Good morning; welcome to the morning hearing on Wednesday 18 May 2022 in the case of Allison Bailey vs Stonewall & Garden Court Chambers at the Employment Tribunal. The case is due to resume at 10am when live tweeting will start.
There is a list of abbreviations we use and previous tweet threads at our substack - tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/allison-bail…
We will continue with the evidence of Maya Sikand (QC previously at GC).
EJ is currently running through ground rules. Chat room is not for commenting on hearing. EJ:Unusual and unfortunate incidents of harassment - pointed and offensive names. If we view as harassment will disconnect.
Pronouns will not be viewed as harassment. We are carrying on with MS. Any housekeeping?
BC: None from me
EJ: Did you find MS in participant list.
Clerk: Just checking.
BC: She is about halfway down the list.
Clerk: Just checking.
BC: She is about halfway down the list.
MS: Good Morning Madam. Can you hear me?
EJ: We will continue with q.
BC: Good Morning. Could you go Final Report.
EJ: We will continue with q.
BC: Good Morning. Could you go Final Report.
MS: Para 16
BC: Yes. Point out core duties on previous pg, social media guidance of BCB. Offers no practical assistance whether particular comment demeans or insults.
BC: Yes. Point out core duties on previous pg, social media guidance of BCB. Offers no practical assistance whether particular comment demeans or insults.
Say at para 18: Assume had art 10 in mind when drafting. Must be right, but must also be right that guidance must be read in light of art 10.
MS: Yes, but saying that in para referred to, main para in guidance. Comments that demean will reduce public trust. Have to assume that made that decision with art 10 in mind.
BC: Have to have Art 10 threshold in mind.
MS: Yes, I had that well in mind.
BC: Barristers like everyone else have right to debate on topics of interest.
MS: yes, but within Bar Standards Framework
BC: Can include topics of controversy
MS: Yes but you need to make sure within bounds of regulator.
BC: Barristers like everyone else have right to debate on topics of interest.
MS: yes, but within Bar Standards Framework
BC: Can include topics of controversy
MS: Yes but you need to make sure within bounds of regulator.
BC: Can't mean that barristers don't get to engage in topics of heated debate. Cannot get into debates with individuals
MS: Says can't get into heated debates
BC: Final sentence can't possibly mean that barristers not engage when know that views may be considered distasteful
MS: Says can't get into heated debates
BC: Final sentence can't possibly mean that barristers not engage when know that views may be considered distasteful
MS: Need to consider content and tone. Can be considred offensive. Need to bear in mind.
BC: Cannot interpret that cannot engage in debate
MS: Yes, have said that about 22 Oct tweet. Said obviously not enough. Cannot be just that offended. Need to look at level of offence.
BC: Cannot interpret that cannot engage in debate
MS: Yes, have said that about 22 Oct tweet. Said obviously not enough. Cannot be just that offended. Need to look at level of offence.
BC: Art 10 is relevant threshold. Need to read in line with Guidance.
MS: that is the approach taken with Mr X
BC: We are not naming that individual
MS: Yes
BC: Agree relevant threshold and one you were applying
MS: that is the approach taken with Mr X
BC: We are not naming that individual
MS: Yes
BC: Agree relevant threshold and one you were applying
MS: If you look at GC25, looking at other conduct that might be breach. Gives example CD3 and CD5. One of the things meantioned by panel at BSB - seriously offensive or discreditable conduct. They used that test and looked in conjunction with the BSB Guidance. I didn't do
But effectively what I did do.
MS: First time seen decision about way in which the BSB Social Media Guidance applied, first time seen. Whilst can see now obvious, when applying it all we had. Came out in Oct; I was looking in Nov that very year. Obvious can see what done,
MS: First time seen decision about way in which the BSB Social Media Guidance applied, first time seen. Whilst can see now obvious, when applying it all we had. Came out in Oct; I was looking in Nov that very year. Obvious can see what done,
BC: Got 4047
MS: THe BSB approach?
BC: Yes
Quote bit of guidance discussing, general guidance in handbook isn't it?
MS: Yes, GC25 is a sort of basic general guidance. Like notes that appear under core duties in BSB handbook.
MS: THe BSB approach?
BC: Yes
Quote bit of guidance discussing, general guidance in handbook isn't it?
MS: Yes, GC25 is a sort of basic general guidance. Like notes that appear under core duties in BSB handbook.
BC: Read as part of consideration?
MS: Must have but can't say if in guidance. Would have looked at handbook, changes all time, can't say what in handbook in force at time, goes through various iterations
BC: Absolutlely, relevant considering conduct
MS: Yes but also had social
MS: Must have but can't say if in guidance. Would have looked at handbook, changes all time, can't say what in handbook in force at time, goes through various iterations
BC: Absolutlely, relevant considering conduct
MS: Yes but also had social
media guidance.
BC: Agree now Art 10 threshold important
MS: IN essence what did
BC: You say, what applying
MS: Yes, tweet offensive to some but in my view not seriously offensive
BC: lets turn to cotton ceiling tweet
EJ: Need date for note
BC: Agree now Art 10 threshold important
MS: IN essence what did
BC: You say, what applying
MS: Yes, tweet offensive to some but in my view not seriously offensive
BC: lets turn to cotton ceiling tweet
EJ: Need date for note
EJ: Date of tweet unless misheard
MS: Don't think talking about date of tweet. Approaching Nov 2019 when guidance literally only just came out.
BC: MS referred to 22 Oct
MS: Analysis of 22 Oct tweet
EJ: The point, Thank you.
MS: Don't think talking about date of tweet. Approaching Nov 2019 when guidance literally only just came out.
BC: MS referred to 22 Oct
MS: Analysis of 22 Oct tweet
EJ: The point, Thank you.
BC: Example of tweet which some might find offensive but not objectively so. Agree with those terms?
MS: Gloss on what said in report
BC: putting it to you to see if agree
MS: put it to me again
BC: Launch tweet offensive to some as gender critical views sometimes considered
MS: Gloss on what said in report
BC: putting it to you to see if agree
MS: put it to me again
BC: Launch tweet offensive to some as gender critical views sometimes considered
offensive.
MS: Don't want to get into semantics
BC: Not transphobic
MS: In my view it wasn't
BC: lets look at cotton ceiling tweet, pg 700
MS: Don't want to get into semantics
BC: Not transphobic
MS: In my view it wasn't
BC: lets look at cotton ceiling tweet, pg 700
MS: 2nd page of complaint?
BC: Targeting MP and calling a male. Actual complaint about describing MP as male bodied.
MS: No. "Targeting a woman who worked for us and calling a man."
BC: If turn pg 324. Doesn't make that distinction. COmplaint descrbed male when AB described
BC: Targeting MP and calling a male. Actual complaint about describing MP as male bodied.
MS: No. "Targeting a woman who worked for us and calling a man."
BC: If turn pg 324. Doesn't make that distinction. COmplaint descrbed male when AB described
as male bodied.
MS: Looked at whole complaint
BC: picked out part of tweet that had not been complained about
MS: Looked at whole tweet
BC: Why in final report don't you say SW complaint in part about MP being described as male, but I understand separate part about young
MS: Looked at whole complaint
BC: picked out part of tweet that had not been complained about
MS: Looked at whole tweet
BC: Why in final report don't you say SW complaint in part about MP being described as male, but I understand separate part about young
lesbians being coerced. Why not put in terms?
MS: Just been through what KM wrote and about her being described as male and that part I did not agree with. AB said male bodied, some people find offensive but I didn't.
BC: Turn pg 760. Highlighted in bold passage you wish her
MS: Just been through what KM wrote and about her being described as male and that part I did not agree with. AB said male bodied, some people find offensive but I didn't.
BC: Turn pg 760. Highlighted in bold passage you wish her
to address.
MS did not highlight male bodied
BC No. So you pick out part that was not subject of complaint.
BC: Go pg 325 final report, in para 54 in third line you say in essence AB has said that MP has encouraged sexual assaults when cannot be shown to be true.
MS did not highlight male bodied
BC No. So you pick out part that was not subject of complaint.
BC: Go pg 325 final report, in para 54 in third line you say in essence AB has said that MP has encouraged sexual assaults when cannot be shown to be true.
BC - you don't say specific point concerned with tweet is said to say that MP encouraged sexual assault and cannot be substantiated.
MS - no emboldened part of tweet that I wanted her to turn her mind to. Indicated potential breach of core duties I list. But at that stage
MS - no emboldened part of tweet that I wanted her to turn her mind to. Indicated potential breach of core duties I list. But at that stage
not necessary to indicate.
BC we will explore if obvious. At no point say this is my interepreation, that it encourages men to assault young lesbians,
MS - completely obvious from her response that she understood.
BC - let us look at response.
BC we will explore if obvious. At no point say this is my interepreation, that it encourages men to assault young lesbians,
MS - completely obvious from her response that she understood.
BC - let us look at response.
Para 32 - says MP ran workshops for heterosexual men to coerce lesbians to have sex with them, shares screenshot of workshop, explains meaning of cotton ceiling.
MS - yes we looke at this yesterday
BC - yes, cotton ceiling refers to men who identify as men who want to have sex
MS - yes we looke at this yesterday
BC - yes, cotton ceiling refers to men who identify as men who want to have sex
lesbians. ..
BC - "this is coercive sexual behaviour"
MS - no evidence of anyone being required to have sex with man, para 34 goes further.
BC - you agree her explanation of cotton ceiling obliging lesbians sleep with men and calling them transphobic of not central to her view.
BC - "this is coercive sexual behaviour"
MS - no evidence of anyone being required to have sex with man, para 34 goes further.
BC - you agree her explanation of cotton ceiling obliging lesbians sleep with men and calling them transphobic of not central to her view.
Coercion is calling lesbians transphobic or bigoted if refuse to have sex. Central to her view
MS: Yes saying if you take MP and take a reasonable social media users view, on face of what alleging in that tweet, MP responsible for forcing young lesbians to be sexually assaulted
MS: Yes saying if you take MP and take a reasonable social media users view, on face of what alleging in that tweet, MP responsible for forcing young lesbians to be sexually assaulted
BC _ focus on q
MS - please don't patronise me sometimes your q are difficult to understand
I understood that what she put in that paragraph.
BC - did you understand thtat was nature of coercion
MS - please don't patronise me sometimes your q are difficult to understand
I understood that what she put in that paragraph.
BC - did you understand thtat was nature of coercion
MS - what saying but no ev
BC - AB goes on to say if it were not no workshops nec; not saying example of lots of individual rapes, example of rape culture.
BC - AB goes on to say if it were not no workshops nec; not saying example of lots of individual rapes, example of rape culture.
BC - rape culture a culture in which women's sexual boundaries regarded as disregardable, why refers to culture rather than individual acts
MS - culture in which viewed ok to rape
BC - and in which boundaries undermined
MS - well I don't know about that , that is your....
MS - culture in which viewed ok to rape
BC - and in which boundaries undermined
MS - well I don't know about that , that is your....
BC - gives some links
MS - some worked some didn't one had a paywall
BC - before look, pg 3225,
EJ - pause, counsel muted
MS - some worked some didn't one had a paywall
BC - before look, pg 3225,
EJ - pause, counsel muted
AH: did have objection earlier, moment has passed
EJ: Thankyou,
IO: Will catch up, missed some, dropped out, trying to get tribunals attention, saw AH wished to intervene, moment has passed
EJ: Carry on
EJ: Thankyou,
IO: Will catch up, missed some, dropped out, trying to get tribunals attention, saw AH wished to intervene, moment has passed
EJ: Carry on
MS: Hear me?
BC: at 3325?
MS: Email from cathy.
BC: Yes, initial view about approach to duties and guidance
MS: If forwarded will have seen
BC: Presumably all correspondence forwarded
BC: at 3325?
MS: Email from cathy.
BC: Yes, initial view about approach to duties and guidance
MS: If forwarded will have seen
BC: Presumably all correspondence forwarded
BC: Top para, says tweets potentially on borderline,
MS: what was saying yesterday, in response to this very email.
BC: Lets not go back yesterday. Did you understand two poss, whether truth could be established and whether legitimate comment
MS: What she said
BC: Put again.
MS: what was saying yesterday, in response to this very email.
BC: Lets not go back yesterday. Did you understand two poss, whether truth could be established and whether legitimate comment
MS: What she said
BC: Put again.
You understand?
MS: Yes
BC: And what asked for whether claimant had any specific comment on coercion involved in workshop,
MS: Not specific comments on published content but whetherh specific on workshop stroke content of workshop
BC Yes two categories
MS: Yes
BC: And what asked for whether claimant had any specific comment on coercion involved in workshop,
MS: Not specific comments on published content but whetherh specific on workshop stroke content of workshop
BC Yes two categories
Content of workshop and specific comments
MS: Yes, in
BC: Series of links on cotton ceiling
MS: Cathy's comments on AB's comments not other peoples
BC: Can look at
MS: looking for AB's comments on workshop and or published content of workshop
MS: Yes, in
BC: Series of links on cotton ceiling
MS: Cathy's comments on AB's comments not other peoples
BC: Can look at
MS: looking for AB's comments on workshop and or published content of workshop
BC: Asking if any specific comments on workshop
Any other comments that might have been published
Plainly relevant, as Ms G identifies, have to consider if legitimate comment on underlying facts.
MS: in C's view yes
BC: Highly relevant,
MS: NO no, conflating number of issues,
Any other comments that might have been published
Plainly relevant, as Ms G identifies, have to consider if legitimate comment on underlying facts.
MS: in C's view yes
BC: Highly relevant,
MS: NO no, conflating number of issues,
Sent me a load of comments variety of views, somebody who coined phrase cotton ceiling, wide range of comments not entirely clear. Not what C talking about there. Q whether she could establish coercion
BC or if leg comment on underlying facts
MS: were no facts
BC: 3 obvious q
BC or if leg comment on underlying facts
MS: were no facts
BC: 3 obvious q
First, what does cotton ceiling mean - agree?
MS: Looked at various def in context of that workshop and did not accept what AB said
BC: When interpreting, need to determine what reasonable social media user understand by it
MS: Yes, sensible approach. Supreme Court, Stocker v
MS: Looked at various def in context of that workshop and did not accept what AB said
BC: When interpreting, need to determine what reasonable social media user understand by it
MS: Yes, sensible approach. Supreme Court, Stocker v
ordinary reasonable user
BC: Have test in mind
MS: Approach I took, supreme court and I aligned.
BC: If you are going to interpret, need to understand what Cotton ceiling means
MS: looked at def online, and in particular what workshop about
BC: Have test in mind
MS: Approach I took, supreme court and I aligned.
BC: If you are going to interpret, need to understand what Cotton ceiling means
MS: looked at def online, and in particular what workshop about
BC: You agree with me I think needed to determine whether cotton ceiling meant what AB said it meant
MS: I looked at what others said it meant as well. My job look at overall tweet meaning
BC: Need to decide if reasonable and legitimate to describe cotton ceiling as inherently
MS: I looked at what others said it meant as well. My job look at overall tweet meaning
BC: Need to decide if reasonable and legitimate to describe cotton ceiling as inherently
coercive
EJ: Echo, last note, looked at overall meaning of tweet
MS: Correct, not role to look at what views of cotton ceiling in community, any ev of MP running workshop whose content involved coercion of young lesbians to have sex, ie - part of rape culture
BC - can only decide
EJ: Echo, last note, looked at overall meaning of tweet
MS: Correct, not role to look at what views of cotton ceiling in community, any ev of MP running workshop whose content involved coercion of young lesbians to have sex, ie - part of rape culture
BC - can only decide
if look at what cotton ceiling means
MS: looked at what people said, looked for content so could look at what workshop about, went thorugh AB's link, did not send link I found which was actual content from planned parenthood, relevant parts replicated in report, only link took me
MS: looked at what people said, looked for content so could look at what workshop about, went thorugh AB's link, did not send link I found which was actual content from planned parenthood, relevant parts replicated in report, only link took me
to content.
BC: Lets look at what sent, supp bundle; pg 8; this was a link to Terf is a slur website and a page documenting abuse harassment and misogyny under term cotton ceiling
MS did not know what autogynephilia was
BC: Must consider transwomen as potential sexual partners,
BC: Lets look at what sent, supp bundle; pg 8; this was a link to Terf is a slur website and a page documenting abuse harassment and misogyny under term cotton ceiling
MS did not know what autogynephilia was
BC: Must consider transwomen as potential sexual partners,
BC - same as what AB says, says terf is a slur, docs abuse.
MS - yes, that is somebody's view of cotton ceiling
BC - suggest supports view of AB of what say smeans and therefore legitimacy of what she understands re workshop
MS - yes, that is somebody's view of cotton ceiling
BC - suggest supports view of AB of what say smeans and therefore legitimacy of what she understands re workshop
MS: saying that as reasonable social media user, sole reason for the workshop run by MP in past in 2012 as transpired was to coerce young lesbians to have sex
AH: have been over this ground, have to move on
EJ: needs to be explored, have to be proportionate, have to understand
AH: have been over this ground, have to move on
EJ: needs to be explored, have to be proportionate, have to understand
BC: Page 8 of supp bundle, extract, 2nd para, cotton refers to underwear, nominal acceptance of transwomen always ultimately rejected at sexual barrier and not fully accepted as women
supports AB view about getting into lesbian's knickers.
MS: Yes,
BC; cites Terf is a slur cites
supports AB view about getting into lesbian's knickers.
MS: Yes,
BC; cites Terf is a slur cites
MP workshop as example
MS: can't read the text, too tiny
BC: I am looking at big heading at top. Point is that AB not alone as viewing as ex of abuse harassment and misogyny in trans politics in having to consider as sexual partners
MS: can't read the text, too tiny
BC: I am looking at big heading at top. Point is that AB not alone as viewing as ex of abuse harassment and misogyny in trans politics in having to consider as sexual partners
MS: Not barristers
BC: we are exploring reasonable social media user
AH: is it being put sole reason for workshop
BC: Hope q clear, let me try and make it clear, going to underlying material, putting to witness supports AB understanding of term cotton ceiling
BC: we are exploring reasonable social media user
AH: is it being put sole reason for workshop
BC: Hope q clear, let me try and make it clear, going to underlying material, putting to witness supports AB understanding of term cotton ceiling
Matter of legitimate comment to view as coercive behaviour
MS - have been through this, can cut through. Saw links, load of commentary about cotton ceiling
BC - don't want to read out loads of ex, but turn to page 9, take one, top right hand side, ex of somebody saying "just not
MS - have been through this, can cut through. Saw links, load of commentary about cotton ceiling
BC - don't want to read out loads of ex, but turn to page 9, take one, top right hand side, ex of somebody saying "just not
attracted to penises" - given example of transphobia
EJ: Pause, what part looking at
BC: Do you accept that first of all, a reasonable social media user would understand cotton ceiling refer to idea transphobic of lesbians to not want to sleep with male bodied, drawing sexual
EJ: Pause, what part looking at
BC: Do you accept that first of all, a reasonable social media user would understand cotton ceiling refer to idea transphobic of lesbians to not want to sleep with male bodied, drawing sexual
boundaries, transphobic or bigoted
MS - no, don't think reasonable social media woudl draw inference, slant on glass ceiling, lenghty proposition, if I am reasonable social media user woudl not have understood that
BC - point to any use in material you saw that did not use in
MS - no, don't think reasonable social media woudl draw inference, slant on glass ceiling, lenghty proposition, if I am reasonable social media user woudl not have understood that
BC - point to any use in material you saw that did not use in
MS - not all considered transphobic, neutral discussions, this site terf is a slur woudl attract those with gender critical views, considered more neutral such as planned parenthood
BC - all of that suppports explanation
MS - supports her view of cotton ceiling, did own research
BC - all of that suppports explanation
MS - supports her view of cotton ceiling, did own research
BC - where is that research
MS - just googled
BC - where is it in report,
MS - there in my report, even footnote it,
BC - footnote what
MS - planned parenthood link
MS - just googled
BC - where is it in report,
MS - there in my report, even footnote it,
BC - footnote what
MS - planned parenthood link
BC - where do we find this other research about meaning of cotton ceiling
MS - had to educate myself, googled, went to links and then googled planned parenthood, sorry, cotton ceiling mP and found planned parenthood
BC - rejected explanaiton of cotton ceiling by AB as one
MS - had to educate myself, googled, went to links and then googled planned parenthood, sorry, cotton ceiling mP and found planned parenthood
BC - rejected explanaiton of cotton ceiling by AB as one
understood by reasonable
MS - at time looked at her explanation but then went to look at workshop to see if workshop did what she said in tweet and explanation
BC - putting to you, did you accept that reasonable user woudl understand refer to idea of lesbian's refusing to have
MS - at time looked at her explanation but then went to look at workshop to see if workshop did what she said in tweet and explanation
BC - putting to you, did you accept that reasonable user woudl understand refer to idea of lesbian's refusing to have
sex with male bodied transphobic and bigoted
Turn to pg 98
AH - time for break?
EJ: Yes, getting echo,
BC: 15 mins
EJ: 11:18am
AH - ask how long anticipate XX of MS?
BC: Rest of morning
Turn to pg 98
AH - time for break?
EJ: Yes, getting echo,
BC: 15 mins
EJ: 11:18am
AH - ask how long anticipate XX of MS?
BC: Rest of morning
[Court resuming]
BC: At pg 98 supp bundle
MS: Yes
BC: Another link sent by AB. Did you look at it?
MS: looked all could
BC art from New Statesman, agree mainstream
MS: Don't know, don't read
BC: At pg 98 supp bundle
MS: Yes
BC: Another link sent by AB. Did you look at it?
MS: looked all could
BC art from New Statesman, agree mainstream
MS: Don't know, don't read
BC: Page 102
MS: This particular bundle is difficult to scroll through, page with lots of ads,
BC: Pick up at penultimate para, if TW are Women, changes def of lesbian, Lesbians have faced ev from mockery to violence, old sore that all Lesbians need to fix them is a bit of penis
MS: This particular bundle is difficult to scroll through, page with lots of ads,
BC: Pick up at penultimate para, if TW are Women, changes def of lesbian, Lesbians have faced ev from mockery to violence, old sore that all Lesbians need to fix them is a bit of penis
Cotton ceiling, - reference to glass ceiling, treated as discrimination issue similar to failing to become CEO.
If read, understanding of cotton ceiling widely shared by commentators in mainstream media
MS: yes, talking about, concept of glass ceiling, borrowing of term,
If read, understanding of cotton ceiling widely shared by commentators in mainstream media
MS: yes, talking about, concept of glass ceiling, borrowing of term,
MS: obviously, any lesbian forced to have sex, woudl not condone, but not what looking at
BC: Cotton - understood referred to underwear
MS: Yes, couple of things looked at, also aware, term coined by trans activist,
BC: Coined by trans porn star
MS: Activist and porn star
BC: Cotton - understood referred to underwear
MS: Yes, couple of things looked at, also aware, term coined by trans activist,
BC: Coined by trans porn star
MS: Activist and porn star
BC - understand referred underwear
MS - yes, think i did
BC - taken by many feminists and lesbians, referred to idea inherently discriminatory for lesbians not to consider male bodied people who identify as lesbians as sexual partners
MS - understood from terf is a slur
MS - yes, think i did
BC - taken by many feminists and lesbians, referred to idea inherently discriminatory for lesbians not to consider male bodied people who identify as lesbians as sexual partners
MS - understood from terf is a slur
BC - New Statesman as well
MS: Yes
BC - must be right, is saying inherenlty discriminatory for lesbians to have sexual boundaries against male bodied people
MS: not discriminatory to discuss boundaries which is what this workshop discusses.
MS: Yes
BC - must be right, is saying inherenlty discriminatory for lesbians to have sexual boundaries against male bodied people
MS: not discriminatory to discuss boundaries which is what this workshop discusses.
BC - glass ceiling refers to careers, refers to discriminatory barriers
MS: I think so
BC - so if what borrowed from, indicates discrimination for lesbians who set those sexual boundaries
MS: possibly, not exercise went through at time
MS: I think so
BC - so if what borrowed from, indicates discrimination for lesbians who set those sexual boundaries
MS: possibly, not exercise went through at time
BC - Ref in links, 108 of supp bundle,
MS - had paywall didn't read
BC - article in times, didn't read it?
MS - no think recall had paywall
BC - didn't ask AB to supply copy
MS - I didn't no
MS - had paywall didn't read
BC - article in times, didn't read it?
MS - no think recall had paywall
BC - didn't ask AB to supply copy
MS - I didn't no
BC - article on MP, set of orange boxes, quarter of way down, fifth paragraph of article
EJ - P's activism in Canada?
BC - yes, controversy over workshop, criticism of biological women, further support for AB understanding of term cotton ceiling
MS - yes, talks about being
EJ - P's activism in Canada?
BC - yes, controversy over workshop, criticism of biological women, further support for AB understanding of term cotton ceiling
MS - yes, talks about being
Critical.
BC - also shows applied understanding to MP workshop
MS - term used by trans lesbian women, Not sure what that means
BC - as understand, male bodied trans woman who identifies as lesbian
MS - I thought, your client wouldn't accept coudl be trans lesbian
BC - also shows applied understanding to MP workshop
MS - term used by trans lesbian women, Not sure what that means
BC - as understand, male bodied trans woman who identifies as lesbian
MS - I thought, your client wouldn't accept coudl be trans lesbian
BC: no but on face of it, applying term cotton ceiling
MS - journalists say all sorts of stuff
BC - one of issues you agreed had to consider whether legitimate comment on underlying facts and if mainstream media applying same understanding
If same understanding as AB
MS - journalists say all sorts of stuff
BC - one of issues you agreed had to consider whether legitimate comment on underlying facts and if mainstream media applying same understanding
If same understanding as AB
BC: Powerful ev of leg comment
AH: is it being put that this is about coercion, needs to be put to witness
EJ: Slightly different comment
AH: Underlying fact is coercion and sole reason for workshop
EJ: Understand that point
MS: accept what said in principle but not underlying
AH: is it being put that this is about coercion, needs to be put to witness
EJ: Slightly different comment
AH: Underlying fact is coercion and sole reason for workshop
EJ: Understand that point
MS: accept what said in principle but not underlying
fact. Underlying fact as I took it was that MP running workshops encouraging sexual assault. Can take me to as many journalist report but not dealing with what I was doing
BC - look at pg697 in main bundle
Ms - yes
BC - provided with copy of email of support from JC of RHC
BC - look at pg697 in main bundle
Ms - yes
BC - provided with copy of email of support from JC of RHC
MS - no
BC - not supplied to AB
MS - can't tell you that, you know that
BC - can say if as far as know
MS - absolutely no idea
BC - email refers to cotton ceiling "terrifyingly rapey"
BC - not supplied to AB
MS - can't tell you that, you know that
BC - can say if as far as know
MS - absolutely no idea
BC - email refers to cotton ceiling "terrifyingly rapey"
MS - didn't see this, don't know who is, dont' know if has gender critical thoughts
BC - describes as coercive behaviour
MS - yes, yes, yes but not talking about whether MP coercing young lesbians
BC - do you agree that to say young lesbians
BC - describes as coercive behaviour
MS - yes, yes, yes but not talking about whether MP coercing young lesbians
BC - do you agree that to say young lesbians
transphobic not to sleep with malebodied as coercive
MS - not coercive, unacceptable comment
BC - agree serious and damaging allegation to label someone as transphobic
MS - to call someone something they are not unacceptable, damaging to claim someone discriminated when did not
MS - not coercive, unacceptable comment
BC - agree serious and damaging allegation to label someone as transphobic
MS - to call someone something they are not unacceptable, damaging to claim someone discriminated when did not
BC - will induce shame and disapproval from those who see and hear, whether wrongly or rightly accused, shaming allegation
MS - don't know if bieng racist and called racist, don't know if shaming or not, from own experience when told discriminated extremely shaming.
MS - don't know if bieng racist and called racist, don't know if shaming or not, from own experience when told discriminated extremely shaming.
MS: I am a woman Mr Cooper, nobody should sleep with someone they don't want to
BC: To label as transphobic coercive
MS: fourth time you have asked me this, getting oppressive, no.
AH: Will interven
EJ: Understand what AB had in mind and taken MS through, have got the picture,
BC: To label as transphobic coercive
MS: fourth time you have asked me this, getting oppressive, no.
AH: Will interven
EJ: Understand what AB had in mind and taken MS through, have got the picture,
EJ: have to decide if detriment and how this may have affected detriment, anything else to say?
BC: Yes, pg 292, two bits of info here, blurb about event itself and then explanation put out by PP Toronto
MS: Yes organisers,
BC: GC W/S bundle; pg 225,
BC: Yes, pg 292, two bits of info here, blurb about event itself and then explanation put out by PP Toronto
MS: Yes organisers,
BC: GC W/S bundle; pg 225,
BC: Part of w/s, para 17, she says statement defensive, not conclusive rebuttal of AB's claim but could not find ev of coercion at workshop, agree statement from them is defensive? (pg 292)
MS: Look at actual link, defensive as in response to criticism from memory
BC: Blurb
MS: Look at actual link, defensive as in response to criticism from memory
BC: Blurb
Title of workshop: Breaking down sexual barriers, sexual barriers faced by queer women, group discussions, hands on
MS: Anyone can read it
BC: Start main blurb again, hands on creation of visual rep of barriers, participants work together, strategise how ot overcome
MS: Anyone can read it
BC: Start main blurb again, hands on creation of visual rep of barriers, participants work together, strategise how ot overcome
BC: Sole reason of workshop to overcome sexual barriers
MS: Says break down, don't know if sole
BC : no other reason given, that exercise described as overcoming the cotton ceiling
MS - yes
BC - if reasonable to understand discriminatory to set boundaries
MS: Says break down, don't know if sole
BC : no other reason given, that exercise described as overcoming the cotton ceiling
MS - yes
BC - if reasonable to understand discriminatory to set boundaries
BC - also reasonable to read blurb as sole reason of this workshop to break down the transphobic sexual barriers that women, lesbians set for themselves
MS: no, is what it is, breaking down barriers for TW
AH: LF going to put following paragraph
MS: That is an expansion
MS: no, is what it is, breaking down barriers for TW
AH: LF going to put following paragraph
MS: That is an expansion
[Lost]
BC - focusing on blurb of workshop, have read whole out, asking about whole of workshop blurn
AH - thought only taking to title
EJ: Have been asked about text, covering whole
AH: MS understand?
BC - focusing on blurb of workshop, have read whole out, asking about whole of workshop blurn
AH - thought only taking to title
EJ: Have been asked about text, covering whole
AH: MS understand?
MS: Can see that there is a cut and paste of workshop cycle one, have to look along with broader explanation of what workshop included
BC: Will come to that; AB commenting on blurb
MS: No she was not, commenting on workshop, need to know if comment that that is what happened
BC: Will come to that; AB commenting on blurb
MS: No she was not, commenting on workshop, need to know if comment that that is what happened
BC: Look at tweet, pg 1839, blurb is what she is directly commenting on and what is in tweet
MS: Don't recall. Don't recall the words
BC: Understand you say we need to consider explanation
EJ: Sorry to derail, only just caught up with 1839
MS: Don't recall. Don't recall the words
BC: Understand you say we need to consider explanation
EJ: Sorry to derail, only just caught up with 1839
BC: Tweet 17,
EJ: Screenshot not repeated on this page
BC: My understanding
MS: Quite important we get that right
BC: looking at workshop at 292, blurb itself identifies sole aim overcoming sexual barriers described as cotton ceiling
EJ: Screenshot not repeated on this page
BC: My understanding
MS: Quite important we get that right
BC: looking at workshop at 292, blurb itself identifies sole aim overcoming sexual barriers described as cotton ceiling
MS doesn't say sole aim
EJ: We have covered that, you couldn't identify another one
MS: have to look at expanded doc
EJ: WHen you say expanded narrative
MS: Organiser's explanation below it
EJ: BC is saying more than one doc pasted here,
EJ: We have covered that, you couldn't identify another one
MS: have to look at expanded doc
EJ: WHen you say expanded narrative
MS: Organiser's explanation below it
EJ: BC is saying more than one doc pasted here,
EJ: BC just asking about initial box and six lines underneath title
MS: yes, but if look at what box says describs that that is what it is doing, sexual barriers faced by queer women
EJ: WHen you say look at in context, do you mean part underneath
MS: yes, but if look at what box says describs that that is what it is doing, sexual barriers faced by queer women
EJ: WHen you say look at in context, do you mean part underneath
MS: Cut and paste of contents of workshop, cited in my report and footnoted in my report, just been copied over,
EJ: When say wider context, explanatory material below?
MS: Yes, looked at whole of it when looking to see whether any ev of wetehr or not MP coercing or sexually
EJ: When say wider context, explanatory material below?
MS: Yes, looked at whole of it when looking to see whether any ev of wetehr or not MP coercing or sexually
assaulting young lesbians
BC: Turn to page 293, 2nd para down, "ways in which TW are socially constructed as undesirable, social stigma impact on health....TW sexual health and wellbeing, TW are women and provide programming... in our community" Para is a description
BC: Turn to page 293, 2nd para down, "ways in which TW are socially constructed as undesirable, social stigma impact on health....TW sexual health and wellbeing, TW are women and provide programming... in our community" Para is a description
of aims of PP Toronto and how TW may be excluded?
MS Yes
BC not describing workshop
MS does below
BC - does not in that paragraph
MS opening para describes the purpose of workshop
BC - issue fo consent is paramount...uncontroversial
MS Yes
BC not describing workshop
MS does below
BC - does not in that paragraph
MS opening para describes the purpose of workshop
BC - issue fo consent is paramount...uncontroversial
BC - workshop not intended to be about overcoming individual women but about ideologies of transphobia, confirming that characterising examples of transphobia?
MS: no, confirming that TW face transphobia, uncontroversial
BC - saying ideologies of transphobia affect sexual desire,
MS: no, confirming that TW face transphobia, uncontroversial
BC - saying ideologies of transphobia affect sexual desire,
BC - workshop to overcome sexual barriers, characterised as transphobia
MS - not saying that, not saying barriers that lesbian women create for themselves, not saying that transphobic, exploring whether any of the barriers may be transphobic
BC - read as whole, in context
MS - not saying that, not saying barriers that lesbian women create for themselves, not saying that transphobic, exploring whether any of the barriers may be transphobic
BC - read as whole, in context
plainly saying about overcoming lesbians desire not to have sex with male bodied people
MS - not saying anywhere that this is coercion
EJ - have explored this point thoroughly and helpfully, move on
BC - lets look at how deal with in report, pg2223
MS - not saying anywhere that this is coercion
EJ - have explored this point thoroughly and helpfully, move on
BC - lets look at how deal with in report, pg2223
Para 49, summarise AB response.
MS - yes
BC and in sub para c you summarise her def of cotton ceiling which she describes as coercive
MS - yes
BC - do not engage with at all in remainder of report
MS - what do you mean
MS - yes
BC and in sub para c you summarise her def of cotton ceiling which she describes as coercive
MS - yes
BC - do not engage with at all in remainder of report
MS - what do you mean
BC - simply assert that AB says MP has encouraged sexual assault when cannot be shown to be true, where do you engage with whether coercive
MS - say cannot be shown to be true, wasn't writing a judgment, summarised what she said and those were my findings
MS - say cannot be shown to be true, wasn't writing a judgment, summarised what she said and those were my findings
MS - she knew full well plain to her that I thought what I thought that her tweets said that MP assaulting young women, did not need to say again
BC - next tweet, relating to SW, pg 2336
EJ - break, 12:08pm
BC - next tweet, relating to SW, pg 2336
EJ - break, 12:08pm
[Court resumes]
BC - taken to pg 2336
MS - yes
BC - para 57, say can be read that SW behind conduct that could be part of criminal campaign but test is not all poss implications from tweet, test what reasonable Social media user understand
MS splitting hairs
BC - taken to pg 2336
MS - yes
BC - para 57, say can be read that SW behind conduct that could be part of criminal campaign but test is not all poss implications from tweet, test what reasonable Social media user understand
MS splitting hairs
BC - not put to AB
MS - clear to her
BC - AB thanks Nick Hellins from Times, doesn't say that SW behind criminal campaign, says SW campaign that furthers that agenda
MS - no point telling me not what says
MS - also summarised AB response to that tweet in body report
MS - clear to her
BC - AB thanks Nick Hellins from Times, doesn't say that SW behind criminal campaign, says SW campaign that furthers that agenda
MS - no point telling me not what says
MS - also summarised AB response to that tweet in body report
BC - not copied in this email, see at time
MS - course not, between Judy and Mark
BC - picking up in third line, can't be read as SW responsible but driving SW agenda? He is right isn't he?
MS - don't understand what he is saying here. Not privy. Nobody said not reasonable
MS - course not, between Judy and Mark
BC - picking up in third line, can't be read as SW responsible but driving SW agenda? He is right isn't he?
MS - don't understand what he is saying here. Not privy. Nobody said not reasonable
approach
BC - you have taken the most extreme response rather than reasonable social media user
MS - not something raised before by AB that extreme interpretation
BC - say, hasn't raised, do you accpet that did not say to her
MS - don't recall this being in your pleadings
BC - you have taken the most extreme response rather than reasonable social media user
MS - not something raised before by AB that extreme interpretation
BC - say, hasn't raised, do you accpet that did not say to her
MS - don't recall this being in your pleadings
BC - do you agree that you did not say to AB that wanted her to address wether SW conduct amounted to criminal campaign
MS - you can look at her response, talking about her response to me
BC - pg 2346;
MS - in the tweet, linked/screenshotted article
BC - not point I am coming to
MS - you can look at her response, talking about her response to me
BC - pg 2346;
MS - in the tweet, linked/screenshotted article
BC - not point I am coming to
MS: My report
BC: Clear place to see lang of tweet, Read as social media user, not criminal barrister lens that coercion criminal acts
MS - not a criminal barrister, don't know what mean
BC: Because you say amounts crim conduct, if lot of people write to my employer to say
BC: Clear place to see lang of tweet, Read as social media user, not criminal barrister lens that coercion criminal acts
MS - not a criminal barrister, don't know what mean
BC: Because you say amounts crim conduct, if lot of people write to my employer to say
should be sacked,
AH - record objection, q put on diff basis that that of tweet
MS - conjunctive, intimidation, fear, coercion.
BC - agree with me, what just described could be intimidation but not nec crim conduct
MS - could be, depends what you have done
AH - record objection, q put on diff basis that that of tweet
MS - conjunctive, intimidation, fear, coercion.
BC - agree with me, what just described could be intimidation but not nec crim conduct
MS - could be, depends what you have done
BC - if lots of people say nasty things about tweet I wrote may feel intimidated but not nec crim conduct
MS - doesn't make sense, can't respond
BC - go to AB explanation, pg 768,
MS - doesn't make sense, can't respond
BC - go to AB explanation, pg 768,
BC - Does number of things, 37-40 para, what has happned to me is an example of intimidation fear and coercion that drives agenda
MS - that didn't make sense to me, she says that what she is referring to on 27 Oct 2019 includes what SW has done by way of complaining about her
MS - that didn't make sense to me, she says that what she is referring to on 27 Oct 2019 includes what SW has done by way of complaining about her
BC - complaint came after
MS - refers to SW complaint, goes on to say in diff para
BC - 769, para 37, ex of intimidation to which I referred in tweet 2, ex of exactly of what AB referring
MS - didn't understand, hadn't happened yet
BC - further ev
MS - cannot be example,
MS - refers to SW complaint, goes on to say in diff para
BC - 769, para 37, ex of intimidation to which I referred in tweet 2, ex of exactly of what AB referring
MS - didn't understand, hadn't happened yet
BC - further ev
MS - cannot be example,
EJ: Confirmed a view she had
BC: Vindicated by subsequent events
MS: Don't know, have to look at what saying at time, can't say comment on something hadn't happened yet
Summarised that she prays that in aid
BC - don't address, address whether complaint ex of threat to get her
BC: Vindicated by subsequent events
MS: Don't know, have to look at what saying at time, can't say comment on something hadn't happened yet
Summarised that she prays that in aid
BC - don't address, address whether complaint ex of threat to get her
sacked
MS - can't be sacked, she is a self employed barrister
EJ - paraphrase, chambers can't be associated with her
BC - shouldn't split hairs
MS - fundamental, GCC not her employer
BC - example threat to get her expelled
MS - can't be sacked, she is a self employed barrister
EJ - paraphrase, chambers can't be associated with her
BC - shouldn't split hairs
MS - fundamental, GCC not her employer
BC - example threat to get her expelled
MS: Did not consider ex of intimidation
BC: Para 41-53, makes essentially a two pronged case, says first of all type of behaviour characteristic of those proposing Self ID
MS: What looking at
BC: Specific points, para 41, frightened to come out
BC: Para 41-53, makes essentially a two pronged case, says first of all type of behaviour characteristic of those proposing Self ID
MS: What looking at
BC: Specific points, para 41, frightened to come out
Cites Terf is a slur, appends examples, refers to AS, those are the examples I am putting to you
Understand characteristic of those advocating for Self ID for some time
MS - understand she is saying body of people who take that view and how SW conducts itself but no ev to support
Understand characteristic of those advocating for Self ID for some time
MS - understand she is saying body of people who take that view and how SW conducts itself but no ev to support
BC - slightly, diff, says SW has poured petrol on flames, no debate, reinforced with menaces, lesbians who disagreed targeted at Pride events, gives further examples, para 49, Womens Place UK, intimidation of gender critical feminists, not saying SW itself, saying position,
slogans, silencing of dissent, labelling, creates environment that encourages and legitimises more extreme forms of abuse
MS - not how tweet read
BC - been through that, exactly what tweet says but explanation she is giving her
MS - formed view nothing supported or gave ev that
MS - not how tweet read
BC - been through that, exactly what tweet says but explanation she is giving her
MS - formed view nothing supported or gave ev that
SW itself was responsible for campaign of intimidation
BC - what about as leading voice created environment and culture
MS - can't say ev of that before me
BC - take examples, agree terf is a slur material ex of horrific abuse
BC - what about as leading voice created environment and culture
MS - can't say ev of that before me
BC - take examples, agree terf is a slur material ex of horrific abuse
MS - nothing to do with SW, answered a million questions
EJ - implied answer yes?
AH - don't understand
[Lost; feedback]
EJ - agree ex of abuse, trying to get answer? Impliedly agreeing?
MS if abusing and calling terf then that is abusive
EJ - implied answer yes?
AH - don't understand
[Lost; feedback]
EJ - agree ex of abuse, trying to get answer? Impliedly agreeing?
MS if abusing and calling terf then that is abusive
OJ - sorry , ev was nothing to do with SW
EJ - got that, needed answer to previous q
BC - want to explore how much we agree/disagree
Agree examples of abuse, leaving aside your point/ev not to do with SW, reasonable to describe abuse appalling levels of initimidation
EJ - got that, needed answer to previous q
BC - want to explore how much we agree/disagree
Agree examples of abuse, leaving aside your point/ev not to do with SW, reasonable to describe abuse appalling levels of initimidation
MS - in what context? Trying to get me to take rabbit hole. Did not see any ev of SW involved
EJ - q was whether ex of appalling abuse, sep q to who responsible
MS - already answered, ex of abuse, don't know who abusive to who about what
EJ - q was whether ex of appalling abuse, sep q to who responsible
MS - already answered, ex of abuse, don't know who abusive to who about what
BC - lets look at her proposition, you may disagree with proposition, but leg comment to say that for a leading organiation in this field that indicate no debate and that transphobic to disagree to do that is contributing to abusive environment
MS - q about six sentences long,
MS - q about six sentences long,
MS - wasn't her comment
BC - Look at pg 1 supp bundle, this is an inside politics view of Holyrood by Mr Fanshawe founder of LGB alliance, knew that?
MS - read at time
BC - read for yourself, para 1-6
BC - Look at pg 1 supp bundle, this is an inside politics view of Holyrood by Mr Fanshawe founder of LGB alliance, knew that?
MS - read at time
BC - read for yourself, para 1-6
Making precisely same point that AB making, SW approach is creating and encouraging an environment the sort of abuse becomes acceptable and endemic
MS - if just make broad assertions, no is the answer, nothing there about coercion
BC - properly considered way in which AB put
MS - if just make broad assertions, no is the answer, nothing there about coercion
BC - properly considered way in which AB put
Could not fail to conclude leg comment on underlying culture in UK
MS - wholly disagree
EJ - think can leave there, will consider answers in context of any findings re detriment
MS - wholly disagree
EJ - think can leave there, will consider answers in context of any findings re detriment
BC - pg2359 in main bundle
MS - Madam, can I have an indication as to when we will finish, BC said in course of morning, then 1pm, make plain cannot be here at 2pm
BC - pg 2359 - email from Elizabeth, not using surname
MS - yes we are
MS - this is my response,
EJ - can we not
MS - Madam, can I have an indication as to when we will finish, BC said in course of morning, then 1pm, make plain cannot be here at 2pm
BC - pg 2359 - email from Elizabeth, not using surname
MS - yes we are
MS - this is my response,
EJ - can we not
use surname until identify
BC - apologise 6359
MS - since on 2359 that is the response gave to LD
Never seen this
BC - 938
MS - not copied in
BC - asking if supplied as material and had it
MS - no
BC - apologise 6359
MS - since on 2359 that is the response gave to LD
Never seen this
BC - 938
MS - not copied in
BC - asking if supplied as material and had it
MS - no
MS - didn't consider it helpful to be lobbied, job to do
BC:2209
MS - nothign to do with tweets investigating
BC - only asking if had it
MS - didn't have it, again this is lobbying
BC - feeling under pressure from others to make findings against AB
MS - no
BC:2209
MS - nothign to do with tweets investigating
BC - only asking if had it
MS - didn't have it, again this is lobbying
BC - feeling under pressure from others to make findings against AB
MS - no
MS - who others?
BC - Ms H, Ms K in particular
MS - neither woudl ever, ever, ever put someone under pressure least of all me, scurrilous allegation, have to be careful making such allegations BC
BC - can see not approached in open minded way, adopted view put to you
BC - Ms H, Ms K in particular
MS - neither woudl ever, ever, ever put someone under pressure least of all me, scurrilous allegation, have to be careful making such allegations BC
BC - can see not approached in open minded way, adopted view put to you
MS: No different thing don't like conclusion
Non sensical, not aware of AB being out of favour, certainly not with me, friend of mine, gave her time and attention and indeed love
BC - explicitly or implicitly, MS K and with clerks you contributed to clear message out of favour
Non sensical, not aware of AB being out of favour, certainly not with me, friend of mine, gave her time and attention and indeed love
BC - explicitly or implicitly, MS K and with clerks you contributed to clear message out of favour
MS - this is outrageous, don't use same clerks room as Ms K the idea that I would do anything to affect somebody's else's career, utterly refute it
BC - all my q
BC - all my q
AH - can I ask you turn to report
suggested to you by BC more than once failed to carry out research on links given by AB, can you look at para 53 of report
suggested to you by BC more than once failed to carry out research on links given by AB, can you look at para 53 of report
MS - yes,
AH - accurate statement
MS - yes
AH - pg 292, put to you, look at extract from PP Toronto, looking at bit "this is an explanation"; like to look at passage and penultimate sentence that participants work together...
AH - accurate statement
MS - yes
AH - pg 292, put to you, look at extract from PP Toronto, looking at bit "this is an explanation"; like to look at passage and penultimate sentence that participants work together...
AH - bear in mind and look at original tweet, tweet 17; assume, extract included as part of tweet
MS - not included with tweet
AH - was not?
AH - what was put was that that was added to tweet
BC - wrong about that
MS- completely wrong,
AH - important point hope tribunal got
MS - not included with tweet
AH - was not?
AH - what was put was that that was added to tweet
BC - wrong about that
MS- completely wrong,
AH - important point hope tribunal got
EJ: had you seen at all when writing report
MS: Screenshot sent to me by AB, explanation from PP Toronto, part in my report,
EJ: Had you seen it?
MS - in my report
MS: Screenshot sent to me by AB, explanation from PP Toronto, part in my report,
EJ: Had you seen it?
MS - in my report
MS: Photo of workshop not attached to tweet, sent to me by AB, expanded explanation something I found
AH: 292 - screenshot of workshop was sent by AB; explanation subsequently received
MS: I found it. I did a google search from MP and PP; found it and put link in report,
AH: 292 - screenshot of workshop was sent by AB; explanation subsequently received
MS: I found it. I did a google search from MP and PP; found it and put link in report,
AH: Going back to tweet at 1389, tweet 17, did you regard that sentence as justifying the wording in the tweet as sole aim how heterosexual men could coerce lesbians
Do you think justified by screenshot
MS: no, not by screenshot or expanded content
AH: told benefit regard to
Do you think justified by screenshot
MS: no, not by screenshot or expanded content
AH: told benefit regard to
subsequent events to explain, SW conduct and campaign
MS - was listening to her when she said it, she appears and says in terms on her oath that this is her view SW running criminal protection racket, if BC thinks illuminative way of approaching tweet,
EJ - we have had the point
MS - was listening to her when she said it, she appears and says in terms on her oath that this is her view SW running criminal protection racket, if BC thinks illuminative way of approaching tweet,
EJ - we have had the point
BC - AB ev was that it was an imperfect analogy
EJ - Thank you
AH pg549; Raise being a SW diversity champion. See at top of pg, asked about this. 2nd Nov thread, Steff put me right...; :g 2547, doc from SH on 4 November 2019 at 14:16. Look at
EJ - Thank you
AH pg549; Raise being a SW diversity champion. See at top of pg, asked about this. 2nd Nov thread, Steff put me right...; :g 2547, doc from SH on 4 November 2019 at 14:16. Look at
MS: Why isn't BSB sufficient?
Whether SW diversity champion or not? She is saying purely regulatory.
AH - 402 of GCC bundle; look at last sentence of para 37; say at time, concerned at lang in tweet, chambers associated with, fascistic tactics, what precisely concern?
Whether SW diversity champion or not? She is saying purely regulatory.
AH - 402 of GCC bundle; look at last sentence of para 37; say at time, concerned at lang in tweet, chambers associated with, fascistic tactics, what precisely concern?
MS - seriously offensive, to align anyone's activity with facism, v serious, seriously offensive
AH - no complaint to adjudicate, come to supply info from Bar Council; you say enough on plate, who followed up, SH did this, aware of her position as to her role to play?
AH - no complaint to adjudicate, come to supply info from Bar Council; you say enough on plate, who followed up, SH did this, aware of her position as to her role to play?
MS - on the board, dual role on board, head of public law team, also diversity officer, whole reason why involved in looking at my drafts
AH - look earlier in w/s at para 27, para 28, SH included from outside as role as BDO; responsible for liaison with Bar Council?
AH - look earlier in w/s at para 27, para 28, SH included from outside as role as BDO; responsible for liaison with Bar Council?
MS - Made sense for her to do it.
AH - end of q
EJ - end of ev, will disconnect and resume at 2pm.
AH - end of q
EJ - end of ev, will disconnect and resume at 2pm.
@threadreaderapp unroll please.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
