A reader has been spared jail over a bomb threat that caused an editor to fear answering his phone.

Nathan Miller, left, has received a conditional discharge after previously admitting an offence under the Malicious Communications Act, following a threat he had made to Wiltshire 999s founder Daniel Jae Webb.

The incident, in which Miller threatened to “blow up your shop” in an expletive-laden phone call to Daniel, came after the journalist, who also works for news agency SWNS, had covered his brother Paul Miller’s conviction for assaulting his pregnant girlfriend.

In a victim impact statement, Daniel told Swindon magistrates that Miller, pictured, had “used threats of violence and suicide in an attempt to have [the story] removed from the internet”.

He wrote: “Despite repeated efforts to calm Mr Miller and signpost him to mental health services who could help him, he continued to make threats until I ended the phone call.

“Mr Miller’s comments resulted in a great deal of distress. It was impossible to know whether he knew where I lived or knew of an address linked to me, and therefore I was concerned about whether or not he would carry out such acts and put my loved ones at real risk of harm.

“Not only was I affected by his words, but so were my family, who were informed of the situation and told to report any suspicious activity around their property to the police on 999 immediately.

“I should not fear going to work; I have a thick skin, but I should not be subject to abuse for reporting on public court proceedings.

“It is vital that the public are kept up to date about ongoings in their local courts and without the press, the public would rarely know when justice is served. In the words of District Judge Dickens: ‘If, as a society, we attack the press, we’re all doomed.’

“The incident did have an effect on me and adds to the concerns I already have about answering the phone, but I shall continue to report news, including court cases, and I won’t allow this kind of behaviour to intimidate me.”

Miller received a 12-month conditional discharge, plus £85 costs and £22 surcharge.

The court heard this was due to his immediate admissions in custody, taking full responsibility for his actions and showing great remorse.

The hearing was also told that he has mental health issues and has previously been sectioned.