Resolution Statement: Complaint 04205-15 Simpson v Nottingham Post
Summary of complaint
1. James Simpson complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that The Nottingham Post breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Dad slashes face of man who stared at daughter”, published on 16 June 2015.
2. The complainant expressed concern that the article had implied that he had been the assailant in the case reported, when he was, in fact, the victim.
3. The newspaper apologised for the inaccuracy, which it said was caused by human error. It had previously published a correction, and offered to re-publish this in print and online, with the inclusion of an apology as follows:
Court report – apology
In a court report published in the Post on Tuesday June 16, we reported that Carl Moran (37) of Raymede Drive, Bestwood, slashed the face of the victim James Simpson during an attack on Mr Simpson in Nottingham city centre. Unfortunately, the report incorrectly stated that Mr Simpson had been staring at Mr Moran’s daughter. In fact, the court heard that the altercation started because Moran, who was convicted and jailed for four years, was staring at Mr Simpson’s daughter. We apologise to Mr Simpson for the mistake and for any inconvenience or upset caused as a result.
Relevant Code Provisions
4. Clause 1 (Accuracy)
i)The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii)A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and – where appropriate – an apology published.
5. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.
6. The newspaper offered to publish a correction and apology.
7. After further correspondence, mediated by IPSO, the complainant said that this would resolve the matter to his satisfaction.
8. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code.
Date complaint received: 21/06/2015
Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 29/10/2015Back to ruling listing