BC LAW
Saved by @Alex1Powell

We need to talk about the 'expert' witness statement evidence led by Ms Bell in her successful case before the Tavistock. THREAD

 You can see who gave evidence in her support from these extracts from the Tavistock's Skeleton Argument.
Helpful for you to bear in mind that her solicitor was a man called Paul Conrathe, who has a long association with the religious right in the US (I have talked about him a number of times but this is as good a starting point as any). https://t.co/GqoBNcRaEA
I am not going to address here other criticisms that might be made of the form in which that evidence was given or the timing of its service before the court. I am just going to address, in alphabetical order, the individuals whose evidence Mr Conrathe led on Ms Bell's behalf.
The first witness, alphabetically, was Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oxford, Michael Biggs.

Mr Biggs was exposed for posting transphobic statements online under a fake twitter handle: @MrHenryWimbush according to this report.
https://t.co/EDPCZt6Mih
The tweets posted under that account include “transphobia is a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons." It also accused The Lancet, amongst the world's oldest and best-known general medical journals, of "endorsing eugenics".
The second, alphabetically, is Professor Neil Evans.

Although he was described as an “internationally recognised neuroendocrinologist” he is in fact a Professor at the Institute of Biodiversity Animal Health & Comparative Medicine: https://t.co/42WlwZ4NBe
Amongst his papers on veterinary medicine are a study on puberty blockers in sheep which was taken up by the Christian Institute which describes itself as "committed to the truths of historic, biblical Christianity" https://t.co/tYHpxYmIE8.
The third, alphabetically, is Professor Gene Feder. He is plainly an eminent academic and practising GP (https://t.co/1VrW5hyElU) but he doesn't seem to have any particular expertise in this field.
The fourth is Professor Gillberg, a professor of child and adolescent psychiatry, Gillberg Neuropsychiatry Centre, University of Gothenburg.

Professor Gillberg was involved in a major scandal in Sweden involving the shredding of evidence. https://t.co/B6lpLvRSqA
The fifth, is Professor Paul Hruz. Professor Hruz's evidence was explicitly relied on by the Divisional Court.

Paul Hruz is linked with the religious hate group, the Alliance for Defending Freedom https://t.co/1skuO8GRiP
Professor Hruz is also linked with the US Heritage Foundation. https://t.co/N4i0ULnB4T
According to this report, Professor Hruz's own university entirely disavows his notional expertise in the field (https://t.co/bEV2wtt4BG) but that did not stop the Divisional Court from placing considerable reliance on it.
There is a lot more to say about Professor Hruz but let me move on to the sixth in alphabetical order, Professor Stephen Levine (whose evidence was also relied on by the Divisional Court).
Stephen Levine has given evidence for the ADF.

As the ADF puts it here: "aggressive pro-abortion and LGBT activists aren’t just targeting churches and creative professionals. They’re also targeting our children—and they’re lying about it" (https://t.co/I3lIwrXkw2).
The seventh was Professor Patrick Parkinson.

He is a Professor of the University of Queensland. So far as I can see, his evidence should not have been before the Divisional Court at all but nevertheless it was.
According to this report (https://t.co/cd0jTdWsuQ) "Parkinson compared transgender people to the coronavirus, declaring it an 'epidemic.' Previously, he has... campaigned against LGBTQIA+ adoption and has ties to Freedom For Faith and The Australian Christian Lobby."
Parkinson has written in favour of conversion therapy https://t.co/f7trpOYGvo
He chairs or chaired the conservative think tank Freedom for Faith and was commission by the Australian Christian Lobby but stepped down from his role as head of the Law School. https://t.co/eobAtU88JS
Freedom for Faith were recently angered by a decision to stop LGBT conversion practices in Australian churches https://t.co/37LMspdeG7
The eight witness was Professor Sophie Scott. You can see her academic specialisation here https://t.co/kEJ0U5oJ14. Plainly she is an eminent academic but she does not claim any particular expertise on the question before the Divisional Court.
The final witness was Professor John Whitehall, Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health, Western Sydney University Medical School. Whitehall is another particularly interesting individual.
You can read about Whitehall here.

He has admitted that that, in 50 years in medicine, he has never treated a child for gender-related issues and has (or had) published no papers to do with gender dysphoria or trans healthcare. https://t.co/v9PD1VGLZg
Whitehall was listed as a speaker in support of gay conversion therapy for the Australian Christian Lobby. https://t.co/CdxibDKR3m
He was Vice-President of the US-based Christian Anti-Communism Crusade https://t.co/smlpcbXHAW
He was former Deputy Present of the Christian Democratic Party whose is Fred Nile. Nile has said homosexuality is a “mental disorder” and is “immoral, unnatural and abnormal.”
Summing up on John Whitehall, he has multiple links to right-wing, anti-LGBT, anti-abortion and anti-trans groups.
These are the people whose evidence Ms Bell's lawyer placed before the Divisional Court, and at least some of which influenced it in the decision it made.

However, the Court shamefully refused to hear from any trans voices. It rejected (at least) three would be interventions.
Even if you do not care to listen to the views of the trans community you should be deeply alarmed that these or some of these highly marginal figures in world medicine are influencing the law around healthcare for children in the UK.
And if you do not care about the trans community - but you do care about abortion rights or gay rights - you should be deeply alarmed at the influence those who are no friends of 'progressives' are gaining in the UK.
If you'd like to support our efforts to protect perhaps the most vulnerable community in the country from the attentions of the US Religious Right (shamefully propped up by some who call themselves progressive) you can do so here. https://t.co/75Zjv7MQJi

More from Jo Maugham

Jo Maugham
Jo Maugham
@JolyonMaugham
From time to time, indeed quite a lot, I receive letters from Pestfix's lawyers who boast of acting for the world's leading tech companies (and a pest control specialist with last reported net assets of £18k but now engorged with profits from £350m of PPE contracts).

Sometimes I have to send those letters off to lawyers acting for @GoodLawProject who charge quite a lot of money (we might now be well into five figures) to advise me on the various ways to tell Pestfix's lawyers to sling their hook.

What I find especially crappy about this is that Pestfix doesn't like its actions being in the public domain. Their letters are marked "private and confidential" to try and stop me telling you they are using profits from public contracts to muzzle my work.

And if I do tell you, they complain to the court that it is my actions that lead to public opprobrium being heaped upon them. For my part, I tend to think it is mostly their actions.

Anyway. I mention this by way of precusor to observing that the NAO has quietly made some changes to their report about, inter alia, the £350m in PPE contracts won by a small pest control specialist in Littlehampton that got into the VIP channel for reasons no one can explain.
LAWER
Jo Maugham
Jo Maugham
@JolyonMaugham
The High Court gave us 'permission' to bring some of our judicial review arguments in relation to the Government's odd PPE contracts. We are today asking again for permission to bring the others. You can read our (remarkable) Skeleton and Statement here.

We chose these three contracts (Clandeboye/Ayanda/Pestfix) in June/July when we had much less understanding than we do now about what was going on. Once you appreciate that fact, what we have already uncovered (before disclosure) about those three is all the more remarkable.

Let me just focus on one aspect of those contracts: the quality of the product supplied by those companies (respectively, a confectionery wholesaler, a 'family office', and a pest control specialist).

And, rather than me editorialising, let me quote the words of those companies themselves, or Government, or Government agencies.

This is what Government says about what we bought from Clandeboye (we spent a total of £108m on gowns).

But how can they not be cleared for use as gowns? And yet be "authorised for distribution... as part of the PPE ensemble"? It doesn't sound like what we got was gowns.
LAW
Advertisement
Jo Maugham
Jo Maugham
@JolyonMaugham
So, just before Christmas, Government what it called a "response" to this New York Times account of cronyism in pandemic spending.

And I said, when that "response" - which you can read here https://t.co/gLEJzuqoAx - was published that every single notional rebuttal by Government of a claim made by the New York Times was false, misleading or both.

And it's time for me to make good.

Here's the first "rebuttal" by Government to the New York Times' claim that: "The government handed out thousands of contracts to fight the virus, some of them in a secretive V.I.P. lane."


A number of points might be made.

(1) Government cannot say the NYT got it wrong. (2) the NAO found the VIP lane (later renamed the high-priority lane) "sat alongside" the normal lane. And I have shown elsewhere VIP contracts were handled by different teams all the way through.


(3) Although Govt says "offers of support raised by Opposition MPs were dealt with expeditiously" the NAO report does not record any referrals made by an Opposition MP leading to a contract - and the Government response telling does not say any did.
GOVERNMENT
Jo Maugham
Jo Maugham
@JolyonMaugham
We at @GoodLawProject have a paralegal attending the case management hearing in the Tavistock's appeal in the Bell case on behalf of our trans defence fund. Occasional updates from them as the hearing progresses...

The 'stay' - effectively a suspension of the legal effect of the first instance decision - will continue. That has been agreed between the parties.

Judge doesn't want oral submissions from any of the would-be intervenors at the case management hearing. (I wouldn't read anything in to that.)

Tavistock supports the intervention by @stonewalluk, @BrookCharity, @TheEndoSociety and @Genderintell, is neutral on those from @libertyhq and @TheBMA and opposes those from Transgender Trend and Dr Bell and a 'parents' group'.

Counsel for Bell opposes - I hope I have that right - the joint intervention.
LAW
Jo Maugham QC
Jo Maugham QC
@JolyonMaugham
If you want to know what happens to populations living in austerity who trade with the US on WTO terms, take a look at Tonga. THREAD

I visited Tonga in 1981 and it was, like so many other Pacific Island nations, slowly adjusting to Westernisation. The people ate mostly fish and vegetables. /1

Now it has rates of Type 2 diabetes of up to 40%, life expectancy has fallen by 10 years and well over half the population is obese. So what happened? (stats https://t.co/1XQHdqL8o8) /2

What happened was that the US discovered that Tonga was a great dumping ground for a cheap and locally unsaleable product known as a Turkey 'tail', essentially a gland of 40-45% fat. /3

They were fatty and, because cheap, attractive to a poor population. By 2007, in another Pacific Island nation, Samoa, 20 kilos per person were being sold every year. But it banned them for public health reasons. https://t.co/2f1N8tuMp6 /4
ALL

More from Law

JillHole-less in Seattle
JillHole-less in Seatt...
@NallyBud
The One Spirit of God is the very definition of good (order, righteousness, fullness of completion). During creation, God called things as 'good' as the sequence of creation occured. God centered things always follow proper sequencing.

A Blessed2Teach (B2T) team drafted & filed this Court of Heaven document as accepted following several weeks of preparation to draft and implement it's proper order. The B2T team filed this document sometime in mid-to late- afternoon of Dec 18th.

The B2T team recreated the original filing of this Court of Heaven as notice (legal term) and recorded & shown here in early January before electoral college votes were certified.

At the time when the B2T team was filing this Court of Heaven document, a servant of God, Amanda Grace, had been given a Word from God near midday of the 18th. The word given her she later published that day after tending to her husband in the hospital.

Because prophecy precedes action/activity, the sequence & filing of the Court of Heaven document is confirmed as accepted. On December 19th, servant Amanda Grace was given another word from God.
LAW
Abd\u2019Allah Lateef
Abd’Allah Lateef
@AbdAllahLateef1
Five years ago this week in a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court declared that its prior 2012 ruling in Miller v. Alabama applied retroactively, thereby requiring that hundreds of former life-sentenced children like myself be resentenced.

I recall that day being one of subdued jubilation tempered by cautious optimism, having absolutely no confidence in how the sentencing judge or the parole board would respond to this High Court mandate. Would I be given an opportunity to live a meaningful life…

...or would I be condemned to prison for the rest of my life? Terrifying questions that had no immediate answers.

On June 27, 2017, I was resentenced to a term of 30-to-life. Following a successful parole hearing in August, on October 10, 2017, after being disappeared from society for over three decades, I walked out of prison on parole for life.

Sadly, in the four-year interim between the Miller and Montgomery decisions, my mother lost her battle with cancer. She was my last surviving (immediate) family member. For me, the Montgomery decision serves as a painfully cruel reminder that “justice delayed, is justice denied.”
LAW
Advertisement
Tashny Sukumaran
Tashny Sukumaran
@tashny
Surendra Ananth @surendraananth, you violated my conditional consent. I assented to unprotected intimate relations with you on the STRICT condition that you tell me if you have relations with anyone else. You failed to do so, and I became ill as a direct consequence.

You refused to reveal your own STI results to me, but claimed to others they were negative and alleged I had multiple other partners, slut-shaming me. You gaslit me saying you had told me about your other partners.

You called up @justice_sisters and @SistersinIslam to tell them I was crazy, jilted. You rebuffed attempts to organise a community mediation so we could address matters. You said I was crazy for speaking to your boss and father in an attempt to keep other women safe.

You have a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR of misogyny, harassment and sheer disrespect for women. This was sent to a friend of mine who has never expressed interest in you and has a partner.


You think women are playthings, notches on the bedpost. You, @surendraananth, are no human rights advocate.
LAW
Rebecca Vincent
Rebecca Vincent
@rebecca_vincent
I’ve often said that nothing is normal about Julian Assange’s case. Here’s my list of the top 10 least normal aspects, strictly on the logistical side of monitoring the extradition proceedings (this is not to mention the many substantive issues that are also far from normal).

1. The judge’s stubbornly persistent refusal to acknowledge that NGO observers are professionals and have an important role to play (separate to that of the general public) in ensuring open justice, and refusal to grant us access to be able to do our jobs properly.

2. The constantly shifting goal posts in gaining access to the public gallery, and arbitrary restrictions on numbers in all 3 courts where proceedings have been held. On any given day, it’s impossible to predict how many will be let in and when, necessitating very early queuing.

3. Receiving conflicting information from the court about remote access, including being accredited to the Cloud Video Platform and then having that access revoked in September. The same thing seems to have happened to us again for 4th January.

4. After unbelievable difficulty getting in, what we actually observed was a small screen on the other side of a large room. It was often impossible to tell who was who, and I could only follow properly as I had the lawyers’ voices memorised from February (when I could see them).
LAW
Absurdistwords
Absurdistwords
@absurdistwords
Pretty much every professional field EXCEPT police have clear, rigorous, transparent consequences for unethical behavior, negligence and malpractice.


The idea that we can "disbar" lawyers but not police is absolute foolishness.

All the factors that make disbarment a necessary tool for lawyers apply to cops... except that cops don't need to be qualified in the first place.

It is a rank absurdity of the criminal justice system that one needs to be educated and certified with a degree in order to argue on behalf of someone's life in court, but to have no qualifications necessary to detain, assault, or prematurely end that same life.

There are countless circumstances in which a lawyer's unethical behavior will result in them not only losing their job but never being able to practice it again.

But corrupt and murderous cops can be rehired indefinitely.

A lawyer's entire career can be ended forever if they were found to have knowingly put someone on a stand to lie.

Police officers however are allowed to lie in court on the stand under oath.

So much that lawyers aren't penalized for putting cops on the stand to lie.
LAW

You May Also Like

Anu Satheesh
Anu Satheesh
@AnuSatheesh5
Guruvayur Sri Krishna & Coconut with Horns.
#Krishnaleela
#Bhakthi
🕉
We’ve all grown up listening to stories of Shri Krishna. This one is a famous story of Shri Krishna in Guruvayur Temple, also called Dakshina Dwaraka.


There lived a villager who planted coconut saplings and had promised that he would offer the 'first coconut' from each of his coconut trees to "Guruvayurappan". When the trees started to yield coconuts, he collected the first coconut from all the trees in a sack 👇


and set forth to Guruvayur.

On the way he was stopped by a robber who asked all the items in the sack. The villager told the robber that the coconuts in the sack belonged to Guruvayurappan and so he was unable to hand it over.
@SriramKannan77 @Jayalko1


The robber with anger asked the villager "Is Guruvaurappan's coconut any different? Does it have horns ?".
Saying so the robber pulled the sack forcefully out of the villager's hand, and coconuts came out..👇


To their astonishment each and every coconut in the sack had horns! Even today, the coconut with horns are displayed in the temple for devotees to see.

Below Picture is not original, as we cannot take photos inside temple.
Hare Krishna
Guruvayurappa
🕉🕉🕉🕉🕉
Shubham
ALL
Julien \U0001f332
Julien 🌲
@julien
1/ there is this sense when you are young that your accomplishments need to be a list of things that seem impressive to others. A list of several items you did.

This isn't actually right, so here is another suggestion.

2/ I remember being 26 and writing about reading 52 books a year. I wrote blog posts about it. They got copied. It became "a thing." Now it's in Twitter bios. It looks impressive but it's insanely useless and I shouldn't have done it.

3/ what I should have known at that time is that only young idiots like myself, with no accomplishments, find list of tiny achievements impressive. Anyone who has actually done anything of substance doesn't gaf

4/ what is actually difficult, and worthwhile, instead is to do ONE single thing for a very, very long time. It's much harder and much rarer and results in outlier outcomes much more often.

Of course you can find this out too late if you are chasing the dragon of Ted talks etc

5/ if I had only worked on a startup for a year, I would've gotten nowhere, the same way that if you lift for 3 months, it achieves nothing. Everything good in life comes from perseverance, but at the beginning, you're just like "I need to be somebody!!!"
LIFE
Advertisement
Ryan Caldbeck
Ryan Caldbeck
@ryan_caldbeck
1/ I am seeing more and more founder secondary in venture rounds (Secondary = founders selling some of their shares before some other shareholders are able). Series B-D. I see both as an investor and through entrepreneur circles.

2/ I like secondary for entrepreneurs. Moderation is key but in a lot of situations I think it helps accelerate the co. Lots of very smart investors disagree. Here are my thoughts.

3/ Magnitude: My basic rule of thumb from what I see is market is 4+ yrs and up to 10% of founder’s equity stake with some $ cap that makes sense given stage etc. (typically <$10m)

4/ The entrepreneurial journey is brutally hard. Giving some financial relief helps remove one piece of pressure. I don’t think that secondary in the magnitude mentioned impacts the drive/persistence of great entrepreneurs.

5/ That secondary means they will be able to just sleep knowing they can pay their kids’ tuition. Secondary will make most founders better at their jobs, thus accelerating the co.
ALL
Enigma
Enigma
@ainittomai
The Eye of Horus. 1/*


I believe that @ripple_crippler and @looP_rM311_7211 are the same person. I know, nobody believes that. 2/*

Today I want to prove that Mr Pool smile faces mean XRP and price increase. In Ripple_Crippler, previous to Mr Pool existence, smile faces were frequent. They were very similar to the ones Mr Pool posts. The eyes also were usually a couple of "x", in fact, XRP logo. 3/*


The smile XRP-eyed face also appears related to the Moon. XRP going to the Moon. 4/*


And smile XRP-eyed faces also appear related to Egypt. In particular, to the Eye of Horus. https://t.co/i4rRzuQ0gZ 5/*
CULTURE
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
1/People I know on the Right tend to be obsessed with the idea of "crimethink", taboos, and the (supposedly) oppressive, omnipresent enforcement of liberal cultural norms.

Why?

My new theory: A lot of it is guilt.

2/It's true that in some circles - the media, universities, many big corporations - liberal norms *are* enforced to some degree, and the enforcement has probably gotten stronger in recent years.

But I don't think this explains all of the Right's obsession.

3/The stereotype is that people on the Right tend to be more threat-sensitive. That would help explain the perception that liberal norm-enforcers are lurking everywhere, ready to pounce and anathematize anyone who makes a misstep.

But I don't think that's all of it either.

4/And of course, it's always fun - whether you're on the Right or the Left, or playing a video game, or whatever - to style yourself as the brave iconoclastic rebel fighting against the oppressive forces of blah blah blah.

But I don't think this is all of it, either.

5/The reason I think it's more than these things is that even *in private*, people on the Right express their "crimethink" ideas very gingerly and hesitantly.

I get the sense that they're not just afraid of external censure, but have also internalized liberal norms.
SOCIETY