Graham Linehan arrested on arrival at Heathrow Part 3

[IDareSay]

These threads are currently being used to follow the case that is taking place at Westminster Magistrate's Court over the 4th and 5th September, but will also be following the subsequent fallout of Graham's arrest at Heathrow on his return to the UK for this court case earlier this week.

He is currently on trial for alleged harassment of a trans identified male and criminal damage to the man's phone. The charges stem from a series of events in October 2024 at Battle of Ideas.

Part 1 here

Part 2 here

Graham's account of the arrest here

You can support his Substack here

Free Speech Union are running a fundraiser to support a claim against the Met in reference to the Heathrow arrest. Just search FSU and Graham Linehan fundraiser and it should be easy to find. Currently reached 93% of its target.

Most of the mainstream media have reported on the case, but none have covered it as well as Nick Wallis. Follow him on X for live posting from the court.
You can support Nick here (posted this morning Friday 5th September):

"I am deeply grateful to everyone who has seen fit to bung me the cost of a coffee, a pint or even a bloody London pint since I found out I was able to come back today. If you think you can afford to make a small donation, there’s more info here:"

https://store29806256.company.site

So the rape victim was lying about being raped then?

No you ninny, Maria MacLachlan's video. The interesting one that carries a warning about an unhinged young man.

O dear god I mis-spelled MM's name. I wonder will she report me to the cops?

Of ffs mumsnet. I just wrote a long, painful account of my years of harassment ( not linked to GI) and how the police turned everything round to also harass me and then the page reloaded as a problem occurred and I lost the lot. One highlight being when I was given a harassment warning for providing the evidence they had asked me to get.

I’m not going to try again, but I’ll just say it’s not just the met who are so easily played by people, and I can understand only too well how Glinner and others feel helpless and the constant stress they are under.

Trusting communities and working with them is supposed to be at the heart of many government plans. From health and social care to education and the economy.

Iceland has reportedly transformed substance use among young people. And they did this when they stopped demonising teen substance use as individual choices and started treating it as a community responsibility.

They achieved this through careful strategy. They increased parenting support, expanded after-school programmes. They strengthened community bonds. It’s remarkable what you can achieve when you stop disdaining and your electorate and start working with them.

No he doesn't find rape hilarous.

He find the claim that a transwomen was raped 2000 times in prison in male prison. That man was in prison for 4 years.

He points out this is 10 times a week, more than once a week, for four years.
He doesn't think rape is hilarous. He finds the claim unbeleivable and laughable.

He's using it as an example of hyperbole thats being used by some trans activists.

Hes not laughing a rape. He laughing at those who take ridiculous claims at face value without questioning whether its credible. Suggesting he's laughing at rape is dishonest and shows an inability to look at what he says without bias.

I don't know whether I believe the claim. Even if its true then the solution isn't to put transwomen in a womens jail though anyway. If it is true its about a failure of the prison to put the transwoman under sufficient protection. Its a claim that very much is on the side of stretching creditability and Linehan points out.

The context, once again, is Linehan's lived experiences of coming across individuals who identify as trans who have problems with the truth and he's been on the recieving end of that.

I get why he's laughing. Its possibly poor form. But hes not laughing at rape.

Hope that clarifies.

Thanks, those comments were a joy to read!

Indeed. Just because women can't get a rape conviction for love nor money, and most women have been on the receiving end of sexually unwanted behaviour, we tend to believe women by default.

That doesn't extend to a group who are proven lying liars. Certainly not for me. And certainly when the same group who are a danger to women, cynically weaponise that very risk to manipulate our behaviour towards them.

In the 1970s, I was back for a weekend in Fife in my second yr at uni.

My best pal took me out to a disco in Kelty. The DJ was called Tarquin. Only people who know Kelty will understand how funny this was. (I'm certain that it was a stage name.)

Sorry, Tarquin - you were a damned fine DJ.

Isn’t that comment skirting close to allowing Glinner a legal complaint?

I wonder if there are any reporters about who would like to submit such a slanderous/defamatory comment to police - after all, the police are bound to investigate if they are complained to?

It IS hard to believe however you cut it.
You have to accept a pretty enormous failure to protect by the prison service to believe it. Which is possible but goes against what most people would think of as likely. You have to believe the institutional failure is so deep, that extends to the prison guards.

So the victim isn't necessarily a lying, but it is difficult to accept at face value too. It sounds like it potentially is hyperbolic.

If the prison guards are that fucking useless, you wouldn't want to be putting male prisoners (regardless of how they identify) in with female prisons for obvious reasons. You wouldn't be solving the issue of rape in prisons. You'd just be exposing a different population to the same risk. Youd be putting transwomen in a separate wing with other transwomen. And even that might not solve the problem unfortunately, because the problem is males raping other males. Indeed the stats point to transwomen having higher rates of sexual offending than the general prison population.

I also get Lineham's response. In the context of his experiences. He no longer believes any claim of ultra vulnerability from TRA. Its the boy who cried wolf problem.

I personally remain open minded to whether the rape victim was lying or not. I don't know have enough context on the claim to decide whether its true or not. I don't know where it was made or what country the person was in. All these factors would affect my view on whether it was true.

No I wouldn't just accept it at face value, because we see enough bollocks presented on here for propagandic value as it is. There are posters i don't trust to tell the truth. Nor should we. It is unwise to believe stuff we see online uncritically.

HTH.

Yes, to the extent claimed which would probably have resulted in his death if true.

Absolutely agree. And no one in a position of responsibility will be able to say, oh we had no idea, no-one could have known.

You have to believe the institutional failure is so deep, that extends to the prison guards.

All the prison guards, on all of the shifts over a four year period that the prisoner interacted with.

Like you RTB, open mind, but vulnerable prisoners are not uncommon within the prison estate and there are well defined procedures to protect them.

Is your username your cat’s full name?

Quite a few people asking now why, if Brooks was a minor at the time of the incident, nobody was asking what he was doing hanging around with much older males with questionable histories.

Anyway moving on.

He's more of the photo evidence used in court, for people to reflect on:

Maria MacLachlan AT MPMacLachlan
This post and the next one from Nick refer to this screencap of a post from Tarquin, showing a still of me from Tarquin's own footage. He knew I was holding my bag. He's blatantly lying under oath.

Nick Wallis AT NickWallis
[SV takes us to a transcript of a confrontation with MM]
SV you ask why she's got her fist clenched and if she's going to punch you - did you think she was?
SB it was a genuine question
SV if you look at her hand - you'll see its not a fist she's holding something
SB it's a poor photo
SV you were there
SB it was 11 months ago
SV at the end of your confrontation you say to MM - "go lie about your assault more". Is that acceptable
SB yes - she was being
... rude about me online.
SV so what was your best case scenario from approaching GL about the "domestic terrorist" quote.
SB that he would apologise
SV after he called you a groomer
SB yes possibly
SV really
SB yes if he was a sane and normal person
SV do you think he was a sane and normal person
SB he could be - he might see the error of his ways
SV why film him on the second occasion in selfie mode - why did you think that might elicit an apology
SB maybe to shame him into an apology
SV you know GL was trying to get info on you to pass on to the police

Did SB deliberately try and misrepresent MM on twitter in a manner than was dishonest, obvious and libellous? And then lie about it in court?

MNetters, you decide.

I was stuck by the way that the two assailants treated MM using much the same tactics as a wolf pack

-- separate one victim
-- make sure that they are weaker
-- make sure that you outnumber the victim
-- circle to attack from more than one direction

Unpleasant, deranged people

The circling to attack from two directions is particularly unsettling - to me it shows that the intention of the interaction is not discourse, it is just to harass the victim

Still not sure what the correct response to this sort of attack is.

On the subject of the Fife connection, I asked my Scottish DH about it and he immediately said (with apologies to the Fifers here) “that’s because everyone from Fife is a zippy-heided bastard”. Apparently people from his part of Scotland have very little regard for the people from the Kingdom of Fife. His more sensible follow up was that Fife has no big cities so all the high fliers gravitate towards Edinburgh or Dundee, leaving the area with a bit of a yokel reputation (ie the Scottish Craggy Island).

i can only assume that means it’s easier to be a big fish in a small pond and/or make connections with similar minded people there.

That looks as though he has tried to photoshop out either a phone or a water bottle, leaving a light grey blur.

The visuals are very much are giving lots more information that the judge will take into account.

It is fascinating to see how they add another layer of understanding to this.

Maria is suggesting here, that SB knowingly pergured himself.

Perjury Act 1911
(1)If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . F1 for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.

(2)The expression “judicial proceeding” includes a proceeding before any court, tribunal, or person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.

(3)Where a statement made for the purposes of a judicial proceeding is not made before the tribunal itself, but is made on oath before a person authorised by law to administer an oath to the person who makes the statement, and to record or authenticate the statement, it shall, for the purposes of this section, be treated as having been made in a judicial proceeding.

(4)A statement made by a person lawfully sworn in England for the purposes of a judicial proceeding—

(a)in another part of His Majesty’s dominions; or
(b)in a British tribunal lawfully constituted in any place by sea or land outside His Majesty’s dominions; or
(c)in a tribunal of any foreign state,
shall, for the purposes of this section, be treated as a statement made in a judicial proceeding in England.

(5)Where, for the purposes of a judicial proceeding in England, a person is lawfully sworn under the authority of an Act of Parliament—
(a)in any other part of His Majesty’s dominions; or
(b)before a British tribunal or a British officer in a foreign country, or within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England;
a statement made by such person so sworn as aforesaid (unless the Act of Parliament under which it was made otherwise specifically provides) shall be treated for the purposes of this section as having been made in the judicial proceeding in England for the purposes whereof it was made.

(6)The question whether a statement on which perjury is assigned was material is a question of law to be determined by the court of trial.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justice-offences
Perverting the Course of Justice
The offence of perverting the course of justice is committed when an accused:

• does an act or series of acts;
• which has or have a tendency to pervert; and
• which is or are intended to pervert;
• the course of public justice.

The course of justice must be in existence at the time of the act(s). The course of justice starts when:

• an event has occurred, from which it can reasonably be expected that an investigation will follow; or
• investigations which could/might bring proceedings have actually started; or
• proceedings have started or are about to start.

The judge potentially has a lot to consider...

SB filmed women over the course of the last few years, with let's be honest pretty intimadatory tactics, even when he has been asked to stop.

Now complains that videos of him are being shared.

You'd have a heart of stone not to laugh.

So rape is only funny if it happens to people who aren't gender critical? And leader of feminists Graham Linehan is the judge of rape victims to decide if they are telling the truth or not?

Got it.

With those timestamps I suspect it's FW that's complaining. Or getting Tarquin to complain on his behalf.

Ahh, that makes more sense, I saw the nebulous grey blur and was wondering what it might be.

In the first pic, it looks like she's holding a handbag to me, clutching the black handle.