Translucent's Steph Richards to sue the labour party.

[impossibletoday]

https://x.com/i/status/2040492200266477936

It's an interesting business model.

It would make Bernie Madoff blush!

'amendment' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that statement

That’s a ‘fuck off and stop asking questions’.

It’s hardly an amendment - it’s now a whole new legal case that is being crowdfunded.

Hang on. Sorry but what is Crowdjustice saying here? I am not arguing about the rights and wrongs of Steph's individual crowdfund but how did it become a sudden free for all?

Aren't Crowdjustice skating on thin ice here? Usually, if 'it didn't seem right', that's because it ain't right.

Yep.

It's a platform I've used often, as I'm sure have many here.

I'll say it again.

This stinks.

https://cilexjournal.org.uk/journal/cilex-journal-march-2017/comment/crowdjustice-of-legal-crowdfunding-and-the-phenomenon

Not regulated by the FCA.

Who does regulate CrowdJustice?

They say they've communicated with all donors. Be good to hear if that is true or not.

How can you change your case from wanting to sue the Labour Party to wanting to take the EHRC to JR without that being an entirely separate and distinct case?

Search me.

Richards has turned off comments on the X post about his crowdfunder.

In the immortal words of Bob ‘Bulldog’ Briscoe:

This stinks, this is total BS.

Well don't we know one or two modest donors? If they've been contacted, I'm sure we'd hear about it.

If this isnt fraud, I'd like to know how it isn't. I dont even see how sueing the Labour Party and a Judicial Review of the EHRC guidance are related. At all.

Just related by Steph being cross at being told he’s male in the eyes of the law and he can no longer trample all over women’s rights.

Something has occurred to me - Steph has monetised his X account.

I reckon this EHRC thing will be his new grift, trying desperately to stay relevant after the Labour Party nonsense was clearly a non-starter.

FoxKillah has a grift competitor...

I don't have a Bluesky account, can anyone see what this is about?

https://bsky.app/profile/tacc.org.uk/post/3mnfyttu5oc2z

Steph is/was friends with Sarah Phillimore and once published an article Sarah wrote on her website. Gosh

@LowLightsHighLights

Somebody dug into Steph’s blog to find this article by him, titled No regrets about publishing a terf article.

https://translucent.org.uk/no-regrets-about-publishing-an-article-by-sarah-phillimore/

In the ever increasing purity spiral, this makes Steph Not Pure Enough:

The hidden post says:

I really regret supporting this person & organization now. Steph doesn't support self ID & believes we shouldn't be treated as our 'acquired sex' in prisons, refuges or in sport. It seems she has a ton of internalized transphobia.

Someone then replied that Sarah Phillimore is being sued by Weddell and the GLP so must be A Bad Person and Steph is guilty by association.

Hence the TACC saying they will remove the CrowdJustice link.

Steph is on the True Trans wing of the Genderists. He believes that only men like him who have full bottom surgery should be allowed into female single sex spaces.

He's a terrible writer.

Yes, he always goes on about how he has had surgery. So funny that some of them now think they are not only better than actual women, but also better than other transwomen 😆

Many thanks @SabrinaThwaite . The purity spiral continues ever downwards.

First they came for Peter Tatchell, then they came for Stonewall, and now Steph 😆

To which I can only point him to the best verdict I've yet found on the subject.

Yeah, but crowdfunding 25k on the basis of 'roughly things I'm unhappy about' wasn't the original description.