Resolution Statement – 01454-25 Buonocore v Mail Online

Summary of Complaint

1. Jeremy Buonocore complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that Mail Online breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Paedophile teacher Jeremy Forrest who sparked an international manhunt when he ran off to France with teenage pupil is now a married father working at a bakery where a young woman has quit after he struck up an 'inappropriate sexual relationship with her'”, published on 9 March 2025.

2. The article, which appeared online only, reported on an alleged affair between the complainant – who was referred to as a “senior baker” – and his female colleague. It further stated the woman ”decided she could no longer work there and quit her job”.

3. The complainant said that the article was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1. Firstly, he believed the allegations of inappropriate behaviour were made by one source without any corroboration and that these were untrue. Secondly, he said it was inaccurate to report he was a “senior baker” where he was employed as a confectioner and was not a senior staff member. Thirdly, he said the woman did not quit her job. The complainant produced an email from his employer confirming there had not been accusations made against him; that he was employed as a confectioner / baker; and that the women remained an employee at the bakery.

4. The publication was content with the report of the alleged affair. It said the complainant’s employer confirmed the woman could “either leave the business or work in a different department” prior to the publication of the article. It also understood the woman took some time away from work as a result of the affair. However, it accepted that the woman had now returned to work at the bakery. As such, the publication offered to publish the following correction:

“We published an article about the paedophile teacher Jeremy Forrest, now known as Jeremy Buonocore. We said that he had begun an inappropriate relationship with a much younger colleague at the bakery where he worked, and this resulted in the woman deciding to quit her job. Following publication, Mr Buonocore has confirmed that in fact, this woman did not quit her job and still works there, and that his employer had not received any official complaints about his behaviour. We are happy to make his position clear”

Relevant Clause 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.

Mediated Outcome

5. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.

6. The publication offered to remove the article from its website, as well as an additional article which repeated the claim about the woman quitting her job, and an assurance that it did not intend to publish the disputed information in the future.

7. The complainant said 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: 26/03/2025

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 06/08/2025