The majority of complaints made to the Press Complaints Commission, which raise a possible breach of the Code of Practice, are resolved directly between the Commission’s staff, editors and complainants.

These are either settled to the express satisfaction of the complainant following some remedial action by the editor or are not pursued by complainants following an explanation or other response from the publication.

Below are summaries of the latest complaints involving the regional press which fall into the first category.

Rotherham Advertiser
Richard Norman of Rotherham complained, through Julia Gratton, that an article on the subject of his conviction for racially aggravated criminal damage contained inaccuracies. In particular, he was concerned that the article had suggested that he had ‘grabbed’ the victim; he denied this completely. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper, which provided the reporter’s notes to the effect that the claim of grabbing was made by the prosecution, amended its records to reflect the complainant’s clear denial of the allegation.

Epping Forest Guardian
M Smith, head teacher of Thomas Willingale School, complained that the article contained a number of inaccuracies with reference to the taking of photographs at the school play, and parents’ reactions to the school’s policy on this. Specifically, she explained that – contrary to the article – the school’s policy had been agreed by its governing body and had been in place for many years, both for protection of children and practical reasons. Moreover, the newspaper had been invited to take a photograph of a few children selected by the school, and not the dress rehearsal as the article had set out. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published a letter from the complainant making clear that the article had been misleading, and that the majority of parents understood and supported the reason for the school’s policy, which was not an unusual one. The newspaper also published a clarification which set out that the newspaper had been invited to take a photograph of a few children at the dress rehearsal.

The Star (Sheffield)
Richard Norman of Rotherham complained, through Julia Gratton, that an article on the subject of his conviction for racially aggravated criminal damage contained inaccuracies. In particular, he was concerned that the article had suggested that he had ‘grabbed’ the victim; he denied this completely. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper, which provided the reporter’s notes to the effect that the claim of grabbing was made by the prosecution, amended its records to reflect the complainant’s clear denial of the allegation.

Leigh Journal
David Butler of Leigh complained on behalf of his daughter’s partner, Paul Meah, that an article reporting that Mr Meah had been acquitted of three sex charges had misleadingly described the circumstances surrounding the third charge. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published an apology which clarified that the judge had directed the jury to disregard the third charge as the prosecution had offered no credible evidence to support its position.

Salford Advertiser
Janine Watson complained on behalf of Manchester City Council that the newspaper had inaccurately claimed that the City Council was waging a campaign to prevent Salford Reds Rugby League Club from developing a new stadium. In fact, she said that the only concern that had been expressed over the development had been in a letter of July 2003 to Salford City Council, and had been made with reference to the retail enabling element of the plan. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the newspaper published a clarification making clear that it accepted that this letter alone did not amount to a campaign against Salford Reds Rugby Club’s new stadium.

Birmingham Post
David Hartless complained about an article that reported the preparation for release of David McGreavy, a convicted murderer. In particular, the article reported that McGreavy was to live with the complainant and his wife when he was released, a claim which the complainant denied. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The newspaper published a correction which read as follows: ‘David and Fiona Hartless would like us to make clear that they have never asked David McGreavy to live with them at their house in Somerset as we stated on January 10. We apologise for any distress we may have caused them and the residents of Charlton Horethorne.’

Wessex Features and Photo Agency
Jacqui Hanson, press officer of Cheshire Constabulary, complained that a representative of the news agency had written to the parents of a murder victim – while the case against the three alleged murderers was active under the Contempt of Court Act – offering money for their story. The agency had made no attempt to clarify whether the parents would be witnesses in the murder trial that was about to take place. The complainant considered that this represented a clear breach of Clause 15 (Witness payments in criminal trials). She expressed her concern that there had been an increase in media approaches to families involved in court trials before their conclusion. (Clause 15)
Resolution: The complaint was resolved when the agency – which had made the approach through the police to minimise the family’s distress – accepted that they should have checked whether the parents would be witnesses in any forthcoming trial. It apologised for the error. It also indicated that its staff’s attention had been drawn to the relevant terms of the Code and undertook that checks would be made with police in future in advance of any such offer to pay for stories.

Daily Record
Mark Cowan of Glasgow complained on behalf of the family of Janette Law. The newspaper had reported that Ms Law (Mr Cowan’s mother-in-law) suffered from dementia and had been incapable of looking after herself before she died. The complainant said neither of these things was true. (Clause 1)
Resolution: The newspaper published a letter from Ms Law’s family which read: “Janette Law was a loving mother, sister and wife. In the summer you reported that Janette suffered from dementia, which was simply wrong. You also printed that she was incapable of looking after herself before she died. This was also false and caused enormous distress to Janette’s family who still grieve her sad loss. It is a shame you chose to rely on information that was so wide of the mark and that led to so many people being deeply hurt.” This was followed by an editorial note which read: “We are happy to provide the opportunity to set the record straight. At the time of publication we had no reason to doubt our source as other than reliable.”