Thread by @MForstater

A thread on Master McCloud.

MCloud was appointed "as the youngest and only second female ‘Master’" to be appointed to the Queen’s Bench division of the High Court in 2010.

McCloud was also on the Committee that writes the Equal Treatment Bench Book

In 2020 Mccloud spoke at this event in aid of Stonewall.

"Ensuring that all voices of minority/oppressed groups are heard" sounds nice, but it often means shutting down dissent as harassment.

In any case judges might have all kinds of characteristics but presenting themselves as being part of a community with responsibilities to that community undermines confidence in impartiality.

I complained about this but it was rejected as out of time.

Barrister @SVPhillimore complained about McCloud sending her private messages on Twitter. This was dismissed because JCIO said this was within McCloud's private life.

Mccloud also tried to start a private conversation with me. I found this inappropriate and I did not reply.

I understand Sarah and I are not the only ones to receive such approaches.

Mccloud had also been commenting publicly on Linked In on sex and gender. Including responding to someone accusing LGBA and Sex Matters of "bigotry" suggesting we might be engaged in criminal harassment

Criminal harassment is conduct directed at an individual.

If a person feels "alarm and distress" at another person's lawful general statements of belief this is not harassment but irrationality.

MCloud posted the idea that a "belief is something you can keep to yourself" in relation to the Forstater ruling.

This is both wrong and inappropriate for a judge to be opining on on social media

The last thing I wanted to do was to get into private conversation with a judge who had declared an intention to find any expression of my belief "harassment" and might report me to the police.

The view that gender critical speech is likely to be harassment is also reflected in the sloppy wording of the Equal Treatment Bench Book 2022 update. forstater.com/manifestation-…

Perhaps McCloud was drawing on the now withdrawn assertion about belief and manifesation from RMW's book? forstater.com/manifestation-…

McCloud has now quit the judicary, blaming everything but their own behaviour

thetimes.co.uk/article/uks-on…

The letter complains that the expression of gender critical beliefs offends their dignity.

McCloud was allocated to hear this gender critical case.

Imagine having to ask for a recusal of a judge here (or not asking because the Linked In posts were deleted so you have no proof or don't know about the judge's political engagement)

crowdjustice.com/case/i-was-exp…

McCloud evokes Rosa Parks and says that it is political wherever McCloud chooses to pee.

Of course a judge should follow rules.

It is up to a service provider to make the rules and to communicate them.

Everyone should be able to follow rules: particularly judges.

As the @EHRC now makes clear in its guidance.

I don't think it is compatible to view breaking rules as "political", and to sit as an "impartial" judge of those who are asking for rules to be set and enforced and are facing accusations of harassment for using clear language.