good job bbc! finally a spin that shows Peggy in the light that fucking ghoul deserves.
The “aggressive and confrontational” way a nurse spoke to a trans doctor in a dispute over access to changing rooms was behaviour not deserving of Equality Act protection, an employment tribunal has heard.
Jane Russell KC said Sandie Peggie’s decision to confront Dr Beth Upton in a changing room on Christmas Eve 2023 was made out of “anger, not fear”, and that the nurse had extremist views.
The comments came on the second day of closing submissions at the tribunal, which began in February.
Ms Peggie was suspended from her job at a Kirkcaldy hospital by NHS Fife following the Christmas Eve encounter. She then took the health board and Dr Upton – a transgender woman – to a tribunal.
The nurse claimed sharing changing rooms with Dr Upton at the Victoria Hospital amounted to unlawful harassment under the Equality Act 2010.
However Ms Russell, in her closing submission, said some of the comments made by Ms Peggie “went far beyond being unreasonable or inaccurate” and therefore should not be given protection under the Equality Act.
The KC stated remarks referencing the trans rapist Isla Bryson – the content of which has been disputed by both parties – were particularly offensive.
She said: “The claimants behaviour in confronting the young doctor in a professional setting in such a way and so unpleasantly is behaviour that ought not to be served protection of the Equality Act.
“We need to recognise that people come in all shapes and sizes and meet those differences with kindness and understanding, rather than as the claimant unfortunately did with judgement and hostility.”
An interesting shift in acceptable BBC perspective. I wonder if there are rumblings that the horrible nurse isn’t going to sweep this as easily as supporters have claimed and they’re trying to get ahead of that.
The lawyer for Peggy is a heinous bigot on the board of Sex Matters, which should have automatically been grounds for conflict of interest, and I wonder/would hope she has taken it too far with the way she described Upton as a torturer/potential rapist.
Fingers crossed the amendment is accepted 🤞
**Edit: the amendment is hugely important!**
> Both legal teams also clashed over whether to allow an amendment application from Ms Russell.
> This would allow NHS Fife and Dr Upton’s legal team to use as a defence that Ms Peggie is entitled to her views but not in the changing room or in the manner in which she expressed them.
Ever since the Forstarter case where it was ruled that being transphobic is a “protected belief”, bigots have been trying to warp that into “acting on transphobia, even in a professional setting, is acceptable behaviour”.
You can be a professional and you can have private beliefs about trans people, people of a certain race, whatever – if you ACT on those beliefs to discriminate, harass and bully someone who is marginalised, that should be an entirely different kettle of fish.
No witnesses to Upton/Peggie conversation, so this is the NHS lawyer doing her best to make a case on what might have been said.
Shame they didn’t include the judge asking the NHS lawyer what sex Dr Upton was and if she’d like to consult with her client on that point (lawyer declined to answer).
So we have our next right wing talking head then?
Shooglie peggie knicker checker no patient safety on her record
I am SO sick of seeing and hearing about bloody Peggie.
>Both legal teams also clashed over whether to allow an amendment application from Ms Russell.
>This would allow NHS Fife and Dr Upton’s legal team to use as a defence that Ms Peggie is entitled to her views but not in the changing room or in the manner in which she expressed them.
>Ms Cunningham said were this to be allowed the tribunal would need to meet again in October and potentially call witnesses – including Ms Peggie – again.
>Judge Sandy Kemp ruled that the panel would need to research the matter but could not provide a timeframe for a final decision.
This practically asking for a do over of the case?
Our defence has failed so we’d like to utterly change it, accepting that SP is perfectly entitled to her views but just not in the one place they are most important and she must express them in a way that we find acceptable. This is absurd.
It’s like saying that Ukraine can be a free independent country except you can’t say that in Ukraine or Russia and that you have to phrase it *Ukraine can be a free member of the Ukraine-Russia collective subject to all the rules of the collective* much like it was as Soviet republic in the Soviet Union.
Is any other protected view subject to limits on where & how? Would it be acceptable to say that an atheist must profess a belief to be sworn in as a witness? Or a vegan be sanctioned because they refused to go for an interview at an abtouir?
Bullies don’t need protection there victims do and she is clearly bully attacking a DR way above her station because they were trans. When we know the real problem is male labour MSP in toilets with cameras
Should the closing arguments be presented in this way anyone glancing at the article or the title to this thread would think it fact
It’s worth noting that at 11:20 last night the Respondents’ legal team sent a request to amend the grounds of their defence to include ‘objectionable manifestation’, which is to say that the *manner* of SP’s actions (though they don’t specify particular interactions) was so egregious that it provides the Respondents with a defence for their responses to her.
The Claimants’ counsel’s response was to point out that this was not brought out in the Respondents’ counsel’s examination of witnesses and, not being a stated part of their legal pleadings, SP’s counsel did not structure their own examination to counter objectionable manifestation.
My understanding is that the panel of judges were unable to come to a fast decision on how this change should be handled (I think they have the power to reject the amendment). It’s possible that this could lead to a recall of witnesses and further examination.
It’s despicable that JR asked for an amendment at the eleventh hour. NHS Fife and the Dr have twisted and turned every which way to try and cover their arse. They see they are loosing the battle so try to take the hearing a completely different way to stitch up the nurse.
The Dr needs to be shows the door and so do all the consultants that have said they don’t know what sex is. I’m sure all those consultants on 200k a year know exactly what sex is but are so entrenched in their middle class bubble that they couldn’t possibly support a nurse.
Why don’t NHS Fife call the witnesses they needed and why not show his phone records?
The board need shown the door.
Human Rights are for everyone though. Without that principle, they are worthless.
Lines are being drawn. Pay attention bigots.
I have nothing to say about the incident itself but I like how the word “cosplay” has emerged from its niche fandom origins to become a word in general usage for all kinds of situations.
This is absurd, entirely arbitrary. It’s what you get from not having a written constitution.
Wholly sick of hearing about this.
Fascinating how all it takes is the BBC to quote the defence’s submission (read: not a verdict) and suddenly a bunch of commenters are acting like journalism has done a Hail Mary and victory is nigh over all the wrongdoers ever.
You don’t need to be desperate. Just let the case play out.
Im very glad i live nowhere near this hospital, bc being a turkish muslim and mentally ill to boot, sandra peggie would probably be a genuine danger to my health, as unfortunately many nurses near me have been (though i am now properly medicated, so the nhs hates me less now). The woman is an actual danger to lgbt and bame patients, and needs to be booted tf out of the nhs amd nursing for good
I think it’s blindingly obvious from the way she’s conducted herself, the people she’s surrounded herself with and the “jokes” and opinions she and her immediate family have shared online that this nurse is just your typical bigot.
It’s not hard to not be a dick and SP has shown herself to be a spiteful bully acting on prejudice at every step.
“an employment tribunal has heard” is the second half of the headline.
It hasn’t agreed that is the case.
This is a fantastic summary of who Sandie Peggie clearly is: a bitter and angry racist, bigot and bully. The fact that people like JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry et al cheer her on is disgusting beyond all belief
Racist cow shouldn’t be a nurse on the racism alone let alone the transphobia.
Throw the book at her, don’t need people like that in the NHS.
😂😂😂
It’s telling from following this case that NHS Fife only cared about racism when it suited them.
It ignored all her comments, including in the workplace, until it brought them out to justify a white transwoman using the women’s CR.
Absolute cess pit all round to be honest. Glad I don’t live in Fife.
27 comments
good job bbc! finally a spin that shows Peggy in the light that fucking ghoul deserves.
The “aggressive and confrontational” way a nurse spoke to a trans doctor in a dispute over access to changing rooms was behaviour not deserving of Equality Act protection, an employment tribunal has heard.
Jane Russell KC said Sandie Peggie’s decision to confront Dr Beth Upton in a changing room on Christmas Eve 2023 was made out of “anger, not fear”, and that the nurse had extremist views.
The comments came on the second day of closing submissions at the tribunal, which began in February.
Ms Peggie was suspended from her job at a Kirkcaldy hospital by NHS Fife following the Christmas Eve encounter. She then took the health board and Dr Upton – a transgender woman – to a tribunal.
The nurse claimed sharing changing rooms with Dr Upton at the Victoria Hospital amounted to unlawful harassment under the Equality Act 2010.
However Ms Russell, in her closing submission, said some of the comments made by Ms Peggie “went far beyond being unreasonable or inaccurate” and therefore should not be given protection under the Equality Act.
The KC stated remarks referencing the trans rapist Isla Bryson – the content of which has been disputed by both parties – were particularly offensive.
She said: “The claimants behaviour in confronting the young doctor in a professional setting in such a way and so unpleasantly is behaviour that ought not to be served protection of the Equality Act.
“We need to recognise that people come in all shapes and sizes and meet those differences with kindness and understanding, rather than as the claimant unfortunately did with judgement and hostility.”
An interesting shift in acceptable BBC perspective. I wonder if there are rumblings that the horrible nurse isn’t going to sweep this as easily as supporters have claimed and they’re trying to get ahead of that.
The lawyer for Peggy is a heinous bigot on the board of Sex Matters, which should have automatically been grounds for conflict of interest, and I wonder/would hope she has taken it too far with the way she described Upton as a torturer/potential rapist.
Fingers crossed the amendment is accepted 🤞
**Edit: the amendment is hugely important!**
> Both legal teams also clashed over whether to allow an amendment application from Ms Russell.
> This would allow NHS Fife and Dr Upton’s legal team to use as a defence that Ms Peggie is entitled to her views but not in the changing room or in the manner in which she expressed them.
Ever since the Forstarter case where it was ruled that being transphobic is a “protected belief”, bigots have been trying to warp that into “acting on transphobia, even in a professional setting, is acceptable behaviour”.
You can be a professional and you can have private beliefs about trans people, people of a certain race, whatever – if you ACT on those beliefs to discriminate, harass and bully someone who is marginalised, that should be an entirely different kettle of fish.
No witnesses to Upton/Peggie conversation, so this is the NHS lawyer doing her best to make a case on what might have been said.
Shame they didn’t include the judge asking the NHS lawyer what sex Dr Upton was and if she’d like to consult with her client on that point (lawyer declined to answer).
So we have our next right wing talking head then?
Shooglie peggie knicker checker no patient safety on her record
I am SO sick of seeing and hearing about bloody Peggie.
>Both legal teams also clashed over whether to allow an amendment application from Ms Russell.
>This would allow NHS Fife and Dr Upton’s legal team to use as a defence that Ms Peggie is entitled to her views but not in the changing room or in the manner in which she expressed them.
>Ms Cunningham said were this to be allowed the tribunal would need to meet again in October and potentially call witnesses – including Ms Peggie – again.
>Judge Sandy Kemp ruled that the panel would need to research the matter but could not provide a timeframe for a final decision.
This practically asking for a do over of the case?
Our defence has failed so we’d like to utterly change it, accepting that SP is perfectly entitled to her views but just not in the one place they are most important and she must express them in a way that we find acceptable. This is absurd.
It’s like saying that Ukraine can be a free independent country except you can’t say that in Ukraine or Russia and that you have to phrase it *Ukraine can be a free member of the Ukraine-Russia collective subject to all the rules of the collective* much like it was as Soviet republic in the Soviet Union.
Is any other protected view subject to limits on where & how? Would it be acceptable to say that an atheist must profess a belief to be sworn in as a witness? Or a vegan be sanctioned because they refused to go for an interview at an abtouir?
Bullies don’t need protection there victims do and she is clearly bully attacking a DR way above her station because they were trans. When we know the real problem is male labour MSP in toilets with cameras
Should the closing arguments be presented in this way anyone glancing at the article or the title to this thread would think it fact
It’s worth noting that at 11:20 last night the Respondents’ legal team sent a request to amend the grounds of their defence to include ‘objectionable manifestation’, which is to say that the *manner* of SP’s actions (though they don’t specify particular interactions) was so egregious that it provides the Respondents with a defence for their responses to her.
The Claimants’ counsel’s response was to point out that this was not brought out in the Respondents’ counsel’s examination of witnesses and, not being a stated part of their legal pleadings, SP’s counsel did not structure their own examination to counter objectionable manifestation.
My understanding is that the panel of judges were unable to come to a fast decision on how this change should be handled (I think they have the power to reject the amendment). It’s possible that this could lead to a recall of witnesses and further examination.
It’s despicable that JR asked for an amendment at the eleventh hour. NHS Fife and the Dr have twisted and turned every which way to try and cover their arse. They see they are loosing the battle so try to take the hearing a completely different way to stitch up the nurse.
The Dr needs to be shows the door and so do all the consultants that have said they don’t know what sex is. I’m sure all those consultants on 200k a year know exactly what sex is but are so entrenched in their middle class bubble that they couldn’t possibly support a nurse.
Why don’t NHS Fife call the witnesses they needed and why not show his phone records?
The board need shown the door.
Human Rights are for everyone though. Without that principle, they are worthless.
Lines are being drawn. Pay attention bigots.
I have nothing to say about the incident itself but I like how the word “cosplay” has emerged from its niche fandom origins to become a word in general usage for all kinds of situations.
This is absurd, entirely arbitrary. It’s what you get from not having a written constitution.
Wholly sick of hearing about this.
Fascinating how all it takes is the BBC to quote the defence’s submission (read: not a verdict) and suddenly a bunch of commenters are acting like journalism has done a Hail Mary and victory is nigh over all the wrongdoers ever.
You don’t need to be desperate. Just let the case play out.
Im very glad i live nowhere near this hospital, bc being a turkish muslim and mentally ill to boot, sandra peggie would probably be a genuine danger to my health, as unfortunately many nurses near me have been (though i am now properly medicated, so the nhs hates me less now). The woman is an actual danger to lgbt and bame patients, and needs to be booted tf out of the nhs amd nursing for good
I think it’s blindingly obvious from the way she’s conducted herself, the people she’s surrounded herself with and the “jokes” and opinions she and her immediate family have shared online that this nurse is just your typical bigot.
It’s not hard to not be a dick and SP has shown herself to be a spiteful bully acting on prejudice at every step.
“an employment tribunal has heard” is the second half of the headline.
It hasn’t agreed that is the case.
This is a fantastic summary of who Sandie Peggie clearly is: a bitter and angry racist, bigot and bully. The fact that people like JK Rowling, Joanna Cherry et al cheer her on is disgusting beyond all belief
Racist cow shouldn’t be a nurse on the racism alone let alone the transphobia.
Throw the book at her, don’t need people like that in the NHS.
😂😂😂
It’s telling from following this case that NHS Fife only cared about racism when it suited them.
It ignored all her comments, including in the workplace, until it brought them out to justify a white transwoman using the women’s CR.
Absolute cess pit all round to be honest. Glad I don’t live in Fife.
Alexa what is an echo chamber?
Hah. Suck it, TERFs.
Comments are closed.