AddThis SmartLayers

Regional daily story helps snare con gang who preyed on elderly

A regional daily helped snare a gang of con artists after one of the criminals read about their own exploits on the newspaper’s website.

Police have thanked the Sunderland Echo for providing evidence which led to the conviction of the gang, who preyed on vulnerable elderly victims in the city.

The Echo carried an appeal for information which was read by one of the conmen on his mobile phone, which equated to “virtually returning to the scene of their crime online”.

As a result of the small piece of evidence, detectives were able to corroborate the conspiracy.

Three members of the Hartlepool-based gang – Phillip Robert Orton, Lee Davidson and Scott Greathead – were put behind bars on Monday at Newcastle Crown Court.

Another, William Gales, died before facing justice, while gang leader Michael Gales is still on the run.

After one attack, 87-year-old Joan Barnett was left lying on the floor of her home for 10 hours after it was raided.

She died three months later due to complications caused by her injuries.

Echo managing editor Gavin Foster told HTFP: “We carried a police appeal on our website in the hope it would help snare those responsible. Among those who read that appeal were the criminals responsible – virtually returning to the scene of their crime online. It sparked a chain of events which led police to their door.

“We assisted the investigation and provided evidence after detectives discovered the story was accessed on mobile phones owned by the gang. Police said our evidence almost certainly helped to secure convictions and put those responsible behind bars.

“Sadly Joan never recovered from what had happened to her. But we hope her family get some comfort from seeing those responsible brought to book and I’m glad we were able to help in that process.”

Sunderland con

The convictions provided a splash for the Echo yesterday.

Gavin added: “This was a classic example of the importance of local newspapers in our communities and our society in exposing wrongdoing and helping to bring those responsible to account.

“At a time when new legislation threatens the very future of those newspapers, the very future of a free press and its ability to challenge individuals and organisations and assist in bringing criminals to book – this should serve as a reminder as to why such ridiculous law proposals should be repealed.”

Detective Constable Simon Dobson, the leading officer in the case, thanked the Echo for its contribution.

He said: “The offenders accessed the Sunderland Echo website and looked at the article that reported on Joan Barnett. Because this was a conspiracy and because with the victims, it was difficult to get evidence from them, it was a small piece of evidence which helped us corroborate the whole conspiracy.”

One comment

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • January 26, 2017 at 6:05 pm
    Permalink

    I’m REALLY uneasy about this.

    That’s because 1) the newspaper seems to be flagging up this point: “Hello readers, we collect your data and details when you come on to our website and we know exactly who your are, and 2) We’ll pass your information on to the authorities if we see fit.

    It’s hardly a friend dropping in is it? More like Big Brother is watching you.

    I don’t disagree with the smartness or morality of catching bad people but I do feel this particular example opens a dangerous can of worms and a dodgy precedent.
    What is to stop the Sunderland Echo running a story on TV licence dodgers and a new scheme to catch them all – then sending the details to the authorities to check whether they have paid their fees? Or historic shoplifting for that matter?
    Or fare-dodging?
    Won’t this undermine the trust between reader and publication which is the absolute core of newspaper loyalty???

    Yes, all of the above misdemeanours are wrongdoings which deserve to be punished, but isn’t the independence of the Press undermined if it acts as a willing undercover arm of the authorities in this way, however well-intentioned?
    We can be accused of spying on our buyers.

    If I’d been editor, I’d probably have assisted the authorities, had they asked in this particular instance – you would be doing your best to provide a worthy civic service and protect the public.
    But I would not have advertised the Echo’s involvement.
    Instead I would have asked the police service to consider what they might be able to do for the paper/public in return for our help in this particular instance?
    Future openness on cases of public interest perhaps?
    Or greater honesty when dealing with difficult questions from the Press?
    Maybe the release of genuine news stories that the police don’t bother with these days because they only release stories to the Press in which they are seeking further information or public help?

    In that way, public good would have been served but faith in the independence of the Press would not have been compromised.
    And, as a spin-off, police-Press relations might have been improved for the benefit of both parties and, (more importantly), for readers who, in the future, would have been better served and informed with more newsworthy and noteworthy information in their papers, without necessarily noticing the change.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(3)