Hayden is well known as a vexatious litigant. He has complained to Police or tried to sue at least 20 people over the last several years. He loses almost every time (or it least, I have found only one instance of him being successful).
It is abundantly clear that Hayden uses frivolous lawsuits to try to silence critics
https://grift.watch/stephanie-hayden/
When I attempted to speak to the defendants in the various legal claims that Hayden has issued over the years on the record, many refused, stating that Hayden is a “nightmare”, that Hayden has “overshadowed” their life for several years, and that they could do without the stress and worry given, in their view, Hayden’s “vexatious and malicious” litigation against them and the fear that Hayden would somehow re-enter their lives and attempt to litigate against them again. They would only give limited unattributed quotes about their experiences.
This person needs to be stopped. I am astonished that he has not been issued with a Civil Restraint Order.
Farrow and Hayden have been exchanging unpleasantries for several years. Hayden is a snowflake and he was butthurt and triggered because Farrow says he's not a woman. Hayden also accused Farrow of calling him a paedophile (which he is) and accused Farrow of doxxing him (apparently by posting an image of letter from his legal firm that had his business address in plain view) That post was removed within a few minutes, but Hayden must be so obsessed with Farrow that he has notifications come up every time Farrow posts something.
As for the doxxing this could have been a mistake (this seems likely as Farrow removed the tweet almost straight away). There is also an argument that this wasn't doxxing anyway, since Hayden is a lawyer, and his business address is already in the public square.
The Farrow case is not the first time that Hayden has managed to get the Police to do his bidding.
https://jonathanturley.org/2019/04/...-to-transgender-activist-by-her-prior-gender/
One case highlights how such speech codes have turned courts into micromanagers of manners and language used by citizens in public. It began with a mother, Kate Scottow, being arrested in front of her children for the crime of referring to a transgender woman as a man online. The alleged victim, transgender activist Stephanie Hayden, has now charged that she is being denied free speech after being accused of trolling on the Internet.
Three officers came to the house to take Scottow to the police station under suspicion of “deadnaming,” or using the prior name or gender of a transexual person.
But, but, but, gender critical speech is protected in the UK, isn't it?
The mother of an autistic ten-year-old daughter and 20-month-old son, Scottow was held for seven hours and her phone and computers were seized after a complaint by Stephanie Hayden. Hayden accused Scottow of a “campaign of targeted harassment” due to her ‘status as a transgender woman.” The basis was an exchange online where Scottow is accused of “toxic” and “defamatory” language, including referring to Hayden as a male in a debate over self-identification. Scottow insisted that she merely expressing her genuine belief that a person “cannot practically speaking change sex.” However, Deputy Judge Jason Coppel QC issued an injunction against her from making such statements, including “referencing [to Hayden’ as a man” or linking her to her “former male identity.”
Anyone still believe there aren't gender-ideology captured judges in the UK?
