Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 5

[fanOfBen]

Previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5549488-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-4

TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.
I will also note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

This all the way. She’s a liar 🤥 liar pants on fire. 🔥

And her organisation have misrepresented the law and induced illegality.

Someone should check a-genders governance because something should be done.

Oh he's a keeper.

In our early relationship mine would just get nothing, no substitute, he doesn't do that anymore.....

Will the judge/panel be aware that ED was lying? E..g will the inconsistencies in her evidence be highlighted in submissions?

Er all the horrific stuff that was laid bare this morning and yesterday about ED's conduct. As a witness in a ET can this be used against her in future disciplinary? Can it be used to start a disciplinary?

'Er' should have been 'Re'

Also Claimant's barrister and Judge seem much more comfortable with this witness, looking at standard tribunal issues of grievance process.

will the inconsistencies in her evidence be highlighted in submissions?

Oh yes.

I haven't been able to follow all her evidence closely so I'm not able to comment on any particular parts where TT have used exclamation marks. But yes, she did a lot of exclaiming loudly, gabbling very fast, raised voice, tones of outrage and horror.

Yep, grandstanding

@StellaAndCrow the "you're afraid of Jenni Murray?" clip comes to mind a lot during these tribunals.

On another note, ST's behaviour is what often plays out in the family courts when abusive men lose control. Pages and pages of petty detail, unreasonable servailance, attempts to limit freedoms, complete blinkered self centredness, the desire for revenge and to have their day in court...

@ItsCoolForCats

Most definitely. Especially the docs that had no business being in her her possession.

Also I would imagine the we are so secret, no one takes any notice of us, but had the ear of bigwigs in the CS and a lot of policy writing.

There appears to be a beetle in your tea cakes.

Best give them to me to dispose of

I'm no HR expert but have taken notes at disciplinary hearings and seen a fair number of follow ups from HR.

An outcome letter to a complainant addressing a grievance is normally quite detailed (depending on how many issues have been raised) but a page and a half to outline if procedure was/was not followed seems reasonable - not too long for unnecessary waffle and not too short to indicate the matter has not been taken seriously.

Your last paragraph also reminds me of the Freeman On The Land types - alternative reality and absolute conviction of their own infallible RIGHTNESS.

In the context of AD raising numerous complaints about him tho. If we are expected to tolerate appalling stuff from a:gender (I give you genocidal) because they are upset I think this is fairly tempered from AM and is probably more to do with how they operate generally than anything gender related. We don’t have the context. Plus J pointed out it had nothing to do with this case so if that’s all they could find…bit desperate.

ED was wearing an all-white dress to give evidence yesterday. A careful choice I suspect in someone who clearly gives a lot of thought to her appearance. She no doubt hoped to give an impression of virtue and honesty.

Oh dear.

There were times when ED laughed in the tribunal room, sort of in disbelief I think. She did so in the discussion about how much power a-gender wields.

The bundles in this case amount to 5000 pages and I suspect there's an opinion that more is better, which accounts for the surprise at Hallam's concise summation.

Every time I read DH here I think you lot are talking about your husband and not David Hallam. Most confusing!

Your last paragraph also reminds me of the Freeman On The Land types

Heh! I thought of them yesterday reading these threads.

I once had a bit of a ding-dong with a previous employer and my appeal to their initial decision was based on the fact that they had (blatantly) not followed their own procedures in dealing with their initial consideration. Mainly because no-one in HR wanted to deal with it and it passed around the entire HR organisation like a hot potato.

The outcome of my appeal was successful (because I kept receipts a careful record of events) and I won my original point but the letter I got was so grudging in response to me it would have been amusing if it hadn't dragged on for so bloody long.

I agree the Freemen on the Land loons exhibit many of the same traits, and so does Prince Harry. Delusional, entitled and completely incapable of seeing anyone else's point of view. And surrounded by imaginary threats to safety which can never be articulated.

[I'm here but the court seems not to be yet...]

From TT:

Good afternoon. This is the 3rd July first afternoon session in the case of Samantha Tempest v DEFRA & Rural Payments Agency. Helen Hogben for the Claimant will continue her questions to David Hallam, witness for the Respondent. We expect to resume at 2pm.

^t.co/qxlCWYf1Gy^

Our Substack page on the case contains all the previous sessions, and a full list of abbreviations
^t.co/KGgDXHIwk8^

A reminder that our work is not a verbatim account or transcript of proceedings. We make our best efforts to report what is said and do so in good faith.

Yes it should but who at the UK Civil Service or HM Land Registry will do anything?

They’ll show themselves either to be serving the public or protecting their own.

Emma Dunn is a silly nasty person.

I remember JR rocking up in a white suit as defender of the righteous.

I manage to feel both sorry for ED for what she has gone through, and horrified as to where it has led her and what she has become. The horror wins, in the end.

Aargh, I meant DH is appropriately dressed, not approximately dressed in business attire. I should know better than to type without glasses.