Thread by @tribunaltweets

We will be returning for a further session this afternoon and running late to finish the cross examination of all the witnesses today.

Previous sessions and abbreviations are covered here:


As sound was cut off it's unclear which witness is on the stand.tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/professor-jo…

we return
J: I assume Shaun Daly (from HR) is in the hotseat?
JM: affirms and agrees WS with SD

BC: Forgive me if I'm brief as I've asked these Qs a lot
SD: Asks for page number again

BC: U wrote to IF on June 18th re formation of the RN?
Yes
BC Was this unprecedented as chair of LGBTQ Network to write to a dean?
BC: U .wrote to IF on June 18th re formation of the RN? of the group.
SD We wrote as champion for LGBT but not as a dean

BC That's not happened before?
SD I cant answer that and I'm not an academic. everything was confusuing about the RN and Ian was our main point of contact at at a senior level
BC You reference Forstater, and [reads re discrimination and asking for cancellation of RN wld be discri

SD We also had a committee and ppl on that view were calling for that stance. We were saying we wldnt ask for what others were asking for
BC U knew about the SM backlash?
SD To an extent. I wasnt personally active on Twitter where much happened
BC U knew the C was a member of the

BC network?
SD Yes, I knew she was on the email list
BC [bundle finding] U can see Feb 21 emails re getting the C onto Yamma?
SD Yes
BC U had the ability to close convos or remove posts?
SD Yes re closing convos but sont know if we cld remove posts and we didnt feel approp to

SD remove msgs. we closed down to stop things getting more inflammatory
BC The C wrote in response to you re the GCRN and not to discrim against the group. She thought it import that group not treated unfairly?
SD Can u clarify?
BC Repeats
SD Yes

BC U needed to ensure no persicution or discrimination of the C?
SD I wasnt aware that she was being persucuted at the time. Obvs I'm more aware now.
BC I'm taking that from yr WS tho, so u were aware?
SD There's level of awareness but I dont think I was following closely

BC: U posted on Yamma thread June 18th?
SD Yes
BC And u discuss perceived trabsphobia and linking this to the opening of the RN?
SD It seemed that was what was occuring at the time, from our c'tee members and other members. Their perception, right or wrong, that the uni was

SD aligning w GC views. There were more ppl feeling upset about what was happening and how it had happened than the other side.
BC We'll ask the uni to look at processes implying there was something wrong w the assoc w the RN?
SD I still hold the veiew that the RN cld not have

SD been promoted without this strength od views. We were v surprised the OU hadnt thought about how this wld be managed nor the RN hadnt run it by us as a c'tee
BC But that isnt normal re ppl's research?
SD I dont know if it's normal. It cld just be courteous. it wld have helped.

SD It's not my experience re gender so a lot ppl didnt know. But we got no engagement to help us understand from RN members
SD We were also questionning the uni as well as the RN
BC As there'd always be a reaction as they regard GC as t'phobic, rightly or wrongly?
Yes

BC You also wrote an open letter to the network and staff?
Yes, and I did later sign it myself
BC It calls for removal of institutional platforms which y'd previously said not to do?
SD Yes
BC Which is discrim...please answer the Q [repeats re recog is discriminatory]
SD Yes

SD I wanted a convo re branding in the uni
BC U knew it'd be upsetting for the C?
SD It wasnt ever my intention
BC This was pinned to the top of the thread? With the letter?
SD Yes, the c'tee wanted this

BC: We can see July 13th an email to sec re distress on finding this pin from JP. Did no one from People Hub or the uni contacted u to say to take it down as causing great distress?
SD No, they didnt
BC That's the end of my Qs
J: Asks JM if any Qs?
JM: No

[witness SD leaves the stand]

Sam Jacobson (SJ) from HR takes the stand

JM: Talks through affirmation and witness statement

BC: Good evening and thank you for staying so late. [finding bundle]
BC This is B&H policy u were following?
SJ Yes
BC Discusses timescales...agreed and stated throughout?
SJ Yes
BC So shld agree w the Cs timescale?
SJ Yes
BC 3 options at a formal stage. line manager? Inves panel

BC Or external expert?
SJ Agrees as options
BC Not belittling but yr role is as administration?
SJ Yes, and I give advice and support to all involved parties
BC in that role u dont make key decisions re process or outcome?
SJ No. Only give advice on risks, benefits and options

SJ I have to remain impartial and don't involve myself in any outcomes
BC [new bundle] On June 24th when complaints made by C is sent to peoples services team to progress?
SJ Yes, sent on that day [discussion time of day]
BC [new page] On 1st page of grievance did u understand

this was urgent and causing distress?
SJ Yes. I didnt speak to the group
BC Did u express the urgency?
SJ I had other urgent complaints
BC Did you highlight the urgency of it?
SJ No. I wldnt take info from the working group
BC No one from the WG said there's an urgency?

SJ No, as we had another complaint that also dealing with as urgent
BC So no partic urgency?
SJ No, I disagree. Did as fast as I cld
BC No one contacted u about progressing this as quickly as possible?
SJ No

BC On June 29th u acknowledged the grievance, 5 days later
SJ Yes
BC Just acknowledging?
SJ Yes
BC Doesnt suggest partic urgency?
SJ I had to read and research and find a panel
BC The C stressing again the urgency to you?
SJ Yes
BC Did u ask for help to speed things up?

SJ I was looking to get proper training in place, eg around Forstater
BC One option was using an ext expert to sit on the panel or run the investigation?
SJ Yes but we didnt feel was an option as AF and FoS needed to be understood within academia

BC This ws decided w yr manager?
SJ Yes, the WG discussed this and we agreed to go internal
BC It was the WG's decision?
SJ Yes
BC Did they probe likely timescales at this point?
SJ We look at the
BC Keeps interupting re Q [repeats]
SJ No, they didnt ask any Qs

BC U gave indicative timescales to the C?
SJ Yes
BC The panel shld have been appointed in 5 working days, but it took 50 days. So hoped early Sept to conclude?
SJ That was the hope
BC How many ppl did u approach to be on the panel?
SJ U need to look at the grade of ppl

SJ Sally and Rick had a lot of experiences with grievances. Also need impartial ppl and some said they had specific views. Rick was very thorough and rigourous. How many ppl were on the list?
SJ No more than 8, maybe less, after looking at grades

BC Miss Mooloy said a list was given and how decisions made [confusing]
SJ Those 2 names were on the list taken to the WG.
BC Did u look at their work schedule b4 taking the list to the WG?
SJ No
BC Was it a factor? Did the WG ask u about this?
SJ No

[new page in bundle]
BC: Prof Holliman said busy in July suggesting being replaced if speed needed and mentioned 3 months to him
SJ Yes
BC So within days of telling the C it wld finish by this date u told him another date?
SJ Yes, wanted to give him worse case scenario

BC U were resigned to this being drawn out?
SJ No
BC No instruction to accept drawing out?
SJ No. I Did explain to WG re Holliman's timescales and I understand they asked him to be released to assist

BC: On July 12 th you wrote to C inviting to a mtg on July 22nd?
SJ Yes
BC So she had no meeting until a quarter of time had gone by?
SJ Yes we were aksed for training by Shoesmith beforehand
BC 40% of the time
SJ Yes
BC Let's say you'd got a move on and not putting it off

BC until had buried her mother
[missed]
BC But you'd not checked availibilities?
SJ Yes and no
BC There was no degree of urgency about this as an invite wld have gone out and not 80% of time gone by?
SJ We were doing all we could
BC No one from wG flagged up the time?

SJ They wanted to remain seperate from the grievance
BC It took 4 weeks to get the notes?
SJ [discussing checking the note taker and ppl being on leave]
BC If the WG had really wanted speed they cld have asked you to enquire re ppl's availability for a conc stretch or go external

BC This is a practical Q for you, rather than kicking it to u in the usual way. Can we go external, etc?
SJ Yes it cld have been done. I had 4 complaints re GC views at the time and 3 had a lot to get through. This panel was already dealing w 2 complaints as they wanted consisten

SJ consistency
BC: [new page] Throughout Aug-Oct the C had raised concerns?
SJ Yes
BC So way beyond completion date and worse case scenario?
SJ Yes but had updated JP
BC Everything is being done to complete the invest report as quickly as possible? Isnt true?
SJ I disagree. Had

SJ been v thorough and a lot of responses to deal with. i had msged JP and told her when mtgs were due to be
BC Investiagtion report may not be fifnished by Xmas?
SJ Trying to manage expectations. Knew times had slipped and didnt want to fall behind on a promise. Needing to redac

SJ redact
BC U mean, I am doing the best I can with my workload and dont mean the WG have said you must respond by X date, as senior ppl. Y'd been left to get on w this?
SJ The WG wanted the panel to decide
BC This doesnt usurp their role. They cld have stepped in at any point

SJ If that's yr interpretation of events that's ok
BC That's all my Qs

P Is it normal to give it to ??
SJ No. Felt as Qs were similar and at the same time, and that panel had had the training this wld move things quickly. But this didnt happen and a new panel for the next 2 comp

P Cannot hear
SJ 2 or 4 ppl normally as witnesses. This v unusual w 22 ppl involved. JP talked about the open letter and we wanted to undertand who to meet
P It's not logical if the case was so large to give them 2 cases?
SJ That was decision of WG

SJ It's not usual. I got a lot of emails from JP
P [again cannot hear]
SJ Wasnt just availability but they all wanted union reps and a few were rescheduled. Asking for union reps as a lot of time needed to reschedule. We did try to speed things up

P Do u normally check availability before setting up a panel?
SJ Not necess. Senior ppl know to make themselves available. Told Mr Holliman that running behind and tried to release him so we didnt have to start again

[WG requested to release him]
J: I've already received one death threat" Does that not require urgent action?
SJ It does. i was as fast as I cld be
P: What did u do when u read that?
SJ We've had death threats managed before and try to do as fast as possible and I think security

SJ were involved and JP had advise from the police I think
P Did u know that?
SJ I had tried to contact her by phone and she said to email, which I took as she didnt want to talk to me.

J: " other grievances - how long did they take?
SJ The one close to JPs -in fact were 2 -

SJ I cant remember but know they took a no of months
The other I cant remeber from the top of my head

J It was realsied that another panel was required - at what point?
SJ The other came in in Aug and I was asked if the panel wld consider and they and I said No to another 2 case

J The panel didnt deal w the other 2 grievances?
SJ No they didnt. Another panel did.

J CM, is she yr LM?
SJ No. I have a LM and Directors - she's a director
J U provided recommendations to WG?
SJ Yes. My contact was via him (??boss) rather than directly
J Is about how u worked

[talking about a director]
J There were no recommendations made by you?
SJ No I discussed concerns re Prof H's availability
J what was yr recommend then?
SJ Discussed..
J What did u say?
SJ Said had issues w time scales, taking of statements, passing on recomms to the WG

J How did recomms manifest themselves? Was it by email?
SJ By phone or Teams call
J Thank you, no not quite...[laughter]
J You are released. I believe that's all the evidence and we'll see you at 11am on Friday, after sending your submissions at 9am on Fri

[court adjourns]

@threadreaderapp unroll