Today, as an observer for the disciplinary hearing of @preta_6, I witnessed what I think was one of the most despicable, unethical displays of quackery I've ever seen. A 🧵...
1/
1/
BARBARA FINDLAY, a lawyer for BCCNM, spent the better part of the day attempting to discredit the statements of the expert witnesses that Amy's lawyers plan to call. She asked her last "expert" witness, Dr. Greta Bauer, to opine on the credentials of other witnesses.
2/
2/
This began, by repeatedly referring to Dr. Linda Blade as "Ms. Blade," ignoring the fact that Linda is not only married, but also holds a PhD in Kinesiology from SFU. A fact that ought to have been rather obvious given the context of attempting to discredit her CV.
3/
3/
Somehow BARBARA referred to all the other witnesses who held a PhD with the title of Dr. She mistitled Dr. Blade.
She then continued to attempt to discredit the other 3 witnesses for Amy's side one by one, via her direct examination of Dr. Bauer.
4/
She then continued to attempt to discredit the other 3 witnesses for Amy's side one by one, via her direct examination of Dr. Bauer.
4/
This thread would be a novel if I went into explicit detail of each of these attempts so I'll choose to only highlight a few of significance.
5/
5/
One that did not escape my sense of irony, was when she attempted to insinuate that Dr. Kathleen Stock's expertise in Philosophy may not be relevant to the issue at hand, as though the entire field of philosophy might be called into question.
6/
6/
As Dr. Greta Bauer was asked to opine on this, I wondered if she was aware of what the "Ph" prefix on her own PhD stood for and that she maybe ought to be cautious in her reply, lest she inadvertently discredit her own credentials.
7/
7/
Insinuations were made that a spreadsheet, supplied as part of a statement by another of Amy's witnesses, somehow did not constitute data. And the source of the data was called into question because it may have been obtained via "questionable methodology".
8/
8/
Interesting that the "data" contained in said spreadsheet was an attempt to track the male prisoners being housed in Canadian female prisons. Having being meticulously gathered by Heather Mason since 2017 when Trudeau's Liberal government started the policy of transferring
9/
9/
Males who self identified as women into female facilities. An alarming number of whom (>50%) were incarcerated for sexual offences against women.
Dr. Bauer was asked to opine on how one might gather such data as a researcher.
10/
Dr. Bauer was asked to opine on how one might gather such data as a researcher.
10/
I guess Dr. Bauer is not aware that many public record requests have been made to obtain this info from the Federal gov't, but so far have been unsuccessful because the gov't chooses not to track the biological sex of its inmates before and after they "transition."
11/
11/
This means that there is no data point by which to search their database for inmates who previously would have been listed as male but are now listed as female. As far as the gov't is concerned, these inmates are female.
12/
12/
One could imagine the difficulty this might cause should one of these male inmates be involved in a negative interaction with a female inmate. How could the sex of the inmates correctly reflect the biological realities of the encounter if they are both listed as female?
13/
13/
But most egregious of all may have been Dr. Bauer's very careful and linguistically sly attempt to discredit Dr. Miriam Grossman by going off on a tangent about the subtle differences of individuals with DSDs (intersex conditions) based off of information on her website.
14/
14/
I am greatly looking forward to the cross examination of Dr. Bauer by Amy's lawyers @LDBildy and Karen Bastow. I would really like to see Dr. Bauer be asked the following:
15/
15/
- Dr. Bauer repeatedly insists that misgendering can cause harm to trans people. She also acknowledges that harm is subjective. Why does the harm of being misgendered trump the harm of females being forcibly imprisoned with men and exposed to physical violence and rape?
16/
16/
- Does Dr. Bauer consider her field of expertise to be superior to that of Dr. Stock and Dr. Blade? If so, why?
17/
17/
- Dr. Grossman's lack of academic publications was pointed out in an attempt to discredit her expertise. Does Dr. Bauer believe that it would be common for a practicing psychiatric clinician to have a significant history of academic publications?
18/
18/
Might not her clinical experience with trans patients be relevant in this hearing? If not, why? Dr. Bauer has been asked to opine on the potential harms to trans people by Amy's statements.
19/
19/
Shouldn't the opinion of a clinician with real world experience treating such potential harm be relevant?
20/
20/
- All of Dr. Bauer's data from studying harms to trans people in prison was from around 2009. That data would have related to trans people housed in prisons with other prisoners of the same sex.
21/
21/
How can she speak to the experience of females housed with male prisoners (since 2017) when she admits that she does not have sufficient data to do so?
22/
22/
One final thing I think it's important to note, in the interest of fairly representing what I witnessed today. I was mildly surprised by the decision of the panel to hear the complete direct, cross and redirect...
23/
23/
of Dr. Bauer before hearing arguments from the BCCNM lawyers to challenge the expert witnesses of Amy's team.
This gives me some degree of hope that this isn't a complete kangaroo court hearing where the outcome is predetermined.
24/
This gives me some degree of hope that this isn't a complete kangaroo court hearing where the outcome is predetermined.
24/
I choose to remain optimistic that the independent panel has the common sense and sense of justice to afford Amy a fair hearing and allow her expert witnesses to speak in her defence.
Fin/
Fin/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
