Sean Matthews
@seanmatthews1.bsky.social
Irish-British computational mathematician/programmer.
Mostly in Mainz, Germany; sometimes in Westmeath, Ireland.
'A man may surely be allowed to take a glass of wine by his own fireside.'
Mostly in Mainz, Germany; sometimes in Westmeath, Ireland.
'A man may surely be allowed to take a glass of wine by his own fireside.'
I like the warm cosiness produced by what appears to be a single expanse of shiny white glazed tiles over the ground floor. Brings back sentimental memories of the cheaply renovated flats in 60s apartment blocks, around the corner from discount supermarkets, I remember from just out of uni.
December 12, 2025 at 10:40 AM
I like the warm cosiness produced by what appears to be a single expanse of shiny white glazed tiles over the ground floor. Brings back sentimental memories of the cheaply renovated flats in 60s apartment blocks, around the corner from discount supermarkets, I remember from just out of uni.
Remember a review in the FAZ of a biography - written supposedly by a physicist - of Bernhard Riemann, that did not seem to be aware that he is/was known as Bernard, and insisted on referring to him as Georg. It seemed also to be unaware of why anyone might care about Bernhard - or Georg.
December 11, 2025 at 10:47 PM
Remember a review in the FAZ of a biography - written supposedly by a physicist - of Bernhard Riemann, that did not seem to be aware that he is/was known as Bernard, and insisted on referring to him as Georg. It seemed also to be unaware of why anyone might care about Bernhard - or Georg.
Must get that. The OVSI, that is.
December 11, 2025 at 10:23 PM
Must get that. The OVSI, that is.
It is unusual to have to issue an amended text.
December 11, 2025 at 1:25 PM
It is unusual to have to issue an amended text.
First consequence already: 'a Judicial Office spokesperson confirmed [that] an amended version of the judgment is to be released shortly.'
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
EXCLUSIVE: Sandie Peggie NHS Fife tribunal judgment to be amended after bogus quote claims
"I know that judgment inside out, and I thought, those words are not there.”
www.thecourier.co.uk
December 11, 2025 at 1:21 PM
First consequence already: 'a Judicial Office spokesperson confirmed [that] an amended version of the judgment is to be released shortly.'
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
EXCLUSIVE: Sandie Peggie NHS Fife tribunal judgment to be amended after bogus quote claims
"I know that judgment inside out, and I thought, those words are not there.”
www.thecourier.co.uk
December 11, 2025 at 12:26 PM
First consequence already: 'a Judicial Office spokesperson confirmed [that] an amended version of the judgment is to be released shortly.'
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/5391...
I'm going to stop at this point.
December 11, 2025 at 9:23 AM
I'm going to stop at this point.
No - my point is that that the judgement makes a material misrepresentation of what the SC said. Whether Beth Upton has a GC or not does not come into it.
December 11, 2025 at 9:22 AM
No - my point is that that the judgement makes a material misrepresentation of what the SC said. Whether Beth Upton has a GC or not does not come into it.
It contains no independent assertion on the rights of trans women. It is makes a primary assertion A about the position of the Scottish government, and a secondary assertion B that observed facts C (about which it makes no legal assertion) do not impact assertion A.
December 11, 2025 at 9:15 AM
It contains no independent assertion on the rights of trans women. It is makes a primary assertion A about the position of the Scottish government, and a secondary assertion B that observed facts C (about which it makes no legal assertion) do not impact assertion A.
At this point I'm going to give up. It says that trans women might, as a matter of fact, use women's facilities, but the Scottish government do not suggest that trans women without a GC should be allowed to do so as a matter of legal right.
December 11, 2025 at 9:15 AM
At this point I'm going to give up. It says that trans women might, as a matter of fact, use women's facilities, but the Scottish government do not suggest that trans women without a GC should be allowed to do so as a matter of legal right.
No, I'm basing my assessment on the fact that I have a PhD training in logic.
December 11, 2025 at 9:03 AM
No, I'm basing my assessment on the fact that I have a PhD training in logic.
Peggie's lawyers say 'there are wrong assertions of law in this judgement: this is made up, this is made up, and this is a misrepresentation'. Nothing more needed. There are reportedly other serious problems with the judgement, can't comment on that, but miscitation is easily enough for appeal.
December 11, 2025 at 8:41 AM
Peggie's lawyers say 'there are wrong assertions of law in this judgement: this is made up, this is made up, and this is a misrepresentation'. Nothing more needed. There are reportedly other serious problems with the judgement, can't comment on that, but miscitation is easily enough for appeal.
The subordinate clause is _not_ an assertion - it is highlighting that a factual observation does not modify the content of the primary assertion.
December 11, 2025 at 8:35 AM
The subordinate clause is _not_ an assertion - it is highlighting that a factual observation does not modify the content of the primary assertion.
No they aren't. The primary assertion of the SC sentence is the main clause: 'Scottish ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is entitled to do [use women's facilities]'.
December 11, 2025 at 8:35 AM
No they aren't. The primary assertion of the SC sentence is the main clause: 'Scottish ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is entitled to do [use women's facilities]'.
The practical first instance consequence of the various errors is to make appeal very easy (the suspicion that the judge used an LLM to draft the decision would be addressed separately).
December 11, 2025 at 7:58 AM
The practical first instance consequence of the various errors is to make appeal very easy (the suspicion that the judge used an LLM to draft the decision would be addressed separately).
Apart from the fact that it deletes the distinction between trans women and women which is the core of the dispute, It quotes the subordinate clause without indicating that it _is_ a subordinate clause, and drops the main clause.
December 11, 2025 at 7:28 AM
Apart from the fact that it deletes the distinction between trans women and women which is the core of the dispute, It quotes the subordinate clause without indicating that it _is_ a subordinate clause, and drops the main clause.
Multiple errors of citation are _unusual_.
December 11, 2025 at 7:15 AM
Multiple errors of citation are _unusual_.
The SC actually wrote: '_although_ such _trans_ women may in practice choose to use female facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the dignity of other women users, the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is entitled do do so'.
December 11, 2025 at 7:12 AM
The SC actually wrote: '_although_ such _trans_ women may in practice choose to use female facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the dignity of other women users, the Scottish Ministers do not suggest that a trans woman without a GRC is entitled do do so'.
The judgment (803) quotes: 'such women may in practice choose to use the female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of other women users...'
December 11, 2025 at 7:12 AM
The judgment (803) quotes: 'such women may in practice choose to use the female-only facilities in a way which does not in fact compromise the privacy and dignity of other women users...'
Various KCs and academic lawyers very unimpressed.
December 10, 2025 at 10:30 PM
Various KCs and academic lawyers very unimpressed.
The SC is apparently materially misquoted (not fabricated). Statements from the Maya Forstater and Lee v. Asher judgements seem fabricated.
December 10, 2025 at 10:29 PM
The SC is apparently materially misquoted (not fabricated). Statements from the Maya Forstater and Lee v. Asher judgements seem fabricated.
Well, it seems the Peggie decision references fabricated and altered quotations from, among other sources, the supreme court. The legal commentary I was referring to isn't about the quality of the legal argument in the judgement, so much as whether, given that, it counts as legal argument at all.
December 10, 2025 at 9:35 PM
Well, it seems the Peggie decision references fabricated and altered quotations from, among other sources, the supreme court. The legal commentary I was referring to isn't about the quality of the legal argument in the judgement, so much as whether, given that, it counts as legal argument at all.
And as for legal opinions about the Peggie judgement...
December 10, 2025 at 8:51 PM
And as for legal opinions about the Peggie judgement...
he also said this:
December 10, 2025 at 7:55 PM
he also said this: