• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Crawley lied: No harassment reports (Bristol University)

Demepivo

Dolores Abernathy
Messages
411
Last edited:

Demepivo

Dolores Abernathy
Messages
411
Conclusion The 2016 tribunal appeal Judgement ordering QMUL to release the PACE trial data, which had found, in the Judge’s words, no threats have been made either to researchers or participants, taken together with this new information that Bristol University have no reports of harassment of University staff by a third party between September 2010 and January 2017 raises questions about such accusations and about those who make them.
 

GreyOwl

Dx: strong belief system, avoidance, hypervigilant
Messages
266
"...raises questions about such accusations and about those who make them".

Delusional, paranoid, convinced of their own power or divinity. I'm sure there is a psych diagnosis that covers all those.
 

Jenny TipsforME

Senior Member
Messages
1,184
Location
Bristol
Is it possible it was something before Sept 2010? Was that the month SMILE was announced? I’m thinking the month SMILE funding was announced would have been the likely time this happened, if it did ever happen.

Obviously pre 2010 and then no harassment would be so old it isn’t appropriate content to use to slur patients in 2017, but trying to get a sense of if there’s any plausible explanation. Most things coming from BPS crowd/SMC seem to be spun in an unusual interpretation rather than being provable outright lies.
 

Mithriel

Senior Member
Messages
690
Location
Scotland
EC classes the disdain we have for her research as harassment. She thinks that petitions to stop her research is harassment and contacting ethics committees or Barnardos or the NSPCC about her work because we think it is a form of child abuse is harassment.

So there is a lot of it about.
 

ukxmrv

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Location
London
The ME organizations should put a
Difamation and character damage law suit. Is not about the law suit but a light to the lies of
This women and invite all press to bring all the psy shananigans to the
Light

There is no law in the UK that covers defamation of a group of disabled people. I tried for a year to get a "human rights" lawyer interested
 

RogerBlack

Senior Member
Messages
902
There is no law in the UK that covers defamation of a group of disabled people. I tried for a year to get a "human rights" lawyer interested
As a general point, the law on the UK on disability that might sort-of-apply is in three categories - none of which apply.
Judicial review - A review of a decision of a public body (none involved).
Disability hate crime - any crime, due to hating the disabled, or a group of them. (no specific crime has occurred).
Libel/slander - while this is a criminal offence, proving it is hard, and the lie told must be both knowing, provably untrue and of a specific person causing them damage.

Then there is the more general non-criminal sanction against a doctor - 'bringing the profession into disrepute' - this is where the doctors registration body in the UK agrees that the actions fell so far short of what is expected of a doctor in public life that they are no longer fit to practice.

The first three don't apply, as the narrow category each accepts does not apply in the case of someone making arguably incorrect speeches.

The last is extremely problematic and probably practically impossible unless you can get a sympathetic review board, and this seems unlikely at the moment.
 

Seven7

Seven
Messages
3,444
Location
USA
Libel/slander - while this is a criminal offence, proving it is hard, and the lie told must be both knowing, provably untrue and of a specific person causing them dama
How is this one hard to prove? We have slides and public account of she saying she was threaten. and we have the court determination that no threats were done, Also the inquiry proving so.
 

ukxmrv

Senior Member
Messages
4,413
Location
London
How is this one hard to prove? We have slides and public account of she saying she was threaten. and we have the court determination that no threats were done, Also the inquiry proving so.

You need to be specif about what law you think she is breaking.

The UK defamation and libel laws are for individuals and not groups of disabled people i.e. one can slander an individual but not a disabled group as that is not an offence
 

Deepwater

Senior Member
Messages
208
I don't think we need to go to law - we have enough for a successful counter-campaign.

Wessely has also been unable or unwilling to prove his repeated claims of death threats. As Prof Malcolm Hooper observed some years ago, if any threats had been reported to the police documentary proof would exist as Crime Reference numbers would have been raised :-
http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Wesselys-Words-Revisited.htm