A dangerous dog owner complained to the press watchdog about a news website’s coverage of her court case – despite the fact it hadn’t actually published some of the alleged inaccuracies she raised.

Gemma Saunders, who was found guilty of owning a dangerous dog that injured someone, complained Wales Online’s coverage of her case had contained multiple errors.

However, the Independent Press Standards Organisation found no wrongdoing on the Reach plc-owned site’s behalf.

The story in question had reported a jury “found Saunders guilty of being the owner of a dog which caused injury while dangerously out of control” and that the judge “warn[ed] Saunders a custodial sentence was a possibility”.

Complaining under Clause 1 (Accuracy) and Clause 2 (Privacy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice, Saunders claimed Wales Online had reported she had denied ownership of the dog, when this was not the case.

She also said there was no custodial sentence imposed post-conviction, despite this also not having been reported in the first place.

Among other gripes with Wales Online’s coverage, Saunders also believed the Cardiff-based title required her consent to publish her partial address and a photograph taken of her outside court.

Denying any breach of Code, Wales Online said it had not reported Saunders denied being the owner of the dog and had not claimed she had received a custodial sentence.

It added the area she lived in was heard in open court and that her photo was taken in an area accessible to the general public.

IPSO found no wrongdoing on Wales Online’s behalf.

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