Thread by @tribunaltweets

This is the second session of the afternoon, day 6 of nurse Sandie Peggie v Fife Health Board and Dr Upton. SP’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation.

NC All of those q before break based on your account of mtg which isn't completely agreed. C said you came out of toilet in scrubs and walked round her to get changed.
DU no -was in civilian clothes before used bathroom.
NC When you started to undress, she heard zip, said she

was uncomfortable.
DU No. Already changed when went into bathroom. Then she confronted me c intimidation.

NC you mention long drive home. Not in any accounts of incident you gave to board initially.
DU No. but that's why. I needed to go bathroom to pee.

NC you put that detail in to explain something puzzling. People would use toilet first then get changed.
DU No, I get fully changed and then go to bathroom. Opposite way round when I arrive at work.

NC clear discrepancy between you and SP, But you agree you are entitled to use F CR
DU Yes
NC and to undress in CR
DU In almost 30 years I understand you have to get undressed first in order to change.
NC Didn't occur to you that SP needed menstrual flood
DU N

NC didn't cross mind
DU Not in habit of thinking c colleagues menstruation. Didn't consider it at all until raised in bundle.
NC so didn't think of it a possibility why SP there.
DU Not a huge leap. SP there when wouldn't normally be and not leaving.

NC Now you know why she was there and waited, for you to leave so she could deal with situation in privacy.
DU In that case don't know why she waited in communal area and not cubicle. I would go into cubicle and wait for someone to leave.

NC You assumed her presence there was about you.
DU Y. In same way today if photographers out front they are waiting to take pics of me.
NC now you know why she was there, do your feel differently.
DU Still not reason to confront and harass me and so appropriate to raise with

someone senior.

NC SP mentioned her bad history with men. You didn't know.
DU No. Not used to discussing that with colleagues. I'm now aware of some details and sorry to hear about it and must be difficult for her to carry that with her.

NC SP gave evidence of repeated sexual assault as young woman by GP.
DU Not aware. Am now, as you have just told me.
NC Given trauma, is a w entitled to want spaces she undresses in to exclude males.

DU TW not males. Someone's trauma doesn't justify bad behaviour towards colleagues or to put restrictions on rights of others to access space.

NC How should board accommodate someone with that history.

DU Expect board to listen to person, work to find solution, find alternatives. Not my decision as not member of board.
NC W to be able to access space with just w who are literally women
DU Don't understand. Cis women

DU You are deliberately confusing
JR there are heckles from ppl supporting C
J Haven't heard. But will remove them.
DU Language is important. Need to use clear lang or I can't understand what you are asking.

NC Are you asking Tribunal to believe you don't understand literally women when I use that.
DU You use TW, TiM, etc. You consider using terms that I consider uncceptable to be okay. But I will cont to use those term.
NC you know what I mean by literal women

DU I know what you are implying
JR this is political
J we end up with q and a in witness and counsel terms . One way to proceed - define what you mean by term in the q.
NC When I say woman I mean someone who is biologically female, you would say assigned at birth.

J There may be confusion - q uses word in one way and answer uses it in another. Biological male means different thing for DU
NC Bio F = kind of body configurated to produce eggs if all works properly, and configured re sperm for a male.

J to DU Checking that you understand what NC means by her terms.
DU Can I clarify my terms in my answers
J Y, whatever you think appropriate.
NC Long digression in lang. I suggest you did understand my q c literal woman,

and in rejecting it you are seeking to assert dominace over me as you did over SP .
JR Dominance over whom
NC Me
DU There is a language difficulty.
NC Using my term Lit W.. Do you think to be entitled to have a space restricted to w, an Employee would need t

to disclose her history to her employer to have accommodation.

DU. No Unfortunate to have to disclose to employers. In ideal world would be more trauma-informed. Deeply saddened that C trauma is being reported in court and newspapers.

Wish I didn't have to tell employer that I'm trans but have to because of the risks to me
NC isn't there an easy trauma-informed solution, to keep CR free of men.

DU ideally individual changing cubicles.

NC Can't know looking at w if has history of trauma/sexual violence

DU Not poss to tell by looking at anyone.

NC you say patient shouldn't need to be told of your trans history for intimate exam

JR Object and irrelevance

NC R2 shown complete contempt for women's bodily privacy and autonomy. And reasonable for C to find

environment with R2 there intimidating
NC Passing or not - my gloss

JR Judge Tinnion rejected these arguments on basis of R2 obviously a man.

J Point here in different context.

NC shows contempt for w need for privacy and dignity.
.

J Break for you to think c what you want to do in this area. Not clear what you think this line of q going to be. I'll need to read J Tinnion. How are we going.

NC Slowly. Halfway through. Should go faster.

J won't finish evidence this week. Dr Searle next? And then.

JR Dr S can only come tomorrow.

NC Need to take instructions.

NC If Dr S can only come back tomorrow - finish DU evidence and have Dr S when we reconvene.

JR Can Dr S give evidence via CVP. Sit earlier/longer. Surprising length of IX this witness. Has to be some limit .

J will keep under review. Dr Searle remotely.

NC Unacceptable, esp as others giving live evidence.

NC Dr S evidence v imp.

[Discussion about timings/order of witnesses]
NC Late productions have caused a lot of work over weekend. R case been a moving feast. Late production put us at disadvantage.
JR We can call Esther Davidson tomorrow.

J We won't break after DU evidence, but continue.
Tomorrow we could start as soon after 9.30 as possible it all can make it.
[agreed}
J Earlier lunch c 12.30 for an hour - fresh air, attend to emails etc. And finish??
JR/NC content to stay later.
Discussion c time. 4.30? 5?

J Warning DU c still giving evidence.

Back at 9.30

@threadreaderapp

@threadreaderapp Pls unroll