The trial of a former editor accused of sending an obscene tweet to a Jewish campaigner has started.
Greg Hadfield, 69, denies the single charge of sending by public communication network an offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing message on X (formerly Twitter).
The tweet was reported to Sussex Police by Fiona Sharpe, who was mentioned in the tweet, alongside a picture of another tweet sent by former Hove MP Ivor Caplin featuring a picture of a young man with an erect penis.
The two-day hearing was opened for the Crown Prosecution Service by Richard Sampson, who said: “This is a case which revolves around the posting of a message on the platform now known as X in which the crown say an indecent message was sent because of the obvious content of a photograph.”
The prosecution’s only witness was DC Joe Williams, who said he had interviewed Hadfield for interview last year.
He said: “I wanted to discuss whether he had sent the message on X to Fiona Sharpe which contained the image which is produced to the court today, but also a number of other messages.”
He said he had put in a telecoms request for data associated with the X account, which showed it had been set up with the email address and telephone number he had previously used to communicate with Hadfield.
Under cross examination, during which he was interrupted by Hadfield’s barrister John Cooper KC several times, DC Williams said he could not prove he had checked Hadfield’s Twitter account to confirm the screengrab Ms Sharpe had sent police matched a tweet on his timeline.
After the prosecution case completed, Mr Cooper asked the chief magistrate, district judge Sam Goozée, to declare there was no case to answer on the basis that the crown had not proved that Hadfield had sent the tweet in question.
He said: “It may have been edited or dealt with in some way by Fiona Sharpe with critical elements taken out which this officer knows nothing about.”
Mr Sampson told Mr Goozée that Hadfield had (unsuccessfully) applied to the court to rule the prosecution was an abuse of process on the basis his journalistic rights in sending the tweet were under attack, and had also publicly crowdfunded on the same basis.
Mr Goozée ruled that as the tweet was sent by Hadfield’s account and he had confirmed in interview he ran the account, so on the face of it there was a case to answer, and the case should proceed.
The trial continues.
So his defence lawyers was a disgusting pof as well, trying to blame the victim.
What’s a pof Rachel?
A pof?
You sound bright.