A man risked a prison sentence by showing a ‘lack of remorse’ as he was sentenced for a ‘campaign of harassment’ against Wiltshire journalist Daniel Jae Webb.
36-year-old Craig Deyager, of Affleck Close, Toothill, appeared before Swindon Magistrates’ Court today (15 November) having previously pleaded guilty to the offence.
Keith Ballinger, prosecuting, said the defendant had bombarded the Wiltshire 999s and SWNS journalist with more than 160 phone calls over a five-hour period in an attempt to have a court story – which documented his drug driving conviction – removed from the internet.
The persistent contact, which included text messages stating he was going to go to the victim’s home and post his address online, continued despite repeated requests for him to stop.
District Judge Joanna Dickens was told that Deyager failed to comply with the probation service in order to compile a pre-sentence report, as ordered by the court in September.
Defence solicitor Richard Williams said his client had been struggling with the death of his grandmother at the same time as he received his drug-driving conviction and subsequently made the news.
“He suffers from anxiety. His apparent reluctance to engage with probation was, in his mind, due to his fear of working with others in a group setting”, he said.
Judge Dickens told of the importance of journalists in society moments before she was interrupted by the defendant. Soon after she stormed out of court and threatened him with a prison sentence – despite having already started to deliver a community order.
“This kind of offence is really serious because when [journalists] come to court, it is a public place and they are allowed to report about it. We have a free press in this country”, she said.
“If they write wrong things, that’s different, but if they write the truth – what’s happening in court – unfortunately you just have to live with that.
“If, as a society, we attack the press, we’re all doomed because no one’s ever going to be a journalist and no one is ever going to report things.
“Obviously you were going through a tough time, but that’s not really any excuse at all. Mr Webb doesn’t need to be subject to that campaign of harassment and indeed, would have been absolutely terrified.
“No doubt he is still frightened of the consequences of this going forward.
“As he said in his victim personal statement, he has a thick skin but he’s only human. At the end of the day, this is absolutely not acceptable.”
As Judge Dickens handed down a community order, Deyager was seen to shake his head before interrupting her.
She continued: “I do accept that you are sorry for what you have done – I’m a bit concerned that you’re shaking your head, but I do accept you seem to be sorry for what you have done, which is a positive thing.
“It’s normally, bearing in mind how serious this is, it is probably serious to warrant a prison sentence. I’m not going to impose that today because of what I have heard about you, because of your disabilities and because of the mitigation, and your guilty plea.”
Deyager went on to interrupt Judge Dickens, complaining about the very thing that had landed him in court in the first place – being angry over the fact his name and address were published in the news.
The Judge angrily slammed shut her laptop and began raising her voice at Deyager.
“I’m actually concerned about whether I should be sending you to prison today now, because I’m really concerned you’re not at all remorseful for what you’ve done”, she shouted.
To which he replied: “I am.”
In response, raging Judge Dickens said: “No you’re not. You’re still saying to me that you’re upset about what he has done, giving out your address – he is required to give out people’s names and addresses.
“You are obviously not sorry for what you have done. I have put the case back, speak to your solicitor and if you’re not properly remorseful you can go to prison.”
After a short recess, the court reconvened and Judge Dickens imposed a one-year community order with 15 rehabilitation activity requirement days.
Deyager was told to pay £300 compensation to Daniel Jae Webb but awarded no costs or victim surcharge.
She also imposed a two-year restraining order, prohibiting the defendant from contacting his victim directly or indirectly.
