#MeToo #metooindia @mjakbar
Delhi court starts hearing MJ Akbar's defamation case against Priya Ramani.
Sr. Adv. Rebecca John begins submissions for Ramani.
#MeToo #metooindia @mjakbar
Continues showing case documents.
John: Only the first four paras of the article referred to Akbar, rest of the article was about male bosses in general.
#MeToo @mjakbar
John: This is self-evident. The portions of the article in inverted commas are from articles written in America by American authors, which is why they are in inverted commas. They've nothing to do with Akbar.
Judge: Has he made complaints against others also?
John: No, he has only picked out Ramani, and he admits he was aware of others also.
His wife, on the other hand stated that, Pallavi's flaunting the relationship publicly threatened to destroy their family- which he admitted.
#MeToo #MJAkbar #PriyaRamani
#MJAkbar #MeToo
More from Live Law
More from Law
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).
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.
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).
In this thread, I noted the lawyer acting against the Tavistock, Paul Conrathe, is using very similar arguments (those under 18 cannot consent at all; or cannot lawfully consent without x conditions) as he has run/is running in a number of cases challenging abortion rights. https://t.co/gJk4c9bUED
— Jo Maugham (@JolyonMaugham) June 21, 2020
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.
