A former professional footballer jailed for blackmailing his old coach over sex abuse claims has had his complaint over a regional daily’s coverage of the case thrown out.

Gavin Geddes complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation after Brighton daily The Argus reported he had been jailed for 40 months after he “blackmailed his boyhood coach for £70,000 by threatening him with false accusations of child sex abuse”.

Geddes, pictured, claimed it was inaccurate to describe his sex abuse claims as “false” because the judge had made no finding in this respect.

But IPSO backed The Argus over its characterisation of the allegations, saying it was not significantly misleading for the newspaper to do so.

The story had said Geddes had blackmailed his boyhood coach for £70,000 and “described the money as compensation for abuse he claims that he suffered as a child”, adding he “maintained in court that abuse he said he suffered as a boy had blighted his life”.

It stated that detectives had investigated his claims of child sex abuse for 18 months, but had informed the former coach late in 2018 that “no file would be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service”.

Geddes, who played professionally for Brighton & Hove Albion, Bristol Rovers and AFC Bournemouth during his career, complained to IPSO under Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice.

He claimed the story was inaccurate because it described his abuse claims as “false” when the judge had not made any finding in this respect.

Geddes further said a statement made by the prosecution barrister that police had concluded their investigation was not correct, claiming the allegations were the subject of an ongoing police investigation.

In response, The Argus said it had been heard in court that no further action had been taken by the police and CPS following a long investigation into allegations of sexual abuse, and that the judge had emphasised to the jury that the coach had always denied the allegations.

It said that its characterisation of the allegations was based on these facts, but as a gesture of goodwill offered to make the article more neutral by removing references to the falsity of the allegations.

The Argus further offered to run a clarification which would be trailed on the front page and appear in full on page six, although Geddes rejected this offer.

IPSO found it was accepted by Geddes that, following a lengthy investigation into the allegations he had made against the coach, no charges had been brought and that no file had been passed to the CPS.

During IPSO’s investigation, he was unable to provide any contradictory evidence to support his position that the investigation into the coach was ongoing.

In these circumstances, the Committee did not find that it was significantly misleading to describe the allegations made by Geddes as “false” and doing so did not represent a failure to take care, in a story which was reporting on his conviction for blackmail.

The complaint was not upheld, and the full adjudication can be read here.