Tag: lawsuits

Counsellor wins £70,000 after ‘trans heresy hunt’ at rape charity

A trauma specialist has been awarded almost £70,000 and won a public apology from the rape crisis charity who forced her out of her job in a row over women-only spaces.

The payment to Roz Adams was twice the anticipated figure and came after a tribunal found she was the victim of a “heresy hunt” at Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (ERCC), where her “sex realist” beliefs were at odds with those of Mridul Wadhwa, the trans activist who was the centre’s chief executive.

Adams suffered harassment after she stood up for a female victim who wanted assurances she would receive counselling from a woman, with Wadhwa identified as the “invisible hand” behind the counsellor’s persecution.

For 16 months under Wadhwa, who identifies as a trans woman but has no gender recognition certificate, the ERCC had no women-only spaces. Referrals to the centre have been paused while its safeguarding procedures are revamped.

In his remedy ruling, Ian McFatridge, the judge, ordered the centre to publish a statement and to refer survivors of sexual assault to Beira’s Place, the women’s refuge established by the author JK Rowling as an alternative source of support for female victims of sexual violence.

The ERCC has been ordered to apologise publicly to Adams for alleging that she was transphobic and acknowledge that there was no evidence to support the allegation and that its disciplinary action against her was wrong.

The centre is also required to acknowledge Adams “was motivated by a wish to act in the best interests of service users when she questioned how to respond to the service user” and that nothing the counsellor did constituted bullying or harassment.

Keep reading

RNC poll watchers allowed into Georgia county buildings, lawsuit still pending

Republican National Committee poll watchers have now been allowed into the buildings in Georgia counties necessary to observe the election process, according to Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley. 

“Following our pressure campaign, our poll watchers have now been let into the building in all four Georgia counties,” Whatley wrote on the social media platform, X on Saturday. “Our lawsuit over the offices remaining open is still pending, but we have eyes in the room as votes are being counted. We will continue our aggressive efforts to enforce Georgia law and protect the vote.”

Whatley announced earlier that the election integrity wing of the RNC had filed a lawsuit against counties in Georgia. 

“Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb, and Gwinnett counties decided at the last minute to accept ballots over the weekend — which disregards the law,” Whatley wrote on the social media platform, X.

“They have also failed to let our poll observers in to watch the process,” he added. “The Secretary of State has issued guidance to allow Republican poll watchers in but local officials REFUSE. Our election integrity operation has filed a lawsuit.”

Keep reading

‘Transgender’ Biological Man Sues Hooters for Refusing to Hire Him After He Was Banned from Restaurant

A “transgender” biological man who identifies as a woman has filed a lawsuit against Hooters for refusing to hire him — after he was already banned from the restaurant for sexually harassing waitresses.

The allegations in the lawsuit have caused leftist protesters to target the restaurant in Colonie, New York, twice.

“I’m suing Hooters for sex-based discrimination, on the basis of accommodation and on the basis of employment,” said Brandy Livingston, according to a report from News 10. “They would use male pronouns. They would refer to me as ‘he.’”

Livingston claims that the staff was also upset about his use of the women’s restroom.

“I overheard one of the servers after I left the restroom talking to one of the managers and said that, ‘Why are you allowing him in the women’s restroom?’ And the manager said, ‘Oh, I don’t like it any more than you do’,” he told News 10.

Despite repeated clashes with the staff, Livingston applied to work at the Hooters location three times.

“I said, do you want to see my experience or anything? Because I had previous jobs I had written down. And he said, “Oh, we don’t care about experience. We hire on the basis of personality. And there’s an image that needs to be met,” Livingston said.

Keep reading

Unmasking a Social Media Crackdown: NCLA Seeks Full Discovery on Government Censorship Tactics

The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) is pushing forward in Missouri v. Biden, aiming to uncover the depth of government-led censorship on social media. This legal action follows a June Supreme Court ruling that vacated a preliminary injunction in the case, previously known as Murthy v. Missouri, which barred officials from the White House, CDC, FBI, CISA, and the Surgeon General’s office from pressuring social media platforms to censor constitutionally protected speech.

NCLA’s clients, including prominent figures such as Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, and Aaron Kheriaty, as well as free speech advocate Jill Hines, allege that they were systematically blacklisted, shadow-banned, de-boosted, throttled, and even suspended across major social media platforms due to their viewpoints on Covid-19, public health, and government policies. NCLA claims this censorship campaign was orchestrated as part of a “whole-of-government” initiative that saw coordinated efforts across a dozen federal agencies, with direction from top White House officials.

We obtained a copy of this new filing for you here.

While the Supreme Court ruled that NCLA’s clients lacked the standing needed to sustain the preliminary injunction, the organization argues that this ruling does not spell an end to the lawsuit. According to NCLA, the standard for standing at the injunction stage is higher than what’s required to advance a case through its initial pleadings. The Alliance is seeking further discovery to show that government actions indeed stifled speech and violated the First Amendment—an assertion that Supreme Court Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch echoed in their partial dissent, in which they warned that the government’s actions raised “serious First Amendment concerns.”

Keep reading

Roman Polanski won’t face LA trial for ‘raping underage girl in 1973

Director Roman Polanski will no longer face trial in the US over the alleged rape of a 13-year-old girl more than 40 years ago.

The case against Polanski, 91, was due to proceed in civil court in Los Angeles next August, but has now been settled. 

The French-Polish director fled the United States decades ago after admitting to the statutory rape of another 13-year-old.

The latest case was ‘settled in the summer to the parties’ mutual satisfaction and has now been formally dismissed,’ Polanski’s attorney Alexander Rufus-Isaacs said.

The suit, filed last year, claimed Polanski took a then-teenager to dinner at a restaurant in Los Angeles in 1973.

He allegedly gave her tequila, and when she began to feel dizzy, drove her to his home, where he forced himself on her.

‘She told him: “Please don’t do this”,’ the plaintiff’s lawyer, Gloria Allred, told reporters in March.

‘She alleges that he ignored her pleas. She also alleges that defendant Polanski removed plaintiff’s clothes and he proceeded to sexually assault her, causing her tremendous physical, emotional pain and suffering.’

The plaintiff, known as Jane Doe, appeared with Allred at a news conference in 2017 in which she said she had been 16 at the time of the alleged assault.

She said she had spoken about what happened to one friend the day after but had not told anyone about it ever since. 

The civil suit, which sought unspecified damages, was filed in June 2023, just before the expiration of a California law that allowed for an extended window for claims against the alleged perpetrators of sexual crimes.

Court papers filed in California in July said a ‘conditional’ accord had been reached.

Keep reading

Bill Gates to Stand Trial in Netherlands in COVID Vaccine Injury Lawsuit

A Netherlands court last week ruled that Bill Gates can stand trial in the Netherlands, in a case involving seven people injured by COVID-19 vaccines.

According to Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, the seven “corona skeptics” sued Gates last year, along with former Dutch prime minister and newly appointed NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, and “several members” of the Dutch government’s COVID-19 “Outbreak Management Team.”

Other defendants include Albert Bourla, Ph.D., CEO of Pfizer, and the Dutch state.

“Because Bill Gates’ foundation was involved in combating the corona pandemic, he has also been summoned,” De Telegraaf reported.

According to Dutch independent news outlet Zebra Inspiratie, the plaintiffs allege that Gates, through his representatives, deliberately misled them about the safety of the COVID-19 shots, despite knowing “that these injections were not safe and effective.”

Dutch independent journalist Erica Krikke told The Defender that the seven plaintiffs — whose names are redacted in the lawsuit’s publicly available documents — “are ordinary Dutch people, and they have been jabbed and after the jabs they got sick.”

Krikke said that of the seven original plaintiffs, one has since died, leaving the other six plaintiffs to continue the lawsuit.

Keep reading

Gina Carano Scores Legal Victory as Judge Blocks Disney’s Appeal in Free Speech Battle

A California judge has ruled against Disney, denying its request to appeal a July decision that allows Gina Carano’s wrongful termination lawsuit to proceed. Additionally, the request to pause discovery during the appeal was also denied.

Gina Carano took to her social media platform, X, to announce the decision: “After the Judge DENIED Disney’s request to DISMISS my case, Disney requested permission to immediately appeal that decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and delay all discovery while that appeal takes place,” Carano posted. “Yesterday, October 16th, 2024, we learned that the Judge DENIED Disney’s unusual request.”

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

Keep reading

‘Reckless Disregard for the Truth’: Shareholders Sue Moderna for Misleading Investors on RSV Shot Efficacy

A group of shareholders is suing Moderna alleging the company knowingly inflated claims about the efficacy of its RSV vaccine for older adults. When the drugmaker later lowered expectations for the vaccine’s efficacy the stock price dropped precipitously.

A class-action lawsuit accuses Moderna of making “materially false and misleading statements” about the efficacy of its respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) shot, leading to significant damages for investors.

The lawsuit, filed Aug. 9 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, covers investors who owned or purchased Moderna stock between Jan. 18, 2023 — the day that Moderna announced that mRNA-1345, its candidate RSV vaccine, met primary efficacy endpoints in Phase 3 clinical trials — and June 25, 2024.

According to the lawsuit, Moderna misled investors by failing to disclose that “mRNA-1345 was less effective than Defendants had led investors to believe” and that “mRNA-1345’s clinical and/or commercial prospects were overstated.”

“As a result, the Company’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times,” the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit names Moderna and its key executives, including its CEO Stéphane Bancel, Chief Financial Officer James M. Mock and President Stephen Hoge, as defendants.

“Defendants acted with reckless disregard for the truth in that they failed or refused to ascertain and disclose such facts as would reveal the materially false and misleading nature of the statements made, although such facts were readily available to Defendants,” the lawsuit states.

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), told The Defender he is not surprised by allegations of fraud concerning Moderna.

“It is unfortunate that Moderna lied about the efficacy of the vaccine and misled investors,” Hooker said. But Hooker said the “bigger tragedy here is the lack of safety testing for modified mRNA products such as their RSV shot.”

Keep reading

RNC Scores Major Victory in Lawsuit Exposing Detroit’s Blatant Discrimination — Only 52 Republicans Hired Compared to Over 2,300 Democrats as Poll Workers

In a major win for election integrity, the Republican National Committee (RNC), the Michigan GOP, and Wayne County Republican leaders have successfully challenged the City of Detroit’s blatant disregard for state election laws.

This victory marks a crucial step toward ensuring fairness and transparency in Michigan’s electoral process, which was threatened by the city’s deliberate failure to hire a sufficient number of Republican poll workers.

The lawsuit, brought in August by the RNC, Michigan GOP, and Wayne County Republicans, exposed Detroit’s refusal to comply with Michigan law, which mandates a balanced hiring of election inspectors from both major political parties.

Instead, the city overwhelmingly favored Democratic poll workers, hiring an astonishing seven times more Democrats than Republicans. Out of 675 Republican nominees, only 52 were hired, compared to over 2,300 Democrats.

Keep reading

Free Speech on Trial: RFK Jr. Battles Biden Over Alleged Social Media Censorship

The Kennedy et al. v. Biden et al. lawsuit on Tuesday heard oral arguments presented by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Children’s Health Defense (CHD), who are suing the Biden-Harris administration, alleging its collusion with Big Tech to censor what should be protected online speech.

Listen to the oral arguments here.

Anthony Fauci is named as a defendant along with Biden, and they are accused of carrying out a systematic and concerted campaign in order to “compel the nation’s three largest social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech,” the filing states. The companies in question are Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

The legal battle is now taking place in the 5th Circuit US Court of Appeals, which is set to decide whether the case has standing to proceed – that is, whether the actions they are suing over have resulted in direct and concrete injuries that a court can redress.

Previously, as CHD General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg recalled, a lower court ruled that Kennedy and CHD – who brought the suit along with another plaintiff, Connie Sampognaro – had legal standing (while Sampognaro did not), and the court of appeals will now accept or reject that opinion.

Another consideration before the judges is the injunction by the Louisiana court, where the case was filed in the spring of last year, and whether to uphold it. If the 5th Circuit goes with the lower court’s position, the Biden-Harris White House’s “coordination” with social platforms will have to be put on hold pending the outcome of these proceedings.

Keep reading