Nasty bullies strike again

Ruth Pearce

I owe a debt of gratitude to Prof Alice Sullivan for raising awareness that one of the people invited to give evidence to the Women and Equalities Commons Select Committee, as part of their Inquiry into proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act, is one Ruth Pearce who, the day after I was assaulted by three male trans activists, tweeted this.

I was aware of this tweet at the time and included it in my original account of the assault.

(Note that the intended recipient Of Pearce’s tweet was Ada Cable who played no small part in the hate campaign against me.)

When I saw Alice’s tweet I decided to contact the Committee directly to complain about Pearce’s inclusion. Only then did I check Pearce’s Twitter timeline for any more tweets and I was horrified to discover this thread. This tweet in particular stands out.

In my email to the Chair of the Committee – Caroline Nokes, MP – on 17 December last year, I said that:

This is sheer invention and is disproven by the video footage, all of which remains in the public domain. The judge at the trial of my assailant specifically pointed out that there was no evidence of my having put anyone in a headlock or any of the other allegations of violence made against me by trans activists seeking to minimise this violent attack by trans-identifying males and attempting to put the blame for it on me. I consider this negatively impacts on Dr Pearce’s credibility as a witness and would ask that you bring this matter to the attention of all Committee members.

Yesterday I sent a further email to the Committee saying this:

Further to my email of 17 November 2019,  I am dismayed to see that Dr Ruth Pearce’s submission contains further untruths about the assault case on me. I have today posted the following comment on Dr Pearce’s blog directly and request that you bring it to the attention of the Committee.

“In your written evidence you include these unreferenced comments about the case in which a trans activist was convicted of assaulting me: “The judge, in that case, noted that Wolf had been provoked but argued her reaction was disproportionate. Wolf declined the option to launch a counter-case as offered by the police.” The judge did not use the word ‘provoked’. He referred to “the unhelpful way in which the victim was present [at the protest] and the way she was filming.” This was based on the uncorroborated testimony of four defence witnesses who lied and their testimony is in fact given the lie by all the video footage which I have collated here.

Your second sentence is a complete fabrication – please correct it. In fact, Tara Wolf and my two other assailants tried to hide from the police resulting in their issuing appeals to the press. There was never any question of the police offering a “counter-case”. If you are in any doubt about this then I suggest you contact DC Bruce Weatherill at Charing Cross police station quoting crime reference number 6544865/17 to get confirmation. Your attempts to misrepresent what happened to me do not reflect well on you and I will be contacting the Committee Chair directly about this as well as publishing the content of this comment on my own website.”

According to the official Guidance on giving evidence to a Select Committee of the House of Commons – UK Parliament:

You should always be honest in the evidence you send to a committee. Deliberately misleading a committee is a serious matter and can amount to what is called a contempt of the House of Commons. If you mislead a committee, you could be investigated by the Committee of Privileges. Don’t worry if you make a mistake in your evidence. If you reliase you’ve made a mistake, tell us as soon as you can.

Of course, I am not for a moment suggesting Ruth Pearce is deliberately lying. Rather that he is simply repeating what he has heard without checking.

These people never seem to learn that whenever I see anyone promoting blatant falsehoods about me or what happened to me, I am going to call them out and publicise their behaviour as widely as possible. That is one reason why many of them are desperate to shut me up and even wish me dead. The other reason is that they know they don’t have a hope in hell of defeating me or any other gender-critical feminist using reason and evidence. Trans activists – by which, as I have said repeatedly, I mean those who promote gender ideology and not all trans people or even all those fighting discrimination – are misogynists and abusers.


Laurel Uziell

At a future date I will tell the whole story about the man who has posted so many defamatory comments about me I ended up reporting him to the police but in the meantime, while I’m on the subject of nasty trans activist bullies, allow me to give an honourable mention to Laurel Uziell, who was one of those who bore false witness in defence of my violent male assailant, Tara Flik Wolf – the man who is now hoping I’ll die of Covid-19.

Uziell’s second book of poetry – entitled “The two genders are YES and NO, so you stutter or else shut up forever” – was published last year. From this blog, we learn that Uziell has included in his book, this account:

Between 2017-2018 I was involved in a trial with a group of TERFs after a scuffle emerged during a counter protest against a ‘debate’ about sex-based rights in light of proposed reforms to the Gender Recognition Act which would have made trans people’s lives marginally easier. Luckily I wasn’t actually in the dock, but I appeared to give evidence, and for everyone involved it was a humiliating ordeal as we were doxxed, harrassed online and in real life, while the relentless media campaign which ensued took a toll on the entire trans community.

Yes, I remember him being humiliated in the witness box. I remember my husband whispering to me, as we watched from the public gallery, that he had totally discredited himself. Counsel for the prosecution had calmly and comprehensively exposed the bulk of his testimony to be false and did the same for the three other defence witnesses. Most of what they said was easily contradicted by the video evidence. The only part for which there was no evidence whatsoever was their concocted story that I had been going around abusing people and filming them and that they had asked me to stop. The reason none of them filmed me behaving in this manner – as one might reasonably have expected at least some of them to do – was that it simply didn’t happen. Laurel Uziell lied through his teeth and so did the other three. And yet DJ Kenneth Grant – who is the main criminal in this case as far as I’m concerned – chose to believe them. He clearly took against me when I pointed out that the man in the dock was male to explain my difficulty in remembering to refer to him as ‘she’.

I take Uziell’s claim to have been “doxxed and harassed” with a pinch of salt. Having chosen to give false testimony in defence of a woman-beater, thereby putting their names in the public domain, did he really expect they would be able to walk away from the devastation they caused without any comeback? If by “doxxed and harassed” he means I have named and shamed them on this blog and in youtube videos – and I believe that is what he means as I have found no evidence of anything else – perhaps he’d like to swap lives with me? Then he’d learn the meaning of the word “harassment”.

Of course, I don’t expect Uziell to ever admit to having committed perjury alongside his three fellow defence witnesses. I don’t expect him to have looked deep into his poetic soul in search of that modicum of human decency and empathy that would have enabled him to predict the effect their unsupportable claims in the witness box would have on me and my life as someone who’d done nothing to him or anyone else nor the lives of my loved ones.  I don’t expect him to have watched the videos that expose the lot of them as liars.

But nor would I have expected him to compound the offence by writing about it in a book, claiming victim status for himself and the other offenders, any more than I would have expected Ruth Pearce to have blithely submitted false evidence to a parliamentary committee about an incident that had nothing to do with him.


Tara Flik Wolf

Nor, for that matter, would I have expected Tara Flik Wolf who, by the way, still deludes himself that he is a ‘terfslayer’ even though he’s done more than most to damage the cause of trans rights, to continue public posting vile misogynist comments about feminists. This is a recent comment from the brave lady warrior himself, a follow-up to his previous comment about JKR which I blogged here.

Every time I think they can’t go any lower, they step up to the crease and prove me wrong.

That is trans activism.


Published 23.01.21

To receive email notifications of future blogs at Peakers Corner, please subscribe. See top of right-hand column.

I am permanently banned from Twitter so please also follow and share announcements by the  @trans_peak Twitter account (run by my husband).

And check out my youtube channel here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Peakers’ Corner blog post tags
Subscribe to Peakers' Corner Blog

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new blog posts by email.

Help support this website!

Peak Trans