Search results

Perhaps. But this was a court with rules on what's allowed into evidence. And frankly my sense is that the QMUL lawyers were pretty stupid and not on top of things. Without knowing details that are not available to us, all we can take from the court hearing is that the court saw no evidence of...

Chris was referring to both, as I read it. I took the reference to "previously unknown video evidence" or whatever the phrase was to be a reference to Valerie's posts. I completely understand having a discussion about whether the approach Valerie suggests is the right approach. I assume she...

Wessely was not a party to the tribunal hearing. The tribunal found no evidence for the PACE authors claims of threats. It said nothing about anyone else, so it is irrelevant to the question.

Good questions. But I think unfortunately they will likely remain unanswered. In cases like this, there are likely good reasons for confidentiality. There are also issues of lawyer-client privilege which might be coming into play. It has only "re-emerged" now because Valerie wrote about it...

I'm only talking about the Wessely tape that Valerie wrote about. I'm not talking about any of the other alleged threats. In some cases you might want to keep information private for safety, or you might be advised by the police to do so. I have no knowledge of any of this stuff. But I trust...

Why make the assumption the police were not called in? Sometimes these things happen quietly and charges are not pursued for any number of reasons.

I have read @Valerie Eliot Smith's recent posts. Valerie has been an incredible help to me over the last 3+ years. Despite her poor health, she vetted multiple versions of my initial 15,000-word investigation and multiple posts afterwards. She has been scrupulous in advising me on what kinds of...

Ha! I chuckled when it popped out. I considered briefly whether using that word could somehow be construed as "harassment" and then I figured I wouldn't stoop to their level of ridiculousness.

Exactly. The use of the letter seems to be wrong in any event. It's possible some of the studies do qualify as service evaluation. Some of them absolutely do not. I do not actually expect this investigation to be a white-wash. There is no way a panel whose work is being watched could maintain...

This was not the case. And for all I know there are more of them. I know of 11.

Also, to be clear--when/if the piece runs, it's not clear how much is about me and how much is about the community and not about me. So we'll just have to wait and see.

Thinking about things is fine. But the problem with preparing a response is that that people are all ready to go with the response because it's ready rather than because it fits the circumstances.

I am the only person who should even remotely be thinking about doing anything else preemptively. NO ONE ELSE MUST DO ANYTHING AT THE MOMENT--NOTHING. I cannot emphasize this strongly enough.

My understanding is that these Thursday debates almost never get covered. I think it would be a mistake to automatically assume that it was not covered because it's about ME. I mean, that certainly wouldn't help. But we don't know that's why. It's just as likely because it was a Thursday...

When the article appears, I will obviously consider the appropriate response. As part of that, I will consider whether and how to involve Berkeley folks and other scientists/academics.

This was in the works long before the debate. The story was delayed for other reasons. The coincidence in timing is just that--a coincidence.

Absolutely not. This is not a good idea in any way, shape or form. No one should do anything at all. And when it comes out, any response must be temperate and well-thought-out. I would urge everyone not to be reactive and possibly not to do anything at all even after the article comes out.

I expect and hope people will be extremely temperate in their responses.

I found it interesting that this seemed to be phrased as if I'd made some sort of shameful admission.

You mean is that right for healthy people? Severe deonditioning can has serious impacts--that's what is "undoubtedly true." But this has nothing to do with ME, so it is irrelevant information.