JP v OU Missed tweets from afternoon of 10/10/23
[Tweets from the beginning of Tuesday afternoon, 10/10/2023 that would not send on Twitter/X in a thread. They were screenshotted and retyped after the session.]
[Tribunal started. Late to connect]
IF: I gave DD advice. It was regarded primarily as an Essex affair.
BC: Look at one email here. 8th Dec 2019, 3 days after cancellation someone called Graham Black, who was that?
IF: In comms team.
BC: He emails you a link to a story in Daily Mail about cancellation and will you keep an eye on it? Jo hasn’t said much on Twitter. You say thanks and are aware of cancellation.
IF: Jo alerted me
BC: flurry of emails on Fri but there was nothing for you to do but manage staff in faculty?
IF: yes
BC: You couldn’t condemn what had happened to her bc of ongoing issues with staff?
IF: I wouldn’t be able to judge (missed)
BC: but you could condemn pretty robustly?
IF: potentially but that’d require us being certain what had happened.
BC: You could certainly say you support our academic’s right to express these views?
(Pause)
BC: is the reason bc of ongoing staff issues?
IF: I identified nothing major occuring so nothing for us to do.
BC: having a talk cancelled bc of a view is major isn’t it?
IF: yes
BC: what you mean is, it hasn’t kicked off with emotional emails to you?
IF: Yes probably
BC: and you’re trying to avoid that happening?
IF: That’s certainly part of it.
BC: it’s not a criticism of you and I understand the position you were in. You were treading the line to make your life easier.
IF: I don’t like the way you put that.
[End of tweets before deleting thread and started again as noted in the session]