Redvers v NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board & Mr Adam Doyle Thread 2

[fanOfBen]

Minimal thread-starting:
TT:
https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/redvers-v-nhs-sussex-integrated-care

Thread 1:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5586672-wellbn-brighton-gp-practice-do-not-believe-in-evidence-based-medicine-tt-at-employment-tribunal-tomorrow

NC is still posting on X re her comment about a public enquiry……she is rattled….rightly so….

So much more than Stonewall, though. Gendered Intelligence, Press for Change, GIRES, Athena Swan, Inclusive Employers, Mermaids and many more besides. Many bloated on public money.
15:27 • 15/10/2026 • 67 Views

Naomi Cunningham @LoudBonnet -5m
X
And worse, the utter spinelessness of legions of senior, well-paid people who have let their organisations be captured by this toxic mind-virus.
Local authorities, universities, police forces, regulators, the NHS, charities.

Naomi Cunningham @LoudBonnet 4m
All the institutions we ought to be able to trust. All off their tits on gender Kool-Aid.

Finished

Diary seems to still be an issue

Discussion currently going on re diaries, proof of meetings etc

Judge is disbelieving of their lack of being able to get the diaries.

GA first tomorrow
Then P Ford
Then Hamilton?

And they are all off home

From TT:

J Next substantive paragraph refs further challenge to orgs, of the same nature?
AD yes

[please be aware there is some sound interference on line atm]
J Top of page 1650 second bullet anxiety of some individuals, Dr Hall again? As part of ix; when Mr Milson asked about this why you are meeting GMC?
AD In terms about approach, this is gx ... what we are doing?
J IT had been planned we [NHSE/GMC] re ix of two doctors. C and DSH? [yes] You would be investigating appropriate action? Does this indicate ix action at least likely?

AD As you see from CCD ... they had a view and I was not privy to that until they indicated and that was their choice to take.
J Did you say when planning took place?
AD There was I think discussion with Dr Gill and GMC at some point in the autumn, wintertime about going going forward but not sure what hat would have been . Final Q from me p1906, the 'apology letter'. You refer to Durant letter and recommendations. Was it your intention to indicate all would be actioned
AD yes and what was to be done re each of them

From TT:

J Thank you. To you Mr Williams?
BW Re terms of reference and what ex between Mr Power and SH. 63 p [second] bundle, p4 there is an email to MP and DSH. It says in final para ToR for ix being drafted 9 July. I will share with you once I have approved. Did Dr Hall have any input after that?
AS no
BW A lot made of 29 June meeting with SH. First time C aware was claimed to have been last Monday. Can I take you to main bundle, what date do you put on that meeting
AD 29 June.
J Turing to the diary matter? I have had none anything yet.
BW I have not consulted with solicitors
J Seems to be that inquiries need to be made
BW Some diary entries are there in bundle
J Not for the relevant period
BW not for 2021, no

CM Just on that Cs case would be two points: Diary entries within scope of orders, and basis of evidence of meetings prior to 2021 with WellBN this would be disclosable

[BW and CM Argue re disclosure]

From TT:

J I find this surprising to the point ... I don;t want to say unbelievable but I am very surprised they cannot be found. Inquiries with IT? BW When someone leaves organisation this can be a difficulty. Migration ... as when changing chambers. J All right. Can we be clear re witnesses for tomorrow BW Gwyneth Adam needs to be away in afternoon; Pennie Ford, and then [Hannah] Hamilton. Three witnesses averaging 90 minutes each. J Thanks counsel and Mr Doyle. [END]

Is the Judge putting them on the clock for questions? 😂

And is the Judge asking for a Public Enquiry or was that someone else? (besides NC and NW)

Bet AD feels rough this evening!

So the judge has not received the diary yet

Slippery, aren’t they?

‘BW Some diary entries are there in bundle
J Not for the relevant period’

I can understand that while AD was still under oath his lawyers were hampered in locating and accessing his 2021 diary because they couldn't discuss it with him. When the judge asked for it I thought his reaction indicated that he thought it was extant and accessible. But I might be wrong.

Of course his solicitor could discuss the whereabouts of his diary for 2021. Not the barrister though.

The diary should be kept for things likes this. I thought seven years was usual. But can see that tech changes and restructure may have caused it to be lost.

One scenario could be that selected diary entries have been disclosed and then the whole thing subsequently wiped during the course of the litigation. Accidentally, negligently or deliberately.

Awks.

Am I the only person who caught the Judge's remark about barristers existing in a different space time continuum?

I heard it but couldn't write it down in time!

And CM said 'You sound just like my wife!'.

I missed that!

Unlikely, IT should still be able to find a copy.

It seems that they have not looked hard enough, or at all.

Perhaps they were afraid he'd subsequently blurt out something he shouldn't while still on the stand. If it is found and the judge has questions presumably she can recall him? I think the possibility of that was contemplated in one of the other tribunals, Sandie Peggie?

Don't get me started. Of course, they could find it or recover it.

I have chores to do.

I'm ending my terfing today with this comment from Naomi.