PART 3 - [Organizing next steps]
(Note using [ and ] to paraphrase conversations)
BN - objecting to ad nauseam questions asked about tweets - that were offensive. Points out RT is blocked - so RT couldn't have seen all those tweets Sall Grover made.
GC - the issue is that BN has said that RT can not be offended for tweets that RT didn't see.
J - said these tweets in evidence
GC - objects - that RT needs to be asked if has seen the question
J - said should have raised that
J and GC - J argues that GC is trying to repair her argument - J said shouldn't be re-opening the evidence, not making special evidence - J says making decision on facts - not making special rules of evidence
GC sits down
J - BG and BN - discussing the affidavits -
[ discussing administrative details - what gets redacted - on respondents evidence / applicants evidence - to create a digital document to go on file ]
J - is talking to AC (? - will confirm later) trying to ascertain - how things work in practice - speaking on the abstract - womens only gyms - its an exception process (walkers) - thats a special measure.
J says looks at most cases.
Confirming JP not talking to Anna Cody but to ZH. Ziele Heigher.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.