed is arguably in the public interest in many ways (yes the sexualised stuff which wasn't locked down behind privacy settings and was public even if it's grim).

That's why I'm open about him being guilty about this charge, but I do recognise it in the context of police failings and that he should never have been put in that position in the first place. So a conviction whilst correct could still be injustice because he hasn't been treated fairly and indicate a wider problem with the system at large.

It's also why I think other people who have not agreed with his approach in the past are still supportive of him despite his flaws.

🗻🗻🗻🗻🌋

Oh and there's the minor question of PROVING that it was Linehan did the damage to the phone beyond reasonable doubt.

If there's no video evidence of the incident that might be difficult to say it was definitely Linehan and not a vexatious teen who admits under oath to stalking and harassment smashing his own phone and then blaming Linehan.

If Brooks is not a reliable witness it opens up the possibility that it's all made up just to claim a scalp.