A weekly newspaper has today defended its actions after one of its journalists was threatened with arrest for attempting to investigate a fraudster.
As reported yesterday, Croydon Advertiser reporter Gareth Davies was served with a prevention of harassment notice after doorstepping and emailing 33-year-old Neelam Desai, who has already pleaded guilty to a string of frauds.
Gareth was told her faced arrest if he continued with his investigations and claimed officers likened his behaviour to that of News of the World phone hackers.
Today the newspaper has come out fighting, insisting its actions were “good old fashioned journalism, not harassment.”
In an opinion piece published today, it said Desai was accused of conning at least three men out of thousands of pounds after contacting them through Asian marriage site Shaadi.com.
“As a newspaper we have a responsibility to put those allegations to Desai, to give her the chance to respond,” it said.
“To do that we visited the 33-year-old’s home, in Beulah Grove, Selhurst, on March 4, and then sent two emails in the following weeks detailing the accusations and politely asking her for a comment.
“Desai now claims the emails she has received, and the stories we are writing, are tantamount to harassment.
“We know that because three Met Police officers based in Gipsy Hill visited the Advertiser’s head office in Redhill, Surrey, on Monday to serve him with a Prevention of Harassment Letter.
“He was told that the letter was a warning that if he contacted her again – either directly or indirectly – he could be arrested.
“When he explained his actions and showed them the emails, he was told that journalists were afforded no special privileges.
“One of the officers added: “You say you were just doing your job, but that’s what the News of the World and the phone hackers said.”
“The Advertiser does not believe reporters should get special treatment nor that allegations of harassment should be treated anything but seriously.
“But does it require three police officers to travel around 20 miles to serve what is, itself, an intimidating warning letter which states a reporter could be arrested for doing his job?
“Our reports have prompted two police investigations into her actions which, for one alleged victim, follows months of fighting for his accusations to be taken seriously.
“That progress has come from good, old-fashioned journalism – not ‘harassment’.
Advertiser editor Glenn Ebrey previously told HTFP that the police’s treatment of Gareth had been “heavy-handed and unnecessary.”
He said he was “especially disappointed” by the officer bringing up the News of the World case and had written to the borough commander asking him to “explain the thinking behind this approach.”
Desai, of Beulah Grove, Selhurst, has separately pleaded guilty to a string of frauds and is set to be sentenced at Croydon Crown Court on 25 April.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “The harassment letter was issued by a local safer neighbourhood team in response to a number of reports from the woman, who felt she was being harassed.
“The officers did this to ensure that the reporter was fully aware that allegations of harassment were being made against him.
“The woman first contacted police on March 5 and most recently on April 1.”
Sign up for our free daily email bulletin
Follow HTFP on Twitter
Got a story? Email the Editor at
Heavy-handed?
Report this comment
We have to accept that in some areas there’s not much love lost between police and press.
Some of us want to nail some of them for suspected (imagined or real) hanky-panky and some of them want to stick one on us! It will always be so and this woman gave them a fine glee opportunity to shake a stick at the Advertiser.
Journalists, estate agents, used car salesmen etc are often lumped together in unpopularity polls.
Report this comment
The defence to any harassment charge is ( you were following a lawful course of conduct discovering crime etc. )
the police are acting beyond their powers, discovering crime is a citizens requirement ! a reporter has a bounden duty to expose fraud and more so if the public purse is being robbed.
Report this comment
Also, as a Mr Picky, can I point out that “harrassment” should be “harassment” here.
Perhaps the police notice contained the same error!
Report this comment
Some police officers really should think before opening their mouths. Unfortunately, in this case, they didn’t and the NOTW comment was very clumsy.
Not sure the reporter’s actions warranted an immediate meeting… again an OTT reaction from the cops given the complainant is a self confessed fraudster.
Report this comment
I always thought that public exposure was one of the penalties a criminal pays for getting found out. It now seems they can hide behind the law.
Report this comment
The police are only doing their job , the journalist has all rights to do his jobs but id does not mean he crosses the boundaries.
she is facing the crimes she committed but does that mean it makes it right for the journalist throw remarks at the met when the met are only doing their job which is trying to look after the people.
Report this comment
As a journalist for 50 years thank goodness for weeklies like the ‘Croydon Advertiser’ whose follow up was right and proper and in the interests of local democracy. Whoever people are – white, yellow, brown, if they have broken the law the local newspaper has a right to pursue them! If the local Press start getting afraid what price democracy?
Report this comment
Is Leveson operating already?
Report this comment
A lot of rubbish written above. Newspapers must never become judge and jury. For starters, they cannot know all the facts in the case and you cannot have some jumped up reporters making wild assumptions to get extra credits on their CV’s. This is an example of the worst kind of Press harassment because it is done for commercial gain (hopefully to sell more newspapers).
The person has pleaded guilty and is due to be sentenced on April 25. Until then it should remain sub-judice. That is how regional newspapers have always handled such situations.
It is only in recent years, with newspaper circulations going down the pan, that desperate journalists have become so irresponsible.
Report this comment
It is truly frightening that the woodentops in the police force believe they have the power to act this way.
They are, in effect, taking on the job of closing down legitimate press inquiries because a convicted fraudster claims she is being harassed.
This is a major step towards authoritarian government, and a natural by-product of the Leveson debacle.
As all journalists know, plods are not the brightest buttons in the box. They will fall in with what they think is the prevailing mood of the day.
Their standing in society is currently at an all-time low. Actions like this will undermine them even more.
The reporter in this case has done well. His first job is to protect his readers against the dishonesty of this despicable woman. Go for it, son!
Report this comment
‘Judge and jury’ should do the decent thing and seek urgent psychiatric counselling. He shouldn’t really be out and about.
Report this comment
Judge and jury: “You cannot have some jumped up reporters making wild assumptions to get extra credits on their CV”.
Would this have applied to Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein?
I’ll be interested to read your reply, assuming you know who they are.
Report this comment
A reply to beenthere:
Yes, Woodward and Bernstein were after President Nixon because he failed to support Israel enough during the Middle East War of 1973.
The question of Nixon’s lying was largely a red herring swallowed by generations of media journalists.
As publication of the secret Watergate tapes revealed, Nixon was very anti-Israel (for a US President). The Jewish lobby on Capitol Hill in 1973 wanted to US Marines to land on the Suez Canal to cut off the Egyptian Army which had reconquered Sinai (under Israeli military administration).
Nixon refused on the grounds that it would start a dangerous confrontation with the Soviet Union.
After that, he was a marked man as far as the Jewish lobby was concerned.
The Watergate saga proved a convenient way of getting revenge. The Washington Post (strongly pro-Israel) started the campaign. Hollywood (overwhelmingly pro-Israel) provided the movie. The rest is legend.
After all, what politician doesn’t tell the odd lie? The charges against him were mainly politically inspired. They were trivial when set against the meltdown that American society was undergoing at the time.
Report this comment
Who are you, Judge and Jury? Are you a journalist?
Report this comment
In reply to Part-time Hack:
No, I am not a journalist any more, but I am still a big head…and one that at least checks his facts.
“Beenthere” makes the mistake of citing a famous historical event with a run-of- the- mill UK court case. The two are so dissimilar as to defy comparison: Woodward and Bernstein were all about US politics at national level; and obviously if society is to function the media must have to right to comment on such issues. But where individuals have pleaded guilty and are about to be sentenced by the courts in the UK, the media have a duty to let justice run its course until after proceedings are concluded. The UK has benefited from properly constituted courts where the rights of all individuals are protected, even guilty ones.
We cannot allow individuals or the media to act above the law, otherwise it will lead to total anarchy and a breakdown of fundamental freedoms that too many people take for granted.
Incidentally, I am not defending Richard Milhous Nixon. I regard him as a war criminal over the way he misled the American public to prolong the Vietnam War, “Peace with honour” was his post election slogan, but that is not what the Watergate issue was about.
Nixon’s big mistake was in criticising Israel a little too often. What I write is common enough knowledge, but you won’t find it in the corporate press. That’s another reason why newspapers are failing.
Report this comment
Please stop talking total “b******s Judge and Jury. The Croydon reporter is merely doing his job by trying to ensure that he presents a fair and balanced report to his readers by giving both sides an opportunity to make their positions clear. As for Watergate, your remarks are risible!
Report this comment
Judge and Jury has bizarre views and sadly it sounds as if he’she has written as therapy from a unit somewhere rather than make raffia mats and matchstick modelling. He’s a worry…
Report this comment
It is terrifying that police can and do interfere with the work of a journalist who is doing his duty to report news and it shows how pressure can be placed and brought to bear on our free press.
Does the subject of the investigation have friends in high place by any chance? Has someone got something to hide?
Full marks to the Croydon Advertiser for standing up against such unacceptable bullying by the Bill, who ought to be catching criminals instead of getting heavy with and leaning on our press whose members must be allowed to freely and truthfully report news in the public interest and for freedom of speech
Indeed it appears to be the police who are harassing the journalist.
Report this comment