Dr Jessica Taylor #8 'Allo 'Allo - it's the tall poppy with the big boobies!

[wendyg13]

No, there is categorically no stalking protection order, that is an outrageous lie by Jessica.

Jessica tried to get a Stalking Protection Order put on Sally Ann. There was a court date last August for this but Sally Ann's lawyers contested the charge, and so it couldn't be settled in August. Instead, a date was agreed for a court hearing where the evidence from both sides would be heard. This was to be early this year, as I understand it.

The court did agree an Interim Protection Order, at that August date, pending the full court case.

This isn't just semantics, an interim order doesn't mean Sally Ann is guilty of anything, it's an emergency provision that can be put in place pending a proper court date. Jessica is telling an outright lie to say she Sally Ann has a Stalking Protection order.

However, the court case has now been dropped, because Jessica's legal team were unable to present evidence for it.
This will be why Jess and Jaimi are saying they can now talk about it - as there is no court case pending any more.

I don't know how long Sally Ann's interim protection order is for, I would imagine when the court date was meant to be, so I would guess she may still be silenced temporarily.

Jessica uses the courts and police to try to intimidate her critics into silence, and then when it doesn't work she lies about them.
She's a liar and a bully.

This is horrendous. Whipping up her gang into a frenzy of hatred against SA and others. Creating publicity for her book with so many lies.
How I wish people would realise, but I know they won’t and she’ll carry on being ‘victim’. How many ‘feminists’ and ex friends has she said have turned against her and are trolling her. It’s pretty obvious where the problem is. It’s interesting how it’s all ‘ they’re all hating on me for being amazing and successful’ but she mainly mentions Jaimi in the context of ‘people calling her thick’.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

This is horrendous. Whipping up her gang into a frenzy of hatred against SA and others. Creating publicity for her book with so many lies.
How I wish people would realise, but I know they won’t and she’ll carry on being ‘victim’. How many ‘feminists’ and ex friends has she said have turned against her and are trolling her. It’s pretty obvious where the problem is. It’s interesting how it’s all ‘ they’re all hating on me for being amazing and successful’ but she mainly mentions Jaimi in the context of ‘people calling her thick’.

Thick or an "airhead," "bimbo", "just like the Kardashians" (i.e. attractive trophy)

She'll be basking in the narc supply, sympathy, and attention. I really hope the truth will come out for the sake of Sally Ann and others she's maligned through the article (it's fairly obvious for instance that Julian is the person she's saying accused her of trafficking - that's a very serious allegation)

 

[Plasmatic]

New to this thread but find it very confusing that Jess is tweeting about going to see Bring Me The Horizon - the lead singer of this is well known for his mistreatment of women including urinating on a fan who rejected his advances. His ex-wife has also alleged abuse too.

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

It’s interesting how it’s all ‘ they’re all hating on me for being amazing and successful’ but she mainly mentions Jaimi in the context of ‘people calling her thick’.

This is similar how she claims people have insulted her by describing her as too attractive and feminine to be a lesbian: it actually functions as a backhanded compliment. To Jessica, that is, not Jaimi. People supposedly saying that Jessica got Jaimi onto a PhD by secretly completing a Master's degree in her name? The subtext for that is clearly "I'm a Very Intelligent Person. Even my detractors recognise that I'm a Very Intelligent Person! They think Jaimi must have had my help because I'm just so Very Intelligent!" The same with her claim that some people think they met when she was "Jaimi's teacher" - she never taught Jaimi at any point, but she's certainly not averse to creating the impression that she has been a teacher of other people at some other point.

Saying the HCPC found her to have done nothing wrong is a lie. She's not even registered by the HCPC as she's not a clinical psychologist! I believe it's true people who were taken in by her play-acting as a clinical psychologist have reported her lack of ethics to the HCPC. But they won't / can't investigate her as she's not a member! Such utter bullshit to say (or imply) she's been in any way endorsed by them.

She was reported to the HCPC by several practitioner and research psychologists over misuse of a protected title on Netflix. The HCPC did take action on that. They compelled Netflix to remove the misleading content. They couldn't do anything else about her unethical and unprofessional behaviour because she isn't regulated by them (their exact wording was, "As she is not actively registered with us, it is not within our remit to investigate the other concerns you have raised"). But they did have this to say:

This is a mechanism they have to ensure that any non-registered individual who has had concerns raised about their conduct will be unable to apply for registration without extra checks being undertaken on fitness to practice grounds. Hardly a shining endorsement. This is all of a piece with her usual tactics: by claiming the HCPC have exonerated her (because they don't have the remit to investigate her) she is creating the false impression that she is regulated by them, which bolsters her credibility among people who know enough about healthcare to realise that practitioner psychologists are HCPC-registered but who don't know enough to spot the disingenuous wordplay and other Walter Mitty BS. The same with when she called the BPS "my regulator" on Twitter. The BPS isn't a regulator and they have stated this very clearly in a recent article on regulation that appears on the website ("The BPS does not have a regulatory function"). She wants people to believe that she has professional oversight - and therefore endorsement - from major psychology bodies.

Some people will be fooled, but not professionals in the circles she wishes she moved in, and I think this is where a lot of her angst comes from. The ranting about not being accepted professionally because she's too working class or too lesbian or too female or too pretty or too sweary is resentment at not being hailed as a genius by the profession itself, and she needs lots of praise and reassurance from random Facebook posters to compensate for the knowledge that in academia and clinical psychology she's seen as a fraud (among the people who have even heard of her, that is). She just can't bear that a practitioner psychologist would hear her name and not feel admiration or even envy, but, "Oh, that grifter" or - worse - "Who's that?".

My own sense is that she's doing this now because she's upset her spurious court case has been dropped for lack of evidence, and she needs to retcon events to explain to her closest acolytes why her glorious legal vindication isn't happening after all.

 

[Blue bunny]

I'm not sure she is that interested in moving in any professionally respected circles. She wants idolisation and she's achieving that from vulnerable women.

Jess probably is trying to goad SA into doing something so she can justify everything. She also probably just wants to torture her, like she think she has been.

Stay strong SA, you're a billion times the person she could only hope of being.

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

No, there is categorically no stalking protection order, that is an outrageous lie by Jessica.

Jessica tried to get a Stalking Protection Order put on Sally Ann. There was a court date last August for this but Sally Ann's lawyers contested the charge, and so it couldn't be settled in August. Instead, a date was agreed for a court hearing where the evidence from both sides would be heard. This was to be early this year, as I understand it.

The court did agree an Interim Protection Order, at that August date, pending the full court case.

This isn't just semantics, an interim order doesn't mean Sally Ann is guilty of anything, it's an emergency provision that can be put in place pending a proper court date. Jessica is telling an outright lie to say she Sally Ann has a Stalking Protection order.

However, the court case has now been dropped, because Jessica's legal team were unable to present evidence for it.
This will be why Jess and Jaimi are saying they can now talk about it - as there is no court case pending any more.

I don't know how long Sally Ann's interim protection order is for, I would imagine when the court date was meant to be, so I would guess she may still be silenced temporarily.

Jessica uses the courts and police to try to intimidate her critics into silence, and then when it doesn't work she lies about them.
She's a liar and a bully.

Wow. How utterly horrid to write the blog in the first place but to lie about this is quite something. The whole blog is just lies isn’t it.
Is anyone calling her out on this publicly?
---

This is similar how she claims people have insulted her by describing her as too attractive and feminine to be a lesbian: it actually functions as a backhanded compliment. To Jessica, that is, not Jaimi. People supposedly saying that Jessica got Jaimi onto a PhD by secretly completing a Master's degree in her name? The subtext for that is clearly "I'm a Very Intelligent Person. Even my detractors recognise that I'm a Very Intelligent Person! They think Jaimi must have had my help because I'm just so Very Intelligent!" The same with her claim that some people think they met when she was "Jaimi's teacher" - she never taught Jaimi at any point, but she's certainly not averse to creating the impression that she has been a teacher of other people at some other point.



She was reported to the HCPC by several practitioner and research psychologists over misuse of a protected title on Netflix. The HCPC did take action on that. They compelled Netflix to remove the misleading content. They couldn't do anything else about her unethical and unprofessional behaviour because she isn't regulated by them (their exact wording was, "As she is not actively registered with us, it is not within our remit to investigate the other concerns you have raised"). But they did have this to say:

View attachment 2687917

This is a mechanism they have to ensure that any non-registered individual who has had concerns raised about their conduct will be unable to apply for registration without extra checks being undertaken on fitness to practice grounds. Hardly a shining endorsement. This is all of a piece with her usual tactics: by claiming the HCPC have exonerated her (because they don't have the remit to investigate her) she is creating the false impression that she is regulated by them, which bolsters her credibility among people who know enough about healthcare to realise that practitioner psychologists are HCPC-registered but who don't know enough to spot the disingenuous wordplay and other Walter Mitty BS. The same with when she called the BPS "my regulator" on Twitter. The BPS isn't a regulator and they have stated this very clearly in a recent article on regulation that appears on the website ("The BPS does not have a regulatory function"). She wants people to believe that she has professional oversight - and therefore endorsement - from major psychology bodies.

Some people will be fooled, but not professionals in the circles she wishes she moved in, and I think this is where a lot of her angst comes from. The ranting about not being accepted professionally because she's too working class or too lesbian or too female or too pretty or too sweary is resentment at not being hailed as a genius by the profession itself, and she needs lots of praise and reassurance from random Facebook posters to compensate for the knowledge that in academia and clinical psychology she's seen as a fraud (among the people who have even heard of her, that is). She just can't bear that a practitioner psychologist would hear her name and not feel admiration or even envy, but, "Oh, that grifter" or - worse - "Who's that?".

My own sense is that she's doing this now because she's upset her spurious court case has been dropped for lack of evidence, and she needs to retcon events to explain to her closest acolytes why her glorious legal vindication isn't happening after all.

So she’s lying about everything. But, in typical narc behaviour, is giving some truth within. So, we know HCPC will have said they can’t investigate but not because she’s done nothing wrong but that she’s not a member, because she can’t be. She’s missed out the other bits that are less favourable.

Same about the lies about finances. She did have her business and accounting set up in a dodgy way. Once called out, suddenly accounts were filed. And she lied there about not being able to set account up in Covid (even though she register ltd company before Covid).

Shes up to something

 

[blurstoftimes]

i read the article with my mouth absolutely wide open the whole way through, she is scarily self-obsessed. And am I reading right - did she claim to be a victim of antisemitism because she 'looks jewish'???

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

i read the article with my mouth absolutely wide open the whole way through, she is scarily self-obsessed. And am I reading right - did she claim to be a victim of antisemitism because she 'looks jewish'???

Why would anyone think she was Jewish? She doesn't post about any aspect of Jewish life, she hasn't discussed the Israel-Palestine war etc. She didn't even know that the Jewish religion and ethnicity are two separate things until someone pointed it out to her! Did she just straight up say to herself "I've got a big nose so people would probably assume I was Jewish!"

 

[markcorriganscrisps]

Is it possible that there have been other legal threats (threats to sue, etc) used since the SPO has been refused? I've just seen the massive post Charlotte P has put up and it all feels a little bit like they're emboldened by *something* recent.

 

[witchinghour]

Is it possible that there have been other legal threats (threats to sue, etc) used since the SPO has been refused? I've just seen the massive post Charlotte P has put up and it all feels a little bit like they're emboldened by *something* recent.

Do you mean the one on Twitter? There's no new info there, it's just Charlotte Proudman being a flying monkey. It's clear Jess lies to her, same as everyone else, and Charlotte either hasn't realised it's all lies yet, or chooses not to.

If lots of flying monkeys speak out, it'll likely be as Jess is putting the pressure on in private, saying how distressed she is, how it's all a conspiracy against her and how she can't speak out herself for some reason. Her supporters will feel they need to defend her.

She did the same in the run up to Sexy But Psycho coming out, and to my shame I did defend her publicly then as I thought, for a while, that she was being unfairly maligned. Thankfully I did see through her soon enough though.

 

[CuriousTherapyCat]

It seems a bit of a “marketing” thing she does prior to some launch of something.
She’s currently running up to a book launch about her life and all the bad stuff she’s had to put up with. This adds to that story.

Also CP mentions it’s old feminists not liking young women. Theres plenty of folk around JT age and younger who criticise, with evidence.

 

[markcorriganscrisps]

Ah that makes sense. There was so much hypocrisy in both her blog and Proudman's post that I wondered whether something had kicked off behind the scenes that had perhaps silenced the other women (threats, rather than an SPO).

 

[wendyg13]

Do you mean the one on Twitter? There's no new info there, it's just Charlotte Proudman being a flying monkey. It's clear Jess lies to her, same as everyone else, and Charlotte either hasn't realised it's all lies yet, or chooses not to.

If lots of flying monkeys speak out, it'll likely be as Jess is putting the pressure on in private, saying how distressed she is, how it's all a conspiracy against her and how she can't speak out herself for some reason. Her supporters will feel they need to defend her.

She did the same in the run up to Sexy But Psycho coming out, and to my shame I did defend her publicly then as I thought, for a while, that she was being unfairly maligned. Thankfully I did see through her soon enough though.

Cp is very similar to Jess and is frequently criticised by her legal peers for speaking out about things she isn’t qualified to. Then claims ‘victim’ status. She’s also a big manipulator of the truth. I noticed that both her and Jess in her rant imply David Mottershead was found guilty of stalking and harassment of CP ( and JT) I’m not defending him at all but he was cleared of this in court although found guilty of possession of a knife.

It is all publicity for her book and getting sympathy purchases.
I hope people who have been targeted by her are getting legal advice and I hope they are all ok and being supported.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

It seems a bit of a “marketing” thing she does prior to some launch of something.
She’s currently running up to a book launch about her life and all the bad stuff she’s had to put up with. This adds to that story.

Also CP mentions it’s old feminists not liking young women. Theres plenty of folk around JT age and younger who criticise, with evidence.

Yep, same old blatant misogyny coming from pro-woman Jess: "all my critics are ugly, 'bitter' old hags jealous of me because I'm young and by default therefore better than them with more to contribute!" Jess: you aren't unusually young to have a PhD or publish books and you are not your wife's age, you're in your mid-30s and it won't be long before people start to see you as middle-aged

 

[Dike Themis]

It's such a lengthy piece centring herself as the victim against all these abusive people & groups.

SAR is the only individual actually named and that concerns me greatly. I fear that she will be the lightening rod for all the rabid, whipped up fangirls unable to parse the spagnum opus for inconsistencies. The unaware will not understand the role, remit & function of BPS, HCPC.
I hope SAR is OK and has people supporting her.

The positioning that we now have permission to speak infers that after an ordeal, where someone has followed process, they are now free to speak their truth. Who is this permission giver?

It seems that the only thing likely to have been restricting comment is legal action around the SPO. Would anyone be foolish enough to name someone if there was unfinished or not upheld legal process?? Obviously this came out on a Saturday morning enabling much frothing to build up....... . Is it the same sort of modus operandi where a significant claim is made, people criticise and then the claim is partly officially ratified allowing the interlocutor further justification that they are victimised by haters. I'm thinking back to people poo pooing the AH meeting & then the photo of the avengers. It's a pretty disturbed personality that riles people up to then say got ya suckers.

There is a viciousness in the way that SAR is the only named person in such a lengthy, emotive piece about stalking. Not sure why the extensive other list of perceived injustices or attacks would have been restricted and indeed much is a rehash. Conflating it all together in this emotive piece just makes me so worried for SAR.

It's pretty horrific and I find it worrying.

 

[Boogs]

If there hasn’t been any kind of conviction where does she stand legally by using SA’s full name, would it be classed as doxxing? I know SA has spoken out so she could argue that she identified herself but I didn’t know her surname or if SA was a pseudonym.

 

[empowered1]

JT has chosen the timing because she didn’t give any evidence to the police to back up her stalking claim. The timing is simply because an interim order is about to lapse it was only given while further investigations were made and a full order is currently not being sought. SA has NOT been charged nor convicted of any offence in relation to JT or her wife or family/friends. I suspect, and it’s only my opinion, it’s a case of JT publicly laying the foundations of her own narrative before the interim order lapses in order to look like the victim.

 

[witchinghour]

If there hasn’t been any kind of conviction where does she stand legally by using SA’s full name, would it be classed as doxxing? I know SA has spoken out so she could argue that she identified herself but I didn’t know her surname or if SA was a pseudonym.

I'd say it's libel and malicious communications.

Is there is a specific crime for lying about a police charge / court proceedings - would this come under contempt of court?

Jessica isn't particularly clever, there is no grand strategy. She is simply a narcissist lashing out to protect her wounded ego / shore up her delusions / silence her critics.

Her lies are often easy to see through - hence her large and growing number of critics.

Her bullying of people may have served her well to date, but the more she bullies and lies, the worse she's making the situation for herself. She will be hoist by her own petard eventually.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

She criticises so many people who are easily identifiable:

"Feminist journalist" who accused her of lying and said her stories were "too fantastical" - Julie Bindel made that comment but of course it's being totally distorted and misrepresented

"Feminists shared my house details!" "A feminist burned my book and was warned by police!" - Rachel did burn the book, which isn't illegal. Jess previously accused her of "sharing Jess's house details", but Rachel wasn't contacted by police, so there was evidently no proof that she had shared any "details".

"Academics" who were also warned by police - Probably Rose (who Jess tried to blame for lying/misleading Rosie into thinking her story was published without consent) and/or the person that Jess tried to report to her uni despite them never having spoken

"Articles saying I traffic women for profit!" - Julian; again, it's very serious to accuse someone of trafficking. Jess would have had good grounds to sue if Julian actually said this, the fact she didn't speaks for itself!

Yet Sally Ann's the only one she dares name, again thinking SA's the weak link here and the easiest to intimidate

If there hasn’t been any kind of conviction where does she stand legally by using SA’s full name, would it be classed as doxxing? I know SA has spoken out so she could argue that she identified herself but I didn’t know her surname or if SA was a pseudonym.

Sally Ann's full name was used in Julian Vigo's article but she was shown the article in advance and would have consented to that

 

[AccidentalAcademic]

I'm not sure she is that interested in moving in any professionally respected circles. She wants idolisation and she's achieving that from vulnerable women.

Jess probably is trying to goad SA into doing something so she can justify everything. She also probably just wants to torture her, like she think she has been.

Stay strong SA, you're a billion times the person she could only hope of being.

I agree she definitely doesn't want the job of a professional. She's made that clear with her disparaging and deceptive comments about having "done her time frontline" when she has never worked clinically at all, and not wanting "to work 9 to 5" or "to hold case after case". The work itself wouldn't be glamorous enough for her.

What she does want is to be regarded as a pioneer in the field, an original thinker, and someone who is revolutionising psychology training, which is why she will sometimes claim to be receiving hundreds of DMs from professionals, to be lecturing on practitioner doctorates, and more recently to be offering "supervision" to practising therapists. I really think her ego is so fragile that she can't cope with the idea that anyone at all sees through her. If she could be content with adulation on social media she wouldn't be constantly ranting about the bad mean feminists and the nasty elitist academics who don't recognise her worth.

She's trying to use Sally-Ann as some kind of prop for sure. This reminds me of the furore before WWBE came out. At the time I thought she was sincere, but I did wonder how thousands of MRAs had found out about a self-published book created using Amazon's printing platform, because it's unusual for any first-time author to get that type of attention, whether positive or negative. I assumed that someone had shared a link on 4chan or some other awful site and I even bought a few things from her shop to show my support. But now she's doing it again when she has another book to promote, and this time her targets aren't faceless MRAs, but a named woman who is extremely vulnerable and who has been in and out of hospital and supported living. Her only 'crime' has been to reveal that Jess was not principled or trauma-informed in her dealings with her. It's disgusting behaviour.