The Halifax Evening Courier has been cleared of any wrongdoing over two articles it published about the death of a man in the Persian Gulf pleasure boat disaster in March this year.

Stephen Grady’s widow, Stephanie Grady, contacted the Press Complaints Commission after the paper ran an article reflecting on the impact of the tragedy on the family, in particular the couple’s two-year-old son, and a further story when she gave birth to a baby girl 14 weeks after the tragedy.

She claimed the first article gave the impression that her son had given an interview to the newspaper, and said the second article was printed after she told staff that she did not want it to appear.

She also objected to the use of a stock picture of her and her elder son, next to a photograph of the boat which killed her husband, claiming the paper had intruded into her grief in breach of Clause 5 (Intrusion into grief or shock) of the Code of Practice and into her son’s welfare in breach of Clause 6 (Children).

She also raised concerns under Clause 1 (Accuracy) and said that a reporter had tried to gain entry to her house on the day she had found out about her husband’s death, only identifying himself when asked.

But the PCC rejected the complaint.

The Courier said the first article had clearly been identified as comment and did not purport to be an interview, but instead invited readers to put themselves in the place of a confused two-year-old missing his father.

It said that, taken as a whole, the article was a sympathetic tribute to Stephen Grady, but it was happy to correct any factual inaccuracies and apologise for these.

It added that the second article, about the complainant’s new baby, was the result of an interview with Stephen’s parents, but after the complainant had got in touch the newspaper had reorganised its story to remove the picture of the new baby.

It said it did not think that most people would agree that the coverage was insensitive, and said it was surprised that the complainant had objected to the publicity, having subsequently done an interview with the Daily Mirror.

It also said it was satisfied its reporter had identified himself properly at the complainant’s home at the earliest opportunity and made no attempt to enter the house without permission.

The PCC said that although the Code requires newspapers to handle publication of material at times of grief “sensitively”, it does not amount to a ban on covering tragic stories unless everyone concerned agrees to publication.

It said although the second article was clearly unwelcome, it was not insensitive.

It also said that while it was not in a position to determine the exact circumstances in which the reporter had made an approach to the complainant, it was clear that he had given his identity and left after being asked to do so.

The PCC also found no breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy), as it did not consider that readers would think the paper had actually spoken to the two-year-old, and the paper had offered to correct other inaccuracies in the piece.

It added that as the paper had not interviewed or photographed boy, there could be no breach of Clause 6 (Children).