Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 3

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5548369-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-2

TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.

I will also note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

From TT:

NC - you should have a pdf copy of children's book My Body is Me (MBIM).
ST - I don't see it
NC - hands up original copy to ST.
[pause, we cannot see ST but assume looking at MBIM]
ST - yes, I've looked at it
NC - para 7 of your WS says this book and another book

discussed by EW are invalidation of your trans identity, is that correct
ST - yes
J - para 7?
NC - checking.....actually it is para 65c. Rather a long subpara, no it's 65e.
J - rather than reading it out, hard to make a note, can you tell us what to look at

Morning all, thanks for the new thread and the c&ping.

He has been handed a physical copy of Rachel Rooney's book My Body Is Me.
Am agog to find out what happens when his actual hand touches an object that actually erases transpeople...

Thing is, he appears to still be here, existing on this earth.

If he's looked at it he shouldn't exist any more, isn't that right?

I am going to write a complaint about the Judge.

Breach of the bench book - and now compelling the speech of an advocate mid questioning.

This is absolutely disgusting.

J ensuring NC does not read book by using poor excuse of difficult to take a note. I think for sure there is a panel member he is working around because otherwise this feels very targeted and biased. Why wouldn’t he want it read out - because TT would reproduce it and by not reading it out it stays in the bundle and can only be accessed, so far, by hard copy in court. He is minimising public information but why?

No doubt currently in shock so maybe a delayed reaction and he'll spontaneously combust during the lunch break.

From TT:

NC - about 10 lines down, following on from 'for example'
[reading]
NC - you said that you hadn't read either of the books,
ST - I said I had flicked through them
NC - did you read the book I handed you cover to cover
ST - yes
NC - you had not your hands on it previously

when you signed your WS. You had no knowledge of the book, you said it was bad because someone told you it was bad and it came from Transgender Trend and you were told it was bad
ST - I had seen it, I had come across a copy of it
NC - are you saying it was bought from

I wonder if the judge is aware that he's coming across as rather biased towards one side.

Sobbing incoming.

Certainly seems like somebody got to him last night.

from TT on Nitter
NC - you said that you hadn't read either of the books,
ST - I said I had flicked through them
NC - did you read the book I handed you cover to cover
ST - yes

NC...when you signed your WS. You had no knowledge of the book, you said it was bad because someone told you it was bad and it came from Transgender Trend and you were told it was bad
ST - I had seen it, I had come across a copy of it

So ST either has, or has not, read it, depending on which serves his purpose best in the moment.

Perhaps there was some convo I chambers this morning with parties? I feel like NC has been told if she doesn’t accept J rulings re language she can take it up at appeal. It is 7nlike her not to argue the toss in the moment? Unless SEEN have instructed her to to to but that seems unlikely.

Well observed.

From TT:

Transgender Trend, and someone paid money for it
ST - I've been in bookstores
NC - do you think that this book is available in Waterstones
ST - I know where you're going with this, I have seen the book, I have seen the content
NC - having now read the book, what do you find the

most objectionable about it
ST - it has some good content, but it starts from the premise that everyone is comfortable in their body,
let me assemble my thoughts
I don't connect to it, I live in my body, I don't enjoy my body, and not everyone is enjoying their bodies like the

children in this book.
J - I think we should move on from this,
NC - I have one further question
J - I understand your position and C's position can we move on
ST - I'll be okay Judge
NC - para 23 of your WS, you are commenting on reaction to EW personal post, you say

<Claimant was emotional and Judge stopped NC!>

NC implying ST may be not being entirely truthful in his WS

😱

As if ST would attempt to bend reality.

Is it MBAM she can't read from? I thought J wanted paragraph nos. Eg 65e?

Edit paragraph typo

fucksake

What is the judge playing at??

J - I think we should move on from this,
NC - I have one further question
J - I understand your position and C's position can we move on
ST - I'll be okay Judge
NC - para 23 of your WS, you are commenting on reaction to EW personal post, you say
<Claimant was emotional and Judge stopped NC!>

Very unfair - surely judge should have said something like 'I suggest we take a few moments for the witness to recover their composure' or something - not Move on and stop asking awkward questions!

🎶I'll take this front row seat
And baby baby you can cry those
Oscar
winning
TEARS🎶

J - I think we should move on from this,
NC - I have one further question
J - I understand your position and C's position can we move on
ST - I'll be okay Judge ....... <wink>

It's story time!

ST totally has measure of J I think and is totes playing him. J very much being manipulated. Not a good look for a J. Not good at all.

From TT:

'a lot of anger'
ST - and confusion
NC - turn to EW's WS, page 87, please read paras a through to h, all the subparas of that page.
[reading]
ST - I've read
NC - EW gives accurate account of that anger,
ST - when I wrote the word 'anger' it was at DEFRA for allowing the post