Nigel Scott

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

[Bev Jackson @BevJacksonAuth]

It’s good to hear that NHS staff are no longer to be allowed to wear political symbols and badges at work. This should include Pride lanyards and “progress” badges, which are also politically polarizing - and not “inclusive” of those who know that sexual orientation is based on biological sex.

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Welcome clarity on what sex means in law.

[Liberal Voices @LiberalVoicesUK]

Now on Liberal Voices - what the Supreme Court ruling means https://t.co/weyvz2KKv8

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

The CPS has questions to answer in its handling of the Lucy Letby case.

[Margot @MargotDA33]

The article below claims that

"A source within the CCRC indicated that the review process could take 'years, not months' due to the complexity and volume of the original case materials."

It also claims that -

"Any potential discussions around bail are currently hindered by the stance of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which has indicated it will oppose any such applications, grounded in the previously assessed evidence that led to her convictions."

These are serious allegations. Should they be either confirmed or denied?

Might there not, otherwise, be a risk, first, that the CCRC risks being seen as failing to see the forest for the trees?

And second, that the CPS might be seen to be knowingly denying the known evidence of potential flaws in the original evidence? (Eg. as in the Court of Appeal's finding of 'inconsistencies' in the evidence that convicted Lucy Letby in the Baby K case).

https://t.co/su7VRxoMp9

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

@HJoyceGender Does this mean that NHS staff should no longer wear Pride lanyards? NHS staff should be banned from wearing pro-Palestinian badges, report recommends - BBC News https://t.co/x9eTV0ZlG3

[Artur Nadolny @ArturNadol7566]

NHS BUILT A SECRET OPERATION AGAINST ITS OWN CEO FOR REPORTING BULLYING

Dr Susan Gilby spent 32 years in the NHS. She became CEO of the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2018, a month after Lucy Letby was arrested, and steered it through a pandemic. She then reported the board chair for bullying. That was her mistake, apparently.

Chair Ian Haythornthwaite and three other senior figures quietly launched what they called Project Countess. Its goal was to remove her.

They purged hundreds of messages and documents to cover their tracks.

One of the Trust's directors took her to the pub and told her it was time for her to go.

He added that if she didn't agree to leave, they would start a process against her. Nobody told her what that process would be.

A tribunal judge found the Trust had built a sham case against Dr Gilby, manufacturing the appearance of performance and misconduct allegations, aimed at engineering her dismissal.

Staff at the Trust then accessed her work accounts while she was suspended and deleted tranches of emails.

Some of those emails were relevant to the Thirlwall Inquiry into Lucy Letby's crimes.

She was also offered a payout in return for silence. She called it utterly shocking and refused.

She was eventually awarded £1.4 million in damages, one of the largest payments the NHS has ever made to a former employee.

The total bill to the taxpayer, including court costs, is estimated at around £3 million. The Trust had refused multiple offers to settle the case earlier.

The Trust still refused to issue an apology.

The @thebma called it a landmark case and said whistleblower protections are woefully inadequate and not fit for purpose.

Dr Gilby said she feels sad, not triumphant. Sad for her career. Sad for her colleagues. Sad that it took this long for the truth to be told.

She went on record warning that sham investigations are routinely used to silence NHS whistleblowers. The Countess of Chester case just put a £3 million price tag on that fact. And nobody in charge has said sorry.

Sources: @thebma @BBCNews @ITV

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Now on Liberal Voices - Michael Meadowcroft - a tribute https://t.co/lfLipfl64o

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

@LibVoice4Women @Wandywild @LibDemWomen It must be difficult for @LibDemWomen - trying to claim that they care about women's rights, while they campaign to abolish them.

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Just the facts, painful as they may be for some people.

[Emma Harriet Nicholson @Baroness_Nichol]

A big Trades Union seems ignorant on Employment Law

[ukvillafan @ukvillafan]

I am no longer surprised at the degree of intellectual vacuity contained in your posts, but this one is especially worthy of comment.

“We have a responsibility to our trans constituents to resist it.”

Actually, you have a responsibility to your female constituents to fully support it. Yjis is because it is a code of conduct specifically written to assist in the effective implementation of settled law.

“The Code will exclude trans people from services and facilities that they have long used without issue ”

The Code will do no such thing. This statement is either a deliberate lie or a further example of legislative incompetence. Both explanations are probably in play here.

Trans people are not ‘excluded’ from any services. They are specifically included in all services provided based on their birth sex. There isn’t a single-sex service that trans people are excluded from.

If a trans individual has previously used services designated for the opposite sex, they have done so in contravention of the law, in which single-sex services have always been segregated by reference to biological sex. It is the responsibility of the trans individuals concerned, and those who have been advising them erroneously; if they have been acting unlawfully.

It is false to claim that these historical abuses of single-sex spaces has passed ‘without issue’. There are countless examples of detriment to women and girls and a long history of trans infiltration being challenged.

There is no evidence that using correct-sex facilities will make trans individuals more likely to be the victims of violence.

Trans individuals will not be ‘pushed out of public life’ as they have the right to access public facilities appropriate to their sex.

“It ushers in an era of enforced segregation for trans people.”

This is another lie. Any ‘segregation’ that occurs is a) the result of the proper interpretation of the Equality Act and b) based on the material reality of sex. It only requires any ‘enforcement’ due to the insistence of, in particular, trans identifying men that they are entitled to ignore the law, transgress women’s boundaries and infiltrate female spaves for the purpose of validating their identities and exercising their fetishes.\

”The Code represents a profound rollback of rights,”

This is also a lie. No ‘rights’ have been ‘rolled back’. The Code implements the law as clarified in the For Women Scotland Case, which found that it has ALWAYS been the law that single-sex spaces are segregated by biological sex, meaning that it has never been a ‘right’ for a male person (whatever his ‘identity’) to invae and colonise female spaces.

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

How should we meet our future energy requirements? Kayed Al- Haddad has a plan.

[Liberal Voices @LiberalVoicesUK]

Now on Liberal Voices - energy policy. https://t.co/P4CvFLp6Kx

[Jade Blue @jadeblueLDN]

A rape case was dropped 13 days before trial.

Years later, an independent review found it should have gone ahead.

But by then, it was too late.

Here's why that matters.

A woman reported a rape.

Three and a half years later, she was preparing for trial.

Then the CPS dropped the case.

The reason? A sexsomnia defence.

The case would never be heard by a jury.

Most people thought that was the end.

It wasn't.

She requested a Victim's Right to Review.

An independent Chief Crown Prosecutor reviewed the decision.

The conclusion was extraordinary.

The case should never have been dropped.

In fact, the review found it was more likely than not that a jury would have convicted.

But there was a devastating problem.

The CPS had already offered no evidence in court.

Double jeopardy meant the case could never be reopened.

The decision was found to be wrong.

The outcome could not be changed.

So she sued the CPS.

The CPS apologised.

They paid damages.

They changed policy.

And today, there is a pilot scheme that gives victims an option for a review before rape cases are dropped.

That woman was me.

My case can't be put back before a jury.

But others shouldn't have to hear that a case should have gone to trial only after it's too late to do anything about it.

That's why I'm campaigning for victims to have a review before cases are dropped.

And for the current pilot to become permanent.

Not after.

When it's too late.

#RightToBeReviewed #VictimsRights #JusticeMatters

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

@JournalismSEEN @charlesworth102 On heavily contested pages, Wikipedia is a contest between highly partisan obsessives. This is not the way to arrive at truth. Wikipedia: where truth dies online - spiked https://t.co/IOyFpxqiWJ

[Artur Nadolny @ArturNadol7566]

SHE REPORTED RAPE AT WORK

Jan Cruickshank (@LittleJanhere) came to me this week with her story and a file of evidence she has spent years building. What she went through is one of the most shocking workplace cover-ups I have come across.

Jan worked as an apprenticeships officer at the Construction Industry Training Board @CITB_UK. Shortly after she started, a male colleague began subjecting her to sexual harassment that lasted over three years.

Explicit texts. Exposing himself to her at a hotel. Sending her an indecent photograph. A phone call during which he committed a sexual act while she was on the line.

In March 2015, at a conference in a Highland hotel, he came to her room and raped her.

Jan reported him. CITB believed his version instead. He claimed they had been having a consensual affair for three years and that Jan was hitting back because he had ended it. He was put on gardening leave for one week. Then he came back. He was also allowed to continue visiting schools while the investigation was ongoing.

CITB then launched a campaign to remove Jan from the business entirely. Two separate internal whistleblowers later confirmed this was deliberate. CITB's own legal team had calculated that a trial would cost them seriously.

So they chose to destroy her credibility instead. An HR investigation was initiated with the outcome already decided before it concluded. Jan was eventually sacked. The stated reason was misuse of company time by having an affair.

Her criminal case was dropped after @PoliceScotland were told by CITB that the relationship had been consensual. That lie closed the case.

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority looked at the evidence independently and reached a completely different conclusion. They awarded Jan compensation as a victim of serious sexual assault.

Jan took CITB to an employment tribunal. They offered her 15k pounds. She refused. She eventually settled for 60k pounds and refused to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

She said there was never any way she was going to agree to be gagged.

In November 2024, SNP MP Seamus Logan @SeamusLoganMP raised her case in the @HouseofCommons. He told Parliament that Jan had been pressured into a settlement far below what she was owed and that the man she accused was never held to account.

CITB responded with one line saying the matter was settled and they had nothing further to add..

A tribunal ruling recently reported as thrown out with no prospect of success has since been overturned. That decision has not yet reached the press.

Jan is now represented by well know to some of us John Robertson, the same investigator who stood beside Glenn Cottingham Smith before his death and who is currently fighting for my friend John Galajsza in his case against Barclays.

Jan asked herself one question:

"How did a woman who reported sexual misconduct at work end up spending the next decade fighting to defend her own reputation and reclaim a life that was stolen from her."

She was not broken. She documented everything. She refused the gag. She is still standing.

If this story made your stomach turn, share it. Jan has been fighting this alone for ten years.

The least we can do is make sure the right people see it. If you believe cover-ups like this should have consequences, put this in front of your network.

One share might reach the person who finally makes the difference.

Let's help her to be heard!

Sources: @Daily_Record Dec 2018 | @CNplus Nov 2024 | @BylineTimes Aug 2024

[SEEN in Journalism @JournalismSEEN]

‘Civil war has broken out in the LibDems after Sir Ed Davey pledged to oppose official guidance protecting female-only spaces’

Extensive quotes from @hollowood_zoe from @LibVoice4Women in @Telegraph

@Daniel_J_Martin

‘Lib Dems at loggerheads’

https://t.co/sS1DhIOfIq

[Liberal Voice for Women @LibVoice4Women]

Thank you @Daniel_J_Martin. "Sir Ed’s statement drew stinging criticism from Dr Zoe Hollowood.
“Polling consistently shows that Lib Dem voters and members believe single-sex spaces should be protected based on biological sex,” she said. “Ignoring this reality is a betrayal to women everywhere, including in our own party.”" https://t.co/tyVccyqnOL

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Does @EdwardJDavey read any of the statements that go out in his name? Has he handed over the operation of his brain to a third party?

[Sarah Ludford 🇬🇧 🇮🇪🇪🇺 🇺🇦 @SarahLudford]

To say I am upset & bewildered that the leader of my party @EdwardJDavey - who last year said ‘we’ - the @libdems - ‘entirely accept’ the SC judgment - has now put his name to this nonsense is the understatement of the year.
Totally contradictory.
Massively disappointing.

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Abuse is no substitute for rational debate.

[Liberal Voices @LiberalVoicesUK]

Now on Liberal Voices - is intelligent debate dead? https://t.co/KRGBOpVvNL

[Give A Shit About Nature @giveashitnature]

A bricklayer in East Yorkshire has spent 35 years putting up barn owl nest boxes on weekends. This year, the region saw 308 owlets hatch.

His name is Robert Salter. He's 56 and does bricklaying full time. In 1990, he saw a piece on the news about a man in Lincolnshire installing barn owl boxes, and decided he'd do the same. He started with five.

He now has more than 350 boxes scattered across fields, farms, outbuildings, and trees in East Yorkshire. Every June, he takes four weeks off from bricklaying and visits them with his wife Sue. Scrambling up ladders, ringing chicks, cleaning boxes, repairing the ones the weather got to. He's a licensed bird ringer for the British Trust for Ornithology.

In 2024, the region ringed 95 owlets. In 2025, the count was 308. The Barn Owl Trust says that nationally, this year was "pretty poor" for barn owl breeding, but east Yorkshire is the exception, and it's the exception because of one man with a ladder.

The barn owl population in the UK was estimated at 4,000 pairs in the mid-2000s and crashed to roughly 1,000 by the early 2010s. The species is still recovering.

Most of conservation is one person who refuses to give up.

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Welfare spending continues to grow. What can be done?

[Liberal Voices @LiberalVoicesUK]

Now on Liberal Voices - welfare reform. https://t.co/tuJ4R4ir3K

[Nigel Scott @LibSubversive]

Surprisingly, or not, the @LibDems have the lowest women's involvement of the main parties.

[Liberal Voices @LiberalVoicesUK]

Now on Liberal Voices - is the party anti women? https://t.co/vRC9YGeh7w