Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 8

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5551959-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-7

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.

Please 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.

please fill up thread 7 first

J - do you know who moderated
CA no
HH - AM response to trans activists acting to bully women - AM did a thumbs up CA no that this is June 24 but never our policy to moderate likes, thumbs up and that sort of thing.

CA - we are trying to stop people squabbling on yammer If ST had stopped and not gone on to additional post. We want people to do it in respectful way Discussion on who dealt with Yammer Viva after CA retired.

Trouble is he seemed unable to stop himself and needed his bosses to act like mummy and daddy and monitor his screen time.

[for anyone just joining, I'm c&p-ing from Tribunal Tweets]

HH - moving on to a post from 20 June 2023, in relation to Guardian article posted stated that women had bigger concerns than bathrooms. AM stated that talks about AM's objections to this, that it is a concern for women
HH a post from Liz Willow, attaching a link to Obs/Guard
Would you argree her description is to unite women rather than be divisive CA - not read
J - can we get on to post not article

HH what AM does is rather than reject polarised view, he embraces it. he posts that the author doesn't understand safeguarding, implication that 'transwomen are effectively a risk to women and children'
CA - this is one of the misunderstanding - the title of article trivialises concern of GC - of single sex spaces AM responding to that. The misunderstanding is that TW are a risk but if you had self ID then you open door to men who may be a risk

" misunderstanding is that TW are a risk but if you had self ID then you open door to men who may be a risk"

EVERY SINGLE WORD IS TRANSPHOBIC AND TRIGGERING FOR SUCH FRAGILE AND VICTIMISED PEOPLE.👻

Q for people more knowledgeable on legal matters - could the judge stop HH altogether if he considers she's had more than enough time on this witness? He was quite emphatic to HH when discussing earlier, although his tone was not as grumpy as it can be when he speaks to NC.

HH - LW response to AM comments, yet again we see from AM a mocking sarcastic reply can't we
CA - it is sarcastic but it's just making the point, who is deciding who is genuinely trans and who is not
HH - mod log for this, row 192 please.
J - are you going to be ref to mod log regularly from now on? I will need a break to reload.
HH - one or two
J can we concentrate on posts or log?
HH log on this occasion
J - any other?
HH - at least 2
J - can we have a short break
J - ten minute break

Resume 11.25

Not even words required, one like will do the trick

CA - this is one of the misunderstanding - the title of article trivialises concern of GC - of single sex spaces AM responding to that. The misunderstanding is that TW are a risk but if you had self ID then you open door to men who may be a risk

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

bloody hell

Thanks again C&Pers 🍦

Whether CA is GC or not, she 100% gets it.

That this has to be explained in court...

People have lost their minds.

He’s basically a king in his own courtroom - he can do as he pleases. But if he cuts off the questioning he opens the judgment to an appeal because of unfairness. He has to be confident that a more senior judge won’t agree that justice was denied because an important line of questioning wasn’t put to a witness.

I can't take much more of the spreadsheet of doom.

Spreadsheets are fairly easy to navigate, you can easily search, and you can hide sections and freeze bits of the screen etc etc. So why do they all seem to be making such a meal out of it?

Is there a distinction?

People who cannot arrange a spreadsheet properly should not be allowed anywhere near them (unless locked for editing).

This is for the good of humanity.

HH yet again we see from AM a mocking sarcastic reply can't we?

Oh no, not sarcasm! that puts AM in the same league as Monty Python's dreaded Piranha brothers, Doug and Dinsdale:

Well, I was terrified. Everyone was terrified of Doug. I've seen grown men pull their own heads off rather than see Doug. Even Dinsdale was frightened of Doug.

(What did he do?)

He used sarcasm. He knew all the tricks. Dramatic irony, bathos, puns, parody, hyperbole, litotes and satire.

He was vicious.

I really don't understand HH's extensive and tedious line of questioning. It doesn't matter if every member of staff bar one thought that SEEN was "transphobic", GC beliefs were/are a PC, end of. Things don't become true or right just because lots of people think they are.

Is it just me, the more HH questions CA about individual items on the SSoD the more it seems to be in the Rs favour.

I agree. All the extra time taken makes a weak case weaker.

HH wants to show that the mods were unfairly harsh on GI and unfairly lenient on GC. But the mods weren't, so she's just trying to flog this dead horse in the hope something sticks.

Or maybe she hopes the judge's recollections of this interminable hounding to be "there must have been something in it for it to go on so long"?

It’s turning into the Tinkerbell v Andreas show