Tuller/ Trial By Error: Hey Bristol, Where Is My Cease and Desist Letter?

Cheshire

Cheshire

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Earlier today, I e-mailed the following letter to Sue Paterson, University of Bristol’s Director of Legal Services, to clarify whether or not I had been sent a cease and desist letter (to cease and desist what, exactly?). Professor Esther Crawley made this claim at her public talk last Friday. I have never received any such letter. I cc’d the office of the university’s vice-chancellor, Professor Hugh Brady.
Click to expand...

http://www.virology.ws/2017/11/22/trial-by-error-hey-bristol-where-is-my-cease-and-desist-letter/
 
It is high time Bristol University took this seriously.
They really need to dig deep into the quality of her research and the claims she makes in her talks about the epidemiology and treatment of ME in children.
And they need to dig deep into her claims of harassment and the story she is telling about it at all her many lectures, rather than taking her at her word.
 
PR companies are not interested in the truth. Their mission is branding and thus spin.
I have zero doubt she uses a PR consultant at this point; it also appears
she spontaneously generates "alternative facts" when under pressure. I'm very grateful Mr Tuller
is keeping the pressure on, despite her insistence on painting this as harassment.

I am so very tired of truth-tellers being made out to be villains for pointing out a corrupt narrative.
It seems we are in a dawning era of truth right now, and more power to the brave souls who are standing up to
the web of lies in all domains.
 
Alvin said:
They may write one today, back date it and claim it was sent to him.
They already appear to lie to protect her so its not unlikely they will do the same again to save their own hides.
Click to expand...

It would be a serious thing for a legal department to do this. I could be wrong but I don't think a legal practitioner would put their own professional standing at risk for EC.
 
Alvin said:
They may write one today, back date it and claim it was sent to him.
They already appear to lie to protect her so its not unlikely they will do the same again to save their own hides.
Click to expand...
I'd be amazed if this happens.
Institutions don't send legal letters unrecorded, there would be a paper or electronic trail.

I'm sure they've just taken her at her word in the past, she's a very competent liar and does vulnerable damsel in distress very effectively. Now that there is irrefutable evidence that she's been economical with the truth they won't be able to defend her.
 
I dunno.....they're British.....defending the indefensible is kinda what we do, and are famous historically for. ;)

(Think 1 man with a blunt orange defending a position, (5 thousand miles away from even a tea lady let alone backup) from 3 million heavily beweaponed locals, who may be slightly aggrieved about the British stealing, well, everything (and the nails).

Of course he's massacred, instantly, but for some reason, he's seen as a hero and not as a total dingbat, coz we is British.)
 
Last edited:
Alvin said:
They may write one today, back date it and claim it was sent to him.
Click to expand...
Very unlikely I'd say. Someone was caught doing that at the firm of solicitors I worked at 27 years ago and were fired instantly. Any lawyer who does that is risking their job. Which individual lawyer at Bristol University is going to sign their name to a back-dated letter to save Crawley?
 
TiredSam said:
Very unlikely I'd say. Someone was caught doing that at the firm of solicitors I worked at 27 years ago and were fired instantly. Any lawyer who does that is risking their job. Which individual lawyer at Bristol University is going to sign their name to a back-dated letter to save Crawley?
Click to expand...
I hope none would do it but my experience has been some people will stoop to the lowest levels to accomplish their goals. As someone once said its only illegal if you get caught.
I hope there are paper trails if they lie to cover for her, makes them look even worse being caught lying yet again. As you've mentioned it does happen.
Never assume your lying adversary (or her agents) are acting in good faith, as the old saying goes trust but verify. Only a fool has blind trust, trust is earned, not given away.
 
Last edited:
In the comments is a link to the current UK Libel Laws

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25551640

Journalists, scientists and academics have faced unfair legal threats for fairly criticising a company, person or product in the past, the Ministry of Justice said, "It said the Act would provide "clearer, better protection for people publicly expressing opinions"
Click to expand...

Some key points include:

*"New serious harm threshold" aimed at helping people to understand when claims should be brought and discourage wasteful use of court time

*Protection for scientists and academics publishing peer-reviewed material in scientific and academic journals

*Protection for those publishing material on a matter of public interest where they reasonably believe that it is in the public interest

*Introduction of a new process aimed at helping potential victims of defamation online, by resolving the dispute directly with the person who has posted the statement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom