Social Media Deviant Exposed by Newspaper a Second Time

The Manchester Evening News has published a second exposé on social media deviant DJE Media, otherwise known as Curtis Arnold and Daniel James Edwards.

I am again grateful to readers for bringing this to my attention.

You can read the latest piece by journalist Stephen Topping here (archived copy).

Regular readers will no doubt be aware that the MEN first broke news of Arnold's sexual harm prevention order on 17th December 2025. Under the front page headline "The sex offender pointing a camera in your face" the paper finally confirmed, loudly and clearly, his previous convictions for voyeurism and making an indecent image of a child. Please refer to my earlier article for the full background on those convictions. 

Rumours of Arnold's sordid past had been circulating online ever since the former hairdresser lied his way past police officers in order to film the recovery of Nicola Bulley's body from the River Wyre. At the same time as Nicola's family were overcome by grief, Arnold uploaded his macabre footage to YouTube and later boasted about making £900 from it.

It now transpires that shortly after those tragic events of 19th February 2023, with the media noose now tightening around Arnold's neck, the 36-year-old attended the offices of two national newspapers to shamelessly deny past criminality and tell them what a "good egg" he really was.

Make no mistake that lying comes as second nature to Curtis Arnold. It comes as naturally to him as swimming does to a fish. He is not bothered about who he lies to, just as long as it somehow works in his favour.

He's as comfortable lying to his YouTube flock and he is to police officers investigating his crimes. His previous convictions for fraud, perverting the course of justice and burglary paint a picture of a man who could not lie straight in bed at night.

Anyhow, back to the new MEN story. According to journalist Topping, Arnold is now subject to a suspended sentence order having been convicted of trespassing at the Prime Minister's country retreat, Chequers.

In a now deleted YouTube confession video, Arnold said that he'd visited the Buckinghamshire estate with the intention of making a video. I watched the short-lived video at the time it was published, but as it is now deleted I am going to have to paraphrase Arnold's comments in it.

According to him, he knew that Chequers was "something to do with the Government", but didn't realise its significance at the time (undoubtedly another of his lies, in case you hadn't spotted). By his own admission he saw signs warning that trespass there was a criminal offence, but decided he was going to have a wander down the driveway anyway. He said he could see a barrier a short way down the hedge-lined driveway, so his intention was to go to barrier and ask if he could film anywhere on the estate.

He didn't get as far as the barrier before several armed police officers "jumped out from nowhere". The officer who took the lead was quite amiable, telling Arnold that he shouldn't be there and asking him to turn around and head back to the public road.

On this occasion, very unusually, the penny dropped with Arnold that he should actually comply with the officer's request instead of trying to outsmart him. He turned around and started walking back up the driveway. Only a few steps into his journey a second officer, who was not quite as amiable as the first, decided to arrest him.

The Chequers incident happened on 28th February 2025. According to the MEN, he was convicted of an offence under section 128 of the Serious Organised Crime Act 2005 and was sentenced to 4 months' custody suspended for 2 years.

Creating articles can be thirsty work:

If you have found this article entertaining or informative then you can show your appreciation by buying a coffee.

Appeals by Way of Case Stated

As things currently stand every person convicted by the Magistrates' Court has an automatic right of appeal to the Crown Court.

This has been the subject of a previous article. Appeals to the Crown Court are by far the most common type of appeal. They are generally pretty quick, easy and cost-effective for everyone concerned.

The Crown Court has the power to revoke, vary or affirm any order or sentence imposed by the Magistrates' Court. It can impose a new sentence provided that it remains within the powers available to the Magistrates' Court at the original time of conviction.

Introduction:

Appeal to the Crown Court is only available to the defence, so what happens if the prosecution is aggrieved at a decision taken by the Magistrates' Court?

A second route of appeal is by way of case stated, which involves sending details of the case to the High Court for further consideration. This invariably takes longer and is more costly than an appeal to the Crown Court, but it is the only option available if the prosecution wishes to pursue the matter.

Grounds:

Appeal by way of case stated is only suitable if either party wishes to appeal against a perceived error of law or act that is "ultra vires" on the part of the Magistrates' Court. It is not, save for the most perverse of cases, an avenue for appeal simply because a party disagrees with a decision of fact taken by the Magistrates' Court.

An appeal by way of case stated might be appropriate if the Magistrates' Court:

• Somehow misapplies the law applicable to the offence;
• Wrong orders the exclusion or admissibility of evidence;
• Incorrectly determines a submission of no case to answer.

An appeal by way of case stated can only be made after the conclusion of proceedings in the Magistrates' Court. 

Procedure:

The appellant has to make an application within 21 days of the final decision of the Magistrates' Court. This is done by writing to the Clerk of the Magistrates' Court concerned, setting out the matters of grievance and question of law to be stated.

The Clerk, in conjunction with the Bench concerned, will then draft a statement of case. This is a document setting out the circumstances of the case, the decisions of the court and the views of each party on the matter of grievance. The draft statement will then be shared with the parties for them to check and suggest any amendments before it is finalised.

The Clerk will then send the finalised statement of case to the appellant, for it to submit to the High Court for consideration.

Hearing:

The appeal is heard by the Divisional Court of the High Court King's Bench Division. The court usually consists of three High Court Judges.

The court will consider the statement of case and hear legal representations from the parties. No new evidence will be admitted.

Decision:

If the court allows the appeal then it has the power to revoke, vary or affirm any decision made by the Magistrates' Court. It also has the power to remit matters back to the Magistrates' Court for a new hearing before a different Bench; or with a direction that the Magistrates' Court either convicts or acquits the defendant.

Further appeal:

If either party disagrees with the decision of the High Court, it can seek leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court (the so-called "leap frog" procedure, which omits the Court of Appeal). Such a further appeal will only be allowed on a point of law and in the general public interest.

Creating articles can be thirsty work:

If you have found this article entertaining or informative then you can show your appreciation by buying a coffee.

Update: Paedophile Headteacher Sentenced

A paedophile headteacher has been sentenced for using AI to generate indecent pseudo-images of children.

Dean Juric, 54, of Tynemouth, North Tyneside, was convicted of the following offences when he appeared at North Tyneside Magistrates' Court on Friday, 21st November 2025:

• One offence of distribution of an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child;
• Three offences of making an indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child.

He was sentenced at Newcastle Crown Court on Tuesday, 27th January 2026.

Juric was formerly the headteacher of St Robert of Newminster Catholic School in Washington, Tyne and Wear - an 11-18 mixed comprehensive school with around 1,600 students on roll.

Juric's crimes are described in more detail in my earlier article. Briefly, he was snared by an undercover police officer posing as the grandfather of a 7-year-old girl. 

Examination of Juric's devices yielded more than 300 indecent images of children, 31 of which were of the most serious kind, Category A, depicting penetrative sexual activity. He had shared one image of what appeared to be a girl of around 14-years-old in a sexualised posed.

Juric had been in conversation with other paedophiles. When one of them asked what turned him on, the 54-year-old teacher chillingly replied "schoolgirl".

HHJ Graham Robinson, sentencing, told the disgraced educator: "You have fallen a long way from grace - many years of dedicated service to the community, now all thrown away.

"There's another side to you that is not only good, it is exemplary.

"I also note you have taken steps to deal with what you recognise is unacceptable, criminal behaviour."

In relation to Juric's prognosis, HHJ Robinson added: "I am entirely satisfied that there's not only a realistic possibility of rehabilitation, but it is a near certainty."

Juric was sentenced to eight months in custody suspended for eighteen months, with the requirement that he completes 150 hours' unpaid work and up to 40 rehabilitation activity days.

He was also made subject to a ten year sexual harm prevention order and notification requirement.

A spokesman for the Bishop Wilkinson Catholic Education Trust, which manages St Robert's, said: "Our Trust acted immediately and decisively, suspending Dean Juric upon learning of the arrest.

"He no longer has any association with our Trust.

"We extend our gratitude to Northumbria Police for their relentless pursuit of justice, their vigilance, and their unwavering resolve in bringing Dean Juric to account."

As Juric's sentence will undoubtedly raise eyebrows, I refer readers to my earlier article on suspended sentence orders.

It should also be noted that HHJ Robinson will be far better versed in the facts of this particular case than the media or armchair commentators might be.

Creating articles can be thirsty work:

If you have found this article informative then you can show your appreciation by buying a coffee.

A Corruption of Power

A former HMCTS admin officer has been jailed for sharing confidential court records with local crooks.

Alexandra Power, 40, of Brentwood Avenue, Crosby, Merseyside, previously admitted offences of perverting the course of justice and unauthorised access to computer material.

She was sentenced at Manchester Crown Court on 23rd January 2026.

Perverting the course of justice is an offence at common law. It is triable on indictment and has a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Power had been working in the office at South Sefton Magistrates' Court when she accessed confidential computer records, the details of which were later discovered on the mobile phone of a suspected drug trafficker.

An audit of the computer system revealed that Power had accessed the records in question, which included those relating to search warrants, ninety eight times over the space of two working days.

Detective Chief Inspector Paul McVeigh said: "It was clear when Power was arrested and her phone seized that she had been sharing information about the workings of the court and sending information which was not in the public domain.

"Having accessed sensitive information regarding applications for warrants to search addresses associated to serious organised criminality she then went on to share that information to those who were to be subjected to the warrants.

"Her actions had a direct impact on criminal investigations and were clearly a massive breach of the position of trust she held.

"The public expects for people working in Power's position to uphold the law and it is right that she is now behind bars as a result of her actions.

"We worked closely with His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) to identify Power at the earliest opportunity and a full review has taken place to ensure this does not happen again."

HHJ Nicholas Dean KC, The Honorary Recorder of Manchester, sentenced Power to two years' imprisonment.

Creating articles can be thirsty work:

If you have found this article entertaining or informative then you can show your appreciation by buying a coffee.