The Nick Wallis wrote up of Graham Linehan’s retrial deserves its own thread as it’s so interesting. Also quite barking mad.

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://genderblog.net/glinner-rides-again/

I knew a lot of this but the machinations exposed clearly are fascinating.

(it’s probably been linked 20 pages deep in another thread but…)

There was a lot of digging around into Brooks’ age on X around the time of the first trial, including the Companies House information. If anyone found anything conclusive, they did not make it known at that time. I’d like to think that was so it could be included in the various dossiers that are being compiled behind the scenes. But that may be wishful thinking!

I wonder how glinner's private detective idea is going. Obviously won't expect that to be answered if it is ongoing, private investigation works better in private. Anything on here from the time? Twitter is so chaotic I doubt I'd be able to track any organized digging.

Why would somebody create a webserver that could convert videos into sequences of still images? And then call it "lesbians.lol"?

https://archive.ph/Jk9E4

And yes, Brooks/Eraslan has called himself "transdeveloper" on Github.

And then there's the Istanbul bus numbers - what's that all about?

https://github.com/transdeveloper

The picture doesn't look anything like Brooks - is he using someone else's image?

Filters can do strange and wonderful things.

I think the last time people tried to ID Brooks following the breadcrumbs he'd left they concluded it was all just another of his wank games, best ignored.

Apols for unladylike terminology, he doesn't bring out the best in me.

The Fruit Farmers have picked up on the CH stuff again today (although I think it’s going round in circles).

And Glinner on X apparently has an evidence bundle re Tarquin.

Yikes.

Yeah, I just saw that there looks like two Sophie Abigails or else the Companies House entry refers to a different Sophia Abigail.

What an odd bunch. Whatever's the point of it all? Attention seeking?

Do you think that’s the same person as this?

I think this is Brooks's friend, Thomas. He was in the public gallery for the first part of the hearing last week but was then asked to leave because the defence was possibly going to call him as a witness the next day, though in the end they didn't for the same reason they didn't put Fiona McAnena, Maria MacLachlan or Graham himself on the stand - all of whom were originally going to testify in support of the provocation defence (as I understand it).
Happily, they succeeded on the other strand of the defence, which was that they couldn't be sure Graham had been responsible for the supposed damage to Brooks' old phone.
The story concerning Thomas is that Brooks infiltrated a TERF Whatsapp group by claiming to be a female detransitioner and he brought Thomas into that group. They harvested all the phone numbers of women in that group. The woman who was initially conned was devastated when she found out. Btw, she is Russian and she says Brooks speaks fluent Russian. He said he has a Russian grandmother and Lithuanian parents. All the stuff suggesting he's Turkish is a false trail.

I don't think this is Thomas. I saw Thomas close-up, this guy looks different and has very different hair.

Yes, looking again I think you’re probably right. This is the other photo I had of that individual, if that helps.

The photo I posted was of another wailing trans identifying male from another recent thread. (Luckily deleted items are accessible for 30 days on Apple!) I briefly wondered if they were one and the same.

The younger ones do all enjoy the brooding, angst-driven vibe though for sure.

I don’t think so - I’m all ears!

If the Turkish thing is a false trail, and if Brooks is involved in the TheFinnaCompany company listed on Companies House, does that suggest that false information has knowingly been submitted?

Who knows. I think the sum total of all his activities will turn out to be ultimately inconsequential. If anything overall I'm going to say the lad is worse than a man short.

He's not involved with that company. According to my information, he took the name of someone who is involved.

I've no idea what I said in the post that was deleted or what rule I broke.

I can’t remember either - wasn’t it about who someone was? Do you not get a copy of the deleted mail when it’s removed?

Well that’s not weird and creepy at all.

He's not involved with that company. According to my information, he took the name of someone who is involved.
There are already two Sophia Abigails involved in the Companies House entry. If neither of them are this Brooks then that makes 3 trans Sophia Abigails, which seems unlikely unless they're all in cahoots and it's some kind of Spartacus act.

Graham Linehan seems blessedly straightforward in comparison.

Deleted post alluded to an alleged incident outside the courtroom, not involving any parties to this case.