Decision
of the Complaints Committee – 28442-20 Glenwright v dailyrecord.co.uk
Summary
of Complaint
1. Edward
Glenwright complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that
dailyrecord.co.uk breached Clause 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of
Practice in an article headlined “Twisted stalker terrorised entire town with
barrage of death threats and child sex slurs”, published on 5 December 2019.
2. The
headline of the article described a defendant as a “twisted stalker”. The
article described the crimes that the defendant had committed, such as sending
violent and threatening messages, faking email addresses, and accusing others
of being paedophiles. The article also made clear that a psychiatric report was
in the process of being requested.
3. The
complainant, the defendant, said that the article was inaccurate in breach of
Clause 12 as calling him a “twisted stalker” was a pejorative reference to his
mental health.
4. The
publication said that, whilst it was aware of the complainant’s mental health,
criticism of the complaint's actions, or describing the complainant as
'twisted' did not amount to a breach of Clause 12. It said that the term was
widely used to describe unpleasant offenders, and was not a pejorative
reference to the complainant's mental health.
Relevant
Code Provisions
Clause 1
(Accuracy)
i) The
Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted
information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.
ii) A
significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected,
promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology
published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the
regulator.
iii) A
fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when
reasonably called for.
iv) The
Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly
between comment, conjecture and fact.
Findings
of the Committee
5. The
Committee considered that the term "twisted" was employed to describe
the complainant in light of the crimes which he was found to have committed as
reported in the article, rather than
because of the state of his mental health. The article reported that sentencing
had been postponed until a psychiatric report had been prepared but did not
make any further reference to the complainant’s mental health. In this context,
the Committee was satisfied that the reference to “twisted” was not a
pejorative reference to the complainant’s mental health”. There was no breach
of Clause 12.
Conclusions
6. The
complaint was not upheld.
Remedial
Action Required
7. N/A
Date
complaint received: 05/10/2020
Date
complaint concluded by IPSO: 15/12/2020