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.

J are you contending that they delib switched to public?
HH - don't accept it wasn't inadvertent

That's a pretty serious accusation, isn't it?

At this point, is it possible to say whether CA will be on the stand longer than ST?

I pretty much 100% certain that CCP has studiously avoided making any comment on trans issues.

She just talks about the impact of sex.

J are you contending that they delib switched to public?
HH - don't accept it wasn't inadvertent

What manner of lawyer speaker is this?

I assume that someone 'pressed the button on purpose' rather than accidentally catching it when they put their bag down?

Given HH was allowed until lunch, can't the judge declare an early lunch like in the cricket if it rains? If it's good enough for Lords, it's good enough for this shitshow.

HH - can you turn to 1982 please. Don't have a specific DEFRA SM policy but have RPAs please read comments under 'must id as civil servant or must not'
AL - not an employee of RPA
J was can this witness tell us about this, involved in any discussion
CA not seen until bundle

<this is actually, physically painful>

How about shared? You spend most of hell in this tribunal, but during the breaks when you go to the loo you get the spinny skirts situation.

She’s just reading the entries out. Then eventually a sort of question, such as ‘who are they now?’

I wouldn’t be surprised if after a 6 minutes reading (most of that a comedy of errors about what entry, and oopsie doopsie) she just asked ‘is Rob short for Robin or Robert, or Roberta?

No way would that judge allow NC to go a tiny fraction of any of HH’s readings without a proper question. Also, HH throwing in continuous opinions about GI, and how everything shows evidence about how awful people are just erasing GI adherents if allowed to say anything.

Blazing sunshine at Lord's, I'm afraid.
India 82-2. Mandhana 6 away from a half-century.
No early lunch there, either😐

I meant innermost but fair point your version is better!

I must be good, I must be good, I must not get sent there!!!!

HH - No more questions to W on this bundle. Only have a few more areas to ask q on will be finished by lunch. para 66 onwards of W statement
HH - you discuss the various PCPs that the C says are applied. The R doesn't accept...the fact is you didn't do this on Yammer before Nov 22
CA they are part of Defra so part of R
HH if we look at para 67 you say no resource to actively to mod and police yammer on ongoing basis
CA it was always in response not before posted, no way to do that.
HH - Panel est in Nov 22 no agreed princ of communication at that point
CA there were policies Acceptable Use policies and each org had one, moderation with those codes and docs
CA each org had Acceptable Use policy about use of media and each had a Code of Conduct that's what we moderated against
J - PoC?
CA One they came into being and widely disemin.
HH - April 23 migration to Viva Defra delegated to IAOs and group owners
CA - after training and guidance and panel kept oversight.
J went live?
CA Aug 23 I believe

I'm screwed. I'm past redemption at this point.

HH - don't accept it wasn't inadvertent

What argument is HH trying to make? If it wasn't inadvertent then it was intentional but if she doesn't accept it was intentional then she is accepting that it was inadvertent.

HH - No more questions to W on this bundle.

I got excited for a nano second there.

J - the fact is from 1 Aug 23 it is correct that there is a policy of not directly moderation
CA it was directed to IAOs
CA I don't believe AM was an IAO/Group owner

<zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz>

Your hard shell may save you?????

That must have been the problem. No mention of TW. They don’t like how the book talks about how the world has not been designed for female bodies. They don’t want to be reminded that they possess male bodies and that this book is not for or about them.

Perhaps like Prometheus, you are each day chained to a rock inside the courtroom and told to expect a cross examination by NC once HH finishes with her spreadsheet questioning.

Each day of relentless torment ends only to be repeated the next.

It came across that she was saying SEEN did it deliberately without making an actual direct accusation.

HH - just on that point turn to 1629. Look under mod of indiv posts/comments, it's right that complaints go initially to viva mailbox and fowarded to IAO who would moderated. They would instruct group owner to remove post
CA - yes
HH - yesterday we saw another post where another indivi moderated
J think that's been dealt with
HH policy of not directly moderation, that creates an unsafe environment for trans. Placing mod in hands of those individuals
CA they have had training, they are senior people

<again, YES IT HAS JUDGE, YES IT HAS!!!>

Maybe TT misreported because in that case it should be "don't accept it was inadvertent"

It means she can refer to it in submissions. "CA said that it was inadvertent, but I invite the court to conclude she was lying, and it was deliberate".

If you don't cross examine on a point then you have implicitly accepted their version, and you can't do the "but that wasn't true, the truth was actually..." in your submissions.

I’d have lost my mind by now, sat there for days, HH is taking the fucking piss

With zero evidence, of course.

CA - they are mod within closed groups, don't accept unsafe environment for anyone who has chosen not to be in that group
HH but closed happen much later
CA - missed sorry think she said yes, later
J - wasn't until Oct. Was it part of policy they would go back to public?
CA had the facility to do that, not aware they were doing that, once we had senior mgt approval to mandate private groups, tech team took action on it.

HH just checking a reference