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...

DC moving on 7 Nov - further contact from LW. LW states - good afternoon El, hope you are well, just wondering if there was any update. Managed to contact SB and she has great confidence in your...

... abilities so I'll not push you for an update - but just to let you know the protection from harassment act offers unlimited fines. GL is 100% to crowdfund any fine imposed on him - he can crowdfund 100k in a week and will scoff at any fine...

I was wondering if his age was relevant to being able to obtain legal aid or threaten a Judicial Review? These type of actions don't come cheap. Most people who would like a Judicial Review on a topic can't afford one.

With regard to his perceived age. From the videos online I would have guessed he was much older than 17 or 18. He's a big lad. It would be a reasonable mistake to assume he was an adult.

Maybe that will come out today (how much was known at the time about his age).

- but any large fine would have a huge effect on GL and those he radicalises - trying to stop GL is surely a thing to seek - I will help anyway I can and can send a draft text for an witness statement...
DC did LW send a WS?
TW didn't get one if he did

P no re-examination
J no q's
TW leaves the witness box and returns to sit in the well of the court
P that is the prosecution case
J thank you

DC I would now like to make a submission of No Case to Answer

I think it’s in case they get enquiries from the press- he’s letting them know he’s famous so as to enable them to prepare a response. It’s not proactive in the sense that the police press dept won’t put something out before being contacted.

Interesting comments on Twitter

Was LW's intervention pre or post sacking? Inappropriate either way, but even more so if post the sack.

It's just so vindictive, isn't it?

DC to summarise this process - what the court is tasked with now is to ascertain whether this court could reasonably convict GL on either charge. This is made on both charges, but my principle focus at this stage is on charge of harassment. You can decide this on credibility...

... of complainant. I would like to make clear for those listening that neither party is asking you to pick a side in what is a political ongoing contention between the conflict of rights and gender ID. The tone of the debate is the context of this debate, but the court is in ...

... the happy position of not having to define it. DC a person's complaint about another's conduct must be assessed against the other person's conduct. The conduct of C is to be borne centrally in mind. This analysis is independent of the quality of the evidence.

Apparently the age given to the court is 18. I don’t know how true that is. 🤷🏻‍♀️

No, he said he contacted the press. Not that he filled in the police force's press officer in case the press got wind of it.

it starts with a note of a message you have sent to the press bureau that you are about to iv GL by arrangement

I wonder how far I’d get if I tried to suggest courses of action to a plod investigating a complaint of a crime. One that’s not even ‘my’ complaint, (and a trivial one at that, that was previously closed out), but one involving a friend / acquaintance.

I’m pretty confident I’d either be ignored or told, semi-politely, to fuck off. Ex-filth or not, why was the cop responding to LW at all?

DC did the conduct properly amount to H such that it attracts criminal sanction. The conduct at its height can be summarised as follows. GL published photos of the complainant largely in a public place and none said to be private.

DC secondly tagging the met police into a tweet that he believed Freda Wallace and SB had knowledge of the LGBA cricket attach

DC thirdly - asking for info and telling his followers he was preparing a document on this guy to give to police - telling his followers to block SB's accounts - describing him as a deeply disturbed sociopath

Don’t forget that 14 year old girls visiting M&S bra depts are totally responsible for their own actions and lack of action too. But Tarquin is just an innocent child who was alarmed and distressed.

Inappropriate doesn't even cover it!

Any other randoms being allowed to discuss this ongoing investigation with the police?

This is so shocking.

I'm not sure if you're referring to women and girls, who absolutely are exposed to massive amounts of crime perpetrated and threatened against them, or men who claim a trans identity, who on the whole aren't.

Yes but I think that’s referring to the internal police press bureau.

Yes, found that. Interesting current career, too.

- but any large fine would have a huge effect on GL and those he radicalises - trying to stop GL is surely a thing to seek - I will help anyway I can and can send a draft text for an witness statement...

😲😲😲

Utterly unhinged.

He was sacked for gross misconduct in Oct 2023, so it was at least a year after this.

My mistake - press bureau is the internal Met PR team? I thought it was something closer to Associated Press. Makes sense then, TY.

DC - the latter point being made in the context of the Freda Wallace group chat [where a threat/joke was made about KJK] - calling him and FW "scumbang grooming homophobic sociopathic sadists" - calling SB a "malignant narcissist"

- describing SB as "a psycho posh kid" - posting that C was studying comp sci in London and that anyone who knows him and wants to stop him harassing people to get in touch

Surely the CPS will want to drop this now. It's an utter car crash!

I’m probably wrong! I just read it as internal comms, but it could well have been external, in which case your comments stand.

- asking if City Uni has a good comp sci course - referring to the complainant as a porn addicted man and sociopath who harasses women - stating his belief C was behind the attack at the LGBA - tagging met police telling them to look out for SB and FW at a LWS event

DC these are sincerely held beliefs about C's conduct and they are directed at the police. GL wants the police involved. These are not a call to vigilantism and cannot be construed as such. Complaints of C's harassment ...

are not vexatious - there is sufficient evidence before this court to create a foundation from which it could be inferred that indeed C engages in conduct both objetively and subjectively is H..

... GL is not formal, polite or diplomatic. It is crude and to C unwelcome. Taken as a whole in the specific context of C's conduct and the wider political conduct this does not cross the threshold of oppressive.