Please note that articles may contain affilitate links. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Monday 20 September 2021

Wiltshire Woman Convicted of Threatening Journalist Over Online News Article

A Wiltshire woman has been convicted of threatening a journalist who refused to remove an online news article reporting the crimes of a relative.

Stacey Reader, 27, of Albany Close, Swindon, admitted an offence under section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 when she appeared at Swindon Magistrates' Court on Tuesday, 14th September 2021.

The maximum penalty for such an offence is 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction; 2 years' custody and/or an unlimited fine on conviction on indictment.

Reader had initially been arrested on suspicion of blackmailing journalist Daniel Jae Webb, but the Crown Prosecution Service decided to pursue a lesser charge under the 1988 Act.

The court heard that Reader, who clearly doesn't understand the Streisand effect, had approached Mr Webb in relation to an article he had written about her relative Connor Deeks.

She asked him to remove the article, but when he refused she made threats against him.

District Judge Joanna Dickens adjourned sentencing pending the completion of a pre-sentence report.

Speaking of the conviction, Mr Webb said: "I hope this conviction sends a strong message to people who think it is acceptable to threaten or abuse journalists working to keep their communities informed, especially through the reporting of court hearings.

"You tend to develop a thick skin working in the news industry and turn a blind eye to most of the abuse you receive, but some incidents are so serious that they cannot be ignored.

"It is really important to remember that journalists are human too - with a life outside the news, a family and friends.

"This kind of abuse not only affects the person it's aimed at, but everyone close to them."

Journalists perform an absolutely crucial role in keeping their communities informed of the inner workings of the judicial process. I am a strong proponent of their right to report and the public's right to know.

I am also a strong opponent of attempts to suppress the reporting of cases that have been heard in public. Quite simply, bar the most exceptional of circumstances, convicted criminals do not have any entitlement to anonymity.

Any convicted criminal shy about having their details published by the media should have considered that beforehand.

No comments: