So now it’s a ‘binder outreach service’ @LushLtd ? Does your head office have any idea what your Paddington store is doing? Well, the local children’s safeguarding boards soon will.
So your Paddington store is going to be cemented as an ‘ongoing’ service to children? I would be interested to see your risk and safeguarding assessments, which I am sure exist <cough>
As you claim to be the ‘only’ such service and have been providing binders to persons of age unspecified since at least June, then I assume your safeguarding assessment is a model of its kind that you can share for the benefit of others?
And where are the accounts please? As you aren’t doing any of this for free. How much money are you making and what are you doing with it?
So just exactly what risks to physical safety do you accept exist with use of binders? What is your process for assessment of child competence for any consumers under 16?
How many children using your service have experienced this?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My claim against Maugham is for £50k. If I win every penny is going to FWS. I was going to hold a little something back for my whale cruise but to call the most egregious attack on women’s rights of my lifetime a ‘whiny trans panic’ is so infuriating and irresponsible that the whales must wait.
As @BarbaraRich_law had to remind me, Maugham is happy to admit that what he said about me is defamatory and would risk harm to my reputation BUT he was entirely justified because it was true and in the public interest to point out that I was cruel, vindictive and obsessive and responsible for creating a toxic environment in the debate for trans rights
I am very pleased to report that the BSB have evidently considered the complaint against me by the Good Law Project and Euan Weddell very carefully and have determined there is no case to answer.
As both the GLP and EW made their complaints public I think it appropriate to share the outcome.
I will be proceeding with my action in defamation against Mr Maugham.
Very useful conversation from about 6.19 where - fair play to him - FW calls out Sophie for misogynistic comments and they discuss how SM is ‘very aware’ of the impact of his words.
All of this I hope to explore in other arenas and in detail. It simply cannot be right that the article 10 rights of one group are fettered on the demand of another group, which itself engages in harassment and abusive speech.
Either the Good Law Project knows nothing about the activities of the man they champion as a fragile and vulnerable victim - or they don’t care?
Which is worse? I hope 2026 will give me a variety of stages upon which I may publicly drill down into all of this.
If we don’t stop one group from enforcing its own hecklers veto, while simultaneously abusing and threatening others, this is going to cause significant harm - not just to individuals but to our trust in the organisations that allow it.
Because this is what is notable about this group. Euan Weddell had a clear legal means of protection against my alleged harassment - a civil injunction against me using the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The Good Law Project however decided to spend its money over months drafting a complaint to my regulator.
This weaponisation of the regulatory process is of course clever. It puts them at no risk of having to prove a case, no costs of expensive court action but hopefully maximum stress and embarrassment to me.
It also means I attract the attention of disgraced transvestite former police officer Lynsay Watson, already subject to harassment complaints from at least 8 others. So I guess he does know his way around the Act!
What I want to make very, very clear to this group - and I am slightly surprised that they haven’t grasped it yet - is that I welcome a light being shined on all of this. I would enjoy having my day or days in court and having my say. If you genuinely think I what I do is unlawful harassment - then make your case. Jolyon has the funds! If he won’t help you - ask yourselves why not?
Policing Panel! Luke Gittos is first. Changed his speech because of what he saw last night - footage of 2 police officers who ask a person ‘what’s that around your neck’ - a Star of David. Police say it risks antagonising protestors. Is it right to question someone about their religious dress? His original speech was mild mannered but now is time for anger #BattleFest
We have to say this ends now. The police don’t see how their power affects real people. See it as necessary step. Police have become an ugly beaurocratic machine.
But we do risk undermining the ability to recreate a police force that works. Need to have serious thought about foundations of police.
The judicial review against the decision to register Gender Plus as ‘safe’ to give cross sex hormones to teenagers fails.
UK courts continue to ignore the massive Elephant in the room, which is the lack of evidence base for this serious and irreversible medical intervention for children. This is not a matter of reasonable difference of opinion or for private practice to profit from. This is not safe.
Part of the problem, not grappled with by court. Clinicians in this area have gone bad. This isn’t ’reasonable disagreement’, it’s harming children. sussex.ics.nhs.uk/wp-content/upl…