“It was definitely targeted at me. Because I am a journalist and because I’m a woman.”

These words, spoken on a new campaign video issued today (Monday November 25) by South Yorkshire Police (SYP), will resonate with hundreds of women working in our industry who have been faced with online violence simply because of their gender and the job they do.

In this specific instance, a journalist for Reach, the UK’s largest commercial publisher, was sent unsolicited extreme pornographic content without her consent. The images, videos and gifs were paired with vile misogynistic language and appeared to have been sent with the intention of intimidation and sexual gratification. Such activities are now classed as criminal under the Online Safety Act, which came into force just over a year ago.

The Know More campaign, launched to coincide with International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women tackles the issue of Online Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG), with the intent of not only educating the public around the impact and criminality of offences such as cyber stalking, threats and cyberflashing, but also with the intent to arm its officers with knowledge around application of the law through training and resources.

Earlier this year SYP approached me to ask for input from Reach into the issues faced by women working in journalism. Their campaign officers had seen the research we published in conjunction with Women in Journalism in 2023 which showed three-quarters of women had experienced some kind of threat to their safety in connection to their work as journalists and that 25 per cent had been subjected to sexual violence or harassment. Half of the respondents said they promoted their work less due to the threat of online harm and a fifth of the respondents said they had considered leaving journalism altogether.

The SYP campaign seeks to acknowledge the increased levels of online violence targeting women in public-facing roles such as journalists and politicians and they asked if we might be able to support by providing testimonies and guidance that could be shared with police officers and in the public campaign.

This push to highlight the criminal impact and potential police response to online violence of this nature should be lauded.

This year more than 100 media leaders signed a letter co-authored by Reach, Women in Journalism and Reporters Without Borders, which called for improved police response to online crimes against women in media industries and improved working relations between journalism and policing.

A month later, the Crime Reporters Association (CRA), the Society of Editors and the Media Lawyers Association issued a report and a series of recommendations setting out improvements that could be made to repair the relationship between police and journalism in the UK and improve the safety of journalists. 

That’s why the SYP campaign has to be spotlighted and celebrated.

To see South Yorkshire Police taking such an active stance on online crime that particularly impacts women, was refreshing and I intend to highlight their work as a bastion of best practice when talking to police leaders and representatives in government who are working to address violence against journalists and VAWG.

Our journalist who bravely shared her story is sadly one of many women who I know have been targeted by unjustifiable and revolting aggression and sent extreme adult content without consent. I applaud her too for highlighting the impact such actions can have and for standing up and refusing to allow such shameful and criminal abuse to stop her from doing her job.

However, what we now need to see is similar activity from other police forces and a joined-up approach to tackling the impact and potential consequences of online violence against women and girls. We also need to see investment and support for police to act upon the laws they have at their disposal and ultimately bring perpetrators of violent online crimes to justice.

Unfortunately in our reporter’s case, while police on her local force (not South Yorkshire) investigated, they were unable to gather enough evidence to identify the perpetrator due to the use of a VPN (Virtual Private Network) and because the crime was not considered to reach the threshold of threat into which further investigation was warranted.

This outcome is not unusual. Currently prosecution of anonymous online crime of this nature is low, often due to difficulties in gathering evidence.

Therefore, the important next steps have to include more collaborative work like that done by SYP. There also has to be more engagement in the issues beset by journalists and women who use online spaces for their work and there has to be greater investment in policing and resources.

Without these elements being put into place, we run the risk of the law being toothless, resulting in perpetrators continuing to escape prosecution for their crimes and potentially going on to commit more serious violence against women and girls.

The post Reach journalist targeted by online abuse shares story as part of new police campaign appeared first on Press Gazette.

Essex Police has said it is investigating Telegraph journalist Allison Pearson under a possible breach of the Public Order Act over a year-old, now-deleted post on X.

The force has faced criticism that its tactics amounted to an attack on press freedom after officers visited Pearson at home on Remembrance Sunday. She said she was told officers could not tell her what the offending post was or who had made the complaint against her and was asked to attend a police station for a voluntary interview.

[Read more: Essex Police action against Allison Pearson is misguided and chills press freedom, writes media law expert David Banks]

But the force since said it has complained to press regulator the Independent Press Standards Organisation, claiming Pearson’s original claim in the Telegraph last week that she was visited over a “non-crime hate incident” was inaccurate.

On Saturday morning, 16 November, the force said it had shared a transcript of video footage with IPSO which includes an officer saying: “It’s gone down as an incident or offence of potentially inciting racial hatred online. That would be the offence.”

The force said: “A complaint of a possible criminal offence was made to the police and this is why we called; to arrange an interview”.

The Guardian reported on Friday that it had found the deleted message at the centre of the complaint and has spoken anonymously to the person who appears to be behind the Allison Pearson complaint.

Pearson is alleged to have re-posted a picture showing two police officers standing next to a group of people holding a flag associated with a mainstream Pakistani political party.

A deleted message, retrieved from online archives by Press Gazette, sent by Pearson on 16 November 2023 said: “How dare they @metpoliceuk. Invited to pose for a photo with lovely peaceful British Friends of Israel on Saturday police refused. Look at this lot smiling with the Jew haters.”

The message was viewed more than 400,000 times according to X. Context added to the message by other X users noted that the picture appeared to be from a protest which took place in August 2023 in Mancheseter relating to a Pakistani political party and said the event had no relation to Palestine, Israel or Hamas.

The complainant is not one of the people in the photograph. The person told The Guardian: “Each time an influential person makes negative comments about people of colour I, as a person of colour, see an uptick in racist abuse towards me and the days after that tweet are no different.”

Press Gazette reproduces the excerpt from the website archive.is below. The image has been altered by Press Gazette to obscure the faces of those appearing in it.

What is the Public Order Act and how can journalists breach it?

For an offence to be a committed under the Public Order Act 1986 the language used must be “threatening, abusive or insulting” and “intended to or likely in all the circumstances to stir up racial hatred”.

Journalists can fall foul of the act when reporting on extreme political statements.

Crown Prosecution Service guidance states: “In deciding upon the public interest of charging these offences it is essential that prosecutors keep in mind that in a free, democratic, and tolerant society people are able to robustly exchange views, even when these may cause offence. However, the rights of the individual to freedom of expression must be balanced against the duty of the state to act proportionately in the interests of public safety, to prevent disorder and crime, and to protect the rights of others.”

What does Allison Pearson have to say?

Writing on X on Saturday, in a post which has been viewed more than three million times, Pearson said:

“The story so far.

“1. I am not a racist.

“2. I didn’t post a racist tweet.

“3. My tweet did not incite violence against any protected characteristic.

“4. My fairly innocuous tweet was deleted a year ago.

“5. Senior lawyers say my tweet does ‘not come near the threshold for criminal prosecution’.

“6. But Essex Police upgraded the accusation from Non-Crime Hate Incident to offence under the Public order Act. Why?

“7. Essex Police visited my home but refused to specify either the accusation or the accuser.

“8. Under pressure, Essex Police deployed the terrorist-fighting Gold Command to investigate a solitary Welsh journalist 5ft 4 inches who still believes in freedom of speech. Weird, I know.

“9. This is all nonsense. Deeply sinister, frightening nonsense and wholly disproportionate police over-reach if you ask me.

“10. Last night, I realised I no longer feel safe in my own country.

“A terrible moment. As Elon Musk said, ‘This must stop.’ It really must.”

Non-crime hate incidents

Feminist Julie Bindel, writing in the Sunday Telegraph, said she was also visited by police on a Sunday over an allegation of committing a “hate crime” over a message she had posted on X. She said she was given no further details and asked to attend a police station voluntarily to make a statement. Bindel refused and said she was told the investigation was being dropped.

Police forces around the UK are believed to be keeping records of thousands of “non-crime hate incidents” which are often based on social media posts and occur when no criminal offence has been committed but when a complainant believes a statement was motivated by hostility or prejudice.

Telegraph calls for change in the law

In a leader column The Sunday Telegraph warned that “overzealous police officers” are “choosing to focus their effort on policing thoughts and speech rather than cracking down on violent crime or theft”.

It said: “Many overseas are watching, and appear horrified that in a supposedly free and democratic society journalists and politicians can face criminal investigation for expressing strongly worded opinions…

“Until we get a government willing to change the law, a small minority of activists will retain the ability to comb wording for offence and abuse police procedure as a means to intimidate opponents.”

Prime Minister Keir Starmer was asked about the Pearson case yesterday. He said: “There is a review going on of this particular aspect but I think that as a general principle the police should concentrate on what matters most to their communities.”

The post Telegraph calls for change in law after Allison Pearson accused of Public Order offence appeared first on Press Gazette.

The Society of Editors and the Crime Reporters Association have warned that plans to introduce a presumption of anonymity for firearms officers facing criminal trial represents “a significant departure” from the principle of open justice.

In a joint letter to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, Society of Editors executive director Dawn Alford and Crime Reporters Association chair Rebecca Camber sought assurances that the new framework could not one day expand to cover other officers accused of using force in the line of duty.

The anonymity proposals — introduced last week after the police officer who shot Chris Kaba dead in 2022 was found not guilty of his murder — would keep the identity of accused firearms officers secret until they are convicted.

Since 1990 there have been four prosecutions of firearms officers over shooting deaths, and in none of those cases was an individual officer ultimately convicted. (The Metropolitan Police as a whole were convicted over the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005.)

The Home Secretary’s proposals are intended to protect officers against possible future retribution. Sky News has reported that Martyn Blake, the officer who shot Kaba, is living in hiding after a bounty was placed on his head by gang members. Blake’s identity had been kept secret until a successful media challenge led the judge to lift a previous anonymity order.

However Alford and Camber said they felt “shared concern” that a presumption of anonymity could in time undermine the principle of open justice.

They wrote: “While we recognise that criminal prosecutions brought against police officers for actions taken in the course of their duties are extremely rare, the proposal to grant automatic anonymity for firearms officers represents a significant departure from the principle of open justice and raises serious questions about transparency and public confidence in the police service as a whole.

“While limited to firearms officers at present, the introduction of such legislation risks laying the framework for other officers accused of using force in the line of duty to seek anonymity under the same provisions and, with this in mind, we would welcome your assurances as to what measures you have taken to ensure this cannot happen and that judges will not seek to apply the same provisions elsewhere.

“While we recognise that such steps are being introduced for the purpose of protecting officers from future retribution, open justice remains a fundamental principle at the very heart of our justice system and is vital to our rule of law. This week you talked about restoring confidence in the police. For confidence to be enhanced, the rule of law must apply equally to police as it does to the general public.”

Secrecy around the criminal justice system has increase in recent years as those under criminal investigation, but not charged, now have a right to privacy in the UK.

In May 2024, a law passed by the Northern Ireland Assembly which would give those charged with sexual offences anonymity unless convicted was struck out after being challenged by the media.

[Related: Journalists fear ‘secret justice’ over proposed one-reporter limit in sex trials]

The post Secrecy around UK gun police threatens open justice say editors and reporters appeared first on Press Gazette.

Home Office officials boasted that police were able to run the car number plates of journalists to warn sex offenders about approaches from the press, documents show.

Home Office files released to the National Archives show the reaction to the campaign by the News of the World to create Sarah’s Law in the wake of the 2000 murder of Sarah Payne.

Under then-editor Rebekah Wade, now Brooks, the Sunday tabloid began a weekly ‘name and shame’ section, identifying dozens of sex offenders living in the community across the country.

It was fully backed by Sarah’s family, but backfired in some cases, causing civil unrest and attacks on victims of mistaken identity.

Although ministers were keen to meet with Brooks and the Payne family, and acknowledged the need for changes to the law and sex offender monitoring systems, the documents also suggest a worrying overreach of police powers.

In a “summary of recent events,” an unnamed official wrote: “The News of the World campaign made a number of fruitless attempts to approach offenders whose placements are funded by the DOU [Dangerous Offenders Unit].

“Their failure to do so was due to the ingenuity of staff at the Langley House Trust who traced press vehicles by running checks with the police and swiftly moved those [offenders] whom they considered to be in danger.”

It’s not known exactly which force carried out the checks, because the trust operates bail hostels across the country.

More than 400,000 people signed a petition to change the law so that the public would have the right to see a register of convicted paedophiles.

A version of the scheme was finally introduced in 2011.

Paedophile Roy Whiting was convicted of Sarah’s abduction and murder in December 2001 and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The documents also detail government deliberations about seeking an injunction to stop the newspaper’s campaign.

Government lawyers suggested that the claimants should include the Labour Home Secretary, Paul Boateng, and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), which did at one point allude to such a move.

But they acknowledged that an injunction would be “ground-breaking, complex and fiercely resisted by the press”.

The post Police tracked journalist number plates to warn sex offenders they were approaching appeared first on Press Gazette.

Police in Gibraltar have announced they are investigating the sudden death of Telegraph journalist David Knowles while he was on holiday on Sunday.

Knowles, who was 32, died of a “health emergency” which was a suspected cardiac arrest according to The Telegraph.

Royal Gibraltar Police said on Thursday it is “investigating the circumstances surrounding the sudden death” of Knowles although it added that “there are no specific concerns at this time with regard to the death”.

UK counter terrorism police are providing support with the investigation.

Update: Royal Gibraltar Police said on Friday a post-mortem exam has been carried out and there “continue to be no specific concerns surrounding the cause of death” although the “results will take some time to be processed”.

It added that detectives supported by counter terrorism colleagues “continue to progress their investigation”.

Knowles was well-known for launching and presenting The Telegraph’s Ukraine: The Latest daily podcast at the start of the Russian ground invasion in February 2022.

He was previously deputy and head of social media as well as head of audio development at the title, and previously worked on the social media teams at Mail Online and the World Economic Forum.

The Telegraph set up an online book of condolences for Knowles which has received contributions totalling more than 90,000 words.

Ukraine: The Latest was shortlisted for the Innovation of the Year award at the British Journalism Awards 2022 and this year was named the Best News Podcast at the Publisher Podcast Awards.

In its obituary, The Telegraph said Knowles was “known and cherished by a huge number of listeners all over the world for his dedicated work presenting the Telegraph’s award-winning Ukraine podcast; a naturally gifted broadcaster, he was a reassuringly authoritative presence who never pushed his own personality into the foreground, even though he felt deeply about the fate of the Ukrainian people”.

Telegraph editor Chris Evans said: “David was exuberant and innovative. He was passionate about the cause of the Ukrainian people and their attempts to repel the Russian aggressor. Without his enthusiasm, the Ukraine podcast would not have been half as successful. He was also a gentle, sensitive man who inspired deep affection among his colleagues.”

Knowles was last year added to a list of people banned from entering Russia, alongside many other UK journalists.

The full Royal Gibraltar Police statement about the death of David Knowles said: “The Royal Gibraltar Police is currently investigating the circumstances surrounding the sudden death of 32 year British National David Knowles on Sunday 8th September, whilst holidaying in Gibraltar.

“His Majesty’s Coroner in Gibraltar has been informed and a Coroner’s investigation is underway. Next of kin for the deceased have been informed and a specialist RGP family liaison officer has been appointed. Arrangements have been made for a post-mortem examination to be conducted today.

“A policing ‘mutual aid’ request for specialist support was submitted to UK policing, although there are no specific concerns at this time with regard to the death.

“Following the RGP’s mutual aid request, detectives from UK Counter Terrorism Policing have been appointed to provide support to the RGP investigation, due to their existing capability and their experience of dealing with international enquiries.

“The RGP will not be making further comment at this time regarding any aspect of the investigation.”

The full follow-up statement reads: “The Royal Gibraltar Police can confirm that the post-mortem examination of the late David Knowles was completed yesterday afternoon at St Bernard’s Hospital, and there continue to be no specific concerns surrounding the cause of death, albeit that the post-mortem examination results will take some time to be processed.

“RGP detectives supported by Counter Terrorism Policing colleagues continue to progress their investigation, and any further updates will be provided at the appropriate time.”

The post Police probe sudden death of Telegraph’s David Knowles appeared first on Press Gazette.

Three journalism organisations have proposed a list of 26 recommendations they say will help fix the “broken” relationship between police and the media.

The recommendations – which have been drawn up by the Crime Reporters Association, the Society of Editors and the Media Lawyers’ Association – have been submitted to the National Police Chiefs Council and the College of Policing.

The proposed fixes include requests that forces take journalists into their confidence to avoid needless speculation, as in the case of Nicola Bulley’s disappearance, and that police press officers answer their phones. The report also urges greater transparency by police forces about crimes committed in their areas (currently only a tiny minority of incidents are revealed publicly).

Police forces asked to provide phone numbers, pick up the phone and take more reporters into their trust

The recommendations were made in a report titled “The Police and the Media: Repairing the Relationship” written by Crime Reporters Association chair Rebecca Camber.

In September Camber gave a speech at the Police Superintendents’ Association’s annual conference during which she argued police could have avoided a “circus of conspiracy theories” around the disappearance of Nicola Bulley had they trusted reporters enough to brief them off the record.

A College of Policing report into Lancashire Police’s handling of the case that was published in November issued a similar assessment, saying “the failure to brief the mainstream media on a non-reportable basis on this information, or to adequately fill the information vacuum, allowed speculation to run unchecked”.

The report published on Friday argued: “If officers take journalists into their confidence, there are real benefits for policing…

“The Crime Reporters Association has been in existence since 1945 and to our knowledge there has never been a case where a member has breached the terms of any briefing.

“If officers don’t know or trust the media present, they can request journalists to sign legal waivers in the same way forces currently proceed in a pre-trial briefing.”

The report also said that the Bulley investigation review “exposed the perils of not identifying the difference between bona fide news reporters and third parties such as social media influencers or bloggers”, and argues only accredited journalists should be allowed to attend press briefings.

The report observes that, “in the event of a terror attack, the current media protocol appears to be to direct media to ‘check on the force Twitter/X’…

“In the hours after a terrorist attack or critical incident, getting accurate information to the public is vital, yet social media platforms can allow false narratives to spread causing confusion and panic.

“If a national mechanism for informing the media was established, guidance to reporters could be quickly disseminated to prevent falsehoods being repeated in online reports.”

But at a more basic level, the report also notes that “since the pandemic, there has been a worrying trend of police press officers being unwilling to speak on the phone about cases”.

“Police forces must advertise their press office phone number and email address clearly on their website,” it advises, adding that forces “should be prepared to answer the phone to respond to press queries…

“A default response of ‘can you just email in’ will do nothing to build relationships or engender trust.”

Among its other recommendations the report asks forces to permit their press officers to discuss “all crimes, regardless of seriousness” with reporters, including “cautions, fines, out-of-court disposals, [single justice procedures] and other fixed penalties”.

At present, it said, these crimes “are often not being released or confirmed”.

“These may be regarded as lesser crimes, but they remain offences and the public have a right to know how they are being dealt with in the criminal justice process.”

The report acknowledges that “many in policing don’t trust the media and increasingly, journalists feel the same about the police. Officers at even the most senior level are nervous about engaging. The prevailing message throughout the ranks appears to be that officers should avoid the media who cannot be trusted. The walls have gone up”.

It argues the media, too, has “a large part to play” in rebuilding trust.

“But with the support of police leadership in changing the narrative, we believe rebuilding this relationship is vital for public confidence.”

Society of Editors executive director Dawn Alford said that “urgent action is needed to re-set and rebuild the relationship between the police and the media”.

“Our joint report offers some key recommendations that would help restore trust and a better working relationship between officers and journalists for the ultimate benefit of the public.

“We now look forward to the College’s response to our recommendations which we hope they can endorse with a view to working together to drive forward much-needed change.”

Full list of recommendations from the Society of Editors, Media Lawyers’ Association and Crime Reporters Association to the Police Chiefs Council and College of Policing:

1. Police forces should advertise their press office phone number and email address clearly on their website, including any out-of-hours provision if applicable
2. All forces should be prepared to answer the phone to respond to press queries
3. Press officers should identify themselves by name on the phone so that professional relationships can be forged with the media
4. Press officers should be empowered to provide as much guidance as possible to reporters. There should be provision in the APP [College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice] to allow press officers to make their own ‘reasoned judgements in individual cases’ when confirming details of investigations
5. Forces should continue to use emailed press releases as a primary form of communication with the media rather than simply placing information online
6. Consideration should be given to a mechanism for informing the national media about stories, whether this is a simple contact email list or software that can deliver email alerts
7. Police should consider providing guidance in major incidents (on a reportable and non-reportable basis) to prevent panic caused by social media speculation, misinformation and rumour
8. Police should be able to discuss case details where people have been dealt with by cautions, fines, out-of-court disposals, SJP [single justice procedure] and other fixed penalties
9. The NPCC, College of Policing and staff organisations need to work together on training for all ranks to promote a better professional relationship between police and the media
10. The police and press must work together to ensure that officers feel more confident and comfortable speaking to the media.
11. The current College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice (APP) guidelines around counter-corruption are damaging officers’ perception of the media and are in urgent need of revision
12. Police must be prepared to act when threats are made to journalists’ safety including online threats and in-person stalking
13. It is essential that press conferences are for accredited media only
14. Officers should seek to have a trusted dialogue with journalists and aim to provide regular updates in major investigations providing both reportable and non-reportable background briefings
15. Forces should endeavour to provide the media with charge details as soon as possible. The media should be afforded advance notice of cases to allow them to attend the defendant’s first appearance at magistrate courts
16. Forces should consider pre-trial or pre-verdict briefings to help the media to understand a prosecution and inform reporting at the end of the case
17. Press offices should endeavour to release pictures and video material shown in court on the same day as shown to the jury throughout a prosecution
18. Press releases containing mugshots and other relevant information should be sent out as soon as possible on the day of the verdict, not after a sentence
19. Police should release mugshots for all custodial sentences. Forces should be aware that releasing mugshots, CCTV, body worn video or other picture material from the case such as images of the weapon or exhibits heightens the chance of publication. Without images, some stories won’t be published
20. The CRA, MLA and Society of Editors would like to work with the NPCC and the College of Policing to understand how we could improve the handling of media approaches to victims and relatives
21. It should always be the choice of the victim or relatives whether to speak to the media. If families do wish to speak to the media, providing as much information and photographs as possible can increase the prominence of reporting about their case and provide opportunities for follow-ups which may be useful publicity in cases such as a missing person or a manhunt. If families do want to speak, don’t wait for sentencing
22. Interviews by police press officers of witnesses and victims should be discouraged, they are no substitute for an independent interview by an accredited member of the media
23. Policing needs to consider a robust strategy to tackle some of the risks to investigations posed by social media
24. Reporters face challenges in verifying information appearing in real time on social media and we anticipate that the relationship with the police will prove ever more crucial in establishing the truth. Forces must understand the need to move quickly to respond with guidance in the face of speculation, misinformation and correct information posted by witnesses
25. In recent times there has been a series of cases where members of the public have posted footage from arrests and police searches which have led to highly critical commentary of the officers involved. Forces should consider providing more guidance about the circumstances of incidents and/or the release of police body worn footage to ensure that the public has a balanced view of what happened
26. We would like to work together with the College of Policing and the NPCC in a review of the Authorised Professional Practice to reflect the recommendations above.

The post ‘Pick up the phone’ is one of 26 fixes offered to police by Crime Reporters Association appeared first on Press Gazette.

Update 8 April 2024: Charges against a press photographer arrested while covering a police incident in Swansea last year have been dropped one day before a jury trial was due to begin.

Swansea Crown Court heard the Crown Prosecution Service was no longer offering evidence against Dimitris Legakis on a charge of assaulting an emergency worker in relation to the incident, according to Wales Online. It was reported that the arresting officer’s original evidence about what happened did not align with a statement he later made.

Judge Geraint Walters was reported to have told the court on Monday that, having read documents in the case, it appeared to him the case was about a police office taking “offence” to a photographer taking pictures.

James Hartson, representing Legakis, said his client was a “well-known professional photographer” and his case raised “legitimate questions about the freedom of the press”.

A public order offence of using threatening or abusive words or behaviour was dropped at an earlier stage while the prosecution said on Monday it would not be in the public interest to pursue the remaining charge of obstructing or resisting a police officer.

Legakis told Press Gazette the case is still impacting his mental health and his camera equipment was seized and kept for more than two months meaning he “had to notify clients of mine of the ongoing legal process which caused me immense embarrassment”.

He now plans to make formal complaints to South Wales Police, the CPS and the relevant fire service which was also present at the incident.

Original story 4 October 2023: A Swansea-based press photographer has been charged with assaulting and obstructing a police officer following an incident in which he says he was stopped from doing his job.

Dimitris Legakis, a member of the British Press Photographers’ Association, told Press Gazette the incident on 22 September has impacted his mental health, leaving him struggling to sleep.

He has also had to spend about £2,500 on equipment in order to be able to continue doing his job as police have not returned equipment worth around £6,000 that was seized, including two DSLR cameras, a wide angle lens, a drone, memory cards and his mobile phone.

Legakis, who runs Athena Picture Agency who are the official photographers for Swansea City FC, said: “I’ve been having nightmares ever since. I hardly sleep. I do suffer with my mental health. That has made it ten times worse. I’m often very unmotivated, on the verge of, if you like, almost scared to go out to work. I’m trying to fight against that.”

Legakis received a tip-off from a friend at around 8.20am on Friday 22 September that a car was on fire. A 77-year-old woman subsequently died in hospital and her husband has been charged with murder.

Legakis was in custody at Swansea Central Police Station for about 15 hours, from around 9am until midnight.

His equipment was seized, seemingly without the required judicial approval under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.

As a result Legakis has been forced to buy a new camera, lens, mobile phone and memory card, spending around £2,500 so he can keep working.

A South Wales Police spokesperson told Press Gazette: “Emergency services were called to the scene of a car fire in Sketty Lane, Swansea at just after 8.20am on Friday 22nd September.

“A man and woman were taken to hospital with burns. 77-year-old Helen Clarke died on the Sunday evening in Morriston Hospital. 80-year-old David Clarke was subsequently charged with murder and has appeared at court.

“While officers were setting up a crime scene cordon a 47-year-old man was arrested.

“Dimitris Legakis, of Swansea, has been charged with assaulting an emergency worker, a public order offence and obstructing a police constable in the execution of their duty.

“He will appear at Swansea Magistrates Court on 15th November.”.

Press ‘should not be prevented’ from filming at scene of an incident

Legakis has been a photographer for two decades but said incidents involving both police and members of the public trying to stop him from doing his job have significantly worsened in the past few years.

On Christmas Day last year he was at the scene near where a car plunged into a river in Swansea, killing two people. According to his videos and a complaint he made to South Wales Police, seen by Press Gazette, multiple police officers attempted to block his camera and said things like “I’m asking you to show some decency”, “I’m asking you to show some respect to the people involved and stop recording”, “you are actually impeding the investigation”, and “are you very proud of what you do?”

He said the officers’ actions breached his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and he is considering taking legal action against police in relation to both these incidents.

College of Policing guidelines state: “Reporting or filming from the scene of an incident is part of the media’s role and they should not be prevented from doing so from a public place. Police have no power or moral responsibility to stop the filming or photographing of incidents or police personnel. It is for the media to determine what is published or broadcast, not the police.

“Once an image has been recorded, the police have no power to seize equipment, or delete or confiscate images or footage, without a court order.”

Legakis said: “The problem I’m having is this: if a member of the public complains to the police that I’m taking pictures and the police turn up, when the police ask me to leave the member of the public obviously thinks that what I’m doing is wrong. And that spoils it for me and that spoils it for other newsgatherers that might turn up.”

Photographer Andy Aitchison eventually secured compensation and an apology from Kent Police after being arrested at his home and held for seven hours on suspicion of criminal damage for taking photos of a protest outside a Covid-hit asylum centre in January 2021.

Last summer My London reporter Callum Cuddeford was arrested and also spent about seven hours in police custody after covering Just Stop Oil action and being mistaken for one of the protesters.

And months later three journalists – two photographers and one LBC reporter – were arrested and detained for covering Just Stop Oil protests on the M25. Hertfordshire Police’s chief constable Charlie Hall “personally apologised” following an uproar.

The post Case dropped against press photographer after altercation with police officer at scene of fatal car fire appeared first on Press Gazette.

The Metropolitan Police has settled with three journalists detained and stopped from covering a Black Lives Matter protest in London in 2014.

Video journalist Jason N Parkinson, photographer Jess Hurd and another unnamed photojournalist, all members of the National Union of Journalists, have accepted an apology and out-of-court settlement from the police force.

But they criticised the fact key evidence was seemingly lost meaning the case took more than nine years to settle and noted that UK police have issued many such apologies after hindering the work of journalists.

Hundreds of people took part in a protest at the Westfield shopping centre in London’s Shepherd’s Bush on 10 December 2014 in honour of Eric Garner who was killed by a police officer’s chokehold in July that year. Garner’s last words were “I can’t breathe” and inspired hundreds of protests in the US and Europe, of which this was the first of its kind in the UK.

The journalists were confined along with protesters and filmed as they read out details from their press cards and were released. They were then told to leave the area, preventing them from reporting on the subsequent arrests of 76 protesters.

Hurd reported that she was hit in the face by a police officer in the events leading up to the detention.

According to Rachel Harger of Bindmans Solicitors, who acted on behalf of the journalists, the Met has now accepted that the three NUJ members felt they were “subjected to state surveillance for reporting on political protest”.

A Met spokesperson said: “The Met absolutely recognises the rights of the media and has worked hard over many years with members of the NUJ to establish mutual professional working arrangements through agreed protocols and guidelines. These materials include training videos and briefings for officers at the beginning of their career, and throughout, on the role of the media and the UKPCA press card. We continue to value our ongoing discussions with the NUJ and their members.”

‘Journalists should be able to work without fear of violence’

Hurd said: “This was not the first time that I have been assaulted by a police officer while working as a press photographer. I thought my case would be clear cut because I was assaulted by one of two evidence gatherers, both recording with body-cams and a videocamera.

“It seems impossible to me that all the footage of our illegal detention, from which we were filmed with our press cards when leaving, and my assault both went missing.

“We will not have access to justice until the police are accountable for their actions. This means not losing key evidence.

“Whilst I welcome the apology from the Metropolitan Police, it reads just the same as all other apologies. Journalists should be able to work without fear of violence and targeting by the police.”

Parkinson also welcomed the settlement and apology but shared similar concerns about the footage and the length of time the case has taken.

“We repeatedly requested all the footage of the police evidence gatherers and body-cams from that night and yet none was ever released,” he said.

“Then towards the end of the case in September 2023 we were told the MPS had discovered new footage and would release it after it was reviewed. Two months later we were told there was no new footage. Our lawyer said either ‘they haven’t properly retained it or it’s been lost.’

“The Met Police were also repeatedly asked to explain the whereabouts of the footage and why it was not properly retained back in 2016. No response was ever given.

“How is it possible that vital evidence is not retained or lost in such a huge case surrounding 76 people being mass arrested?

“This apology is nothing that we have not seen many times before, the same words and the same assurances. Yet we have seen more journalists arrested while doing their jobs in the last year than I have witnessed in my entire 20-year career. We are 26th on the World Press Freedom Index, below South Africa. That is not a good position to be in for a so-called democracy.”

Hurd and Parkinson are also both part of an ongoing legal action by six journalists against the Met for holding surveillance information about them on a national “domestic extremism” database. That legal challenge was launched in November 2014, before the Black Lives Matter protest.

NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet said: “While we are pleased this has been resolved and the police have apologised, the fact that it has taken so long to get to this stage is wholly unacceptable.

“Journalists must be allowed to do their job without any police interference and without their safety being compromised. The NUJ will continue to make this abundantly clear to the Metropolitan Police Service and other forces, and will carry on representing and supporting members who have been treated unfairly.”

Black Lives Matter and Just Stop Oil protests arrests of journalists

Journalists were arrested and even assaulted at numerous protests in the US relating to the Black Lives Matter movement.

On Wednesday it was announced two Los Angeles Times journalists had settled with the Minnesota state for $1.2m after being “cornered and attacked” during a protest over the murder of George Floyd in May 2020.

In September last year five press photographers, including British journalist Adam Gray working for SWNS, achieved a settlement with the New York Police Department after they were each assaulted and/or arrested covering protests in the summer of 2020.

The settlement meant the NYPD was obligated to implement policies and training to ensure members of the press are free from the threat of wrongful arrest and harassment.

In May 2021 photojournalist Nick Stern, originally from the UK, alleged police officers “assaulted, battered and shot” him with rubber bullets as he tried to cover protests in Los Angeles.

In the UK there has been a spate of arrests of journalists especially at the scenes of environmental protests.

Photographer Peter Macdiarmid received a payout from Surrey Police last month after he was handcuffed and detained for several hours while covering a Just Stop Oil protest at an M25 petrol station in August 2022.

A MyLondon reporter spent seven hours in police custody two days later after being arrested covering a petrol station protest in Hammersmith.

In November that year four journalists – LBC reporter Charlotte Lynch, documentary maker Rich Felgate and photographers Tom Bowles and Ben Cawthra – were arrested in the space of two days by Hertfordshire Police while covering protests on the M25. A review found their arrests may have constituted “unlawful interference” in their freedom of expression.

MPs later added greater protections for journalists covering protests to the Public Order Bill.

The post Met Police issues apology nearly ten years after detaining journalists at protest appeared first on Press Gazette.

More than 100 journalists and media industry leaders have signed a letter to UK police chiefs asking them to “do everything you can to break the cycle of abuse that risks sidelining women from journalism”.

The letter, led by Reach, Women in Journalism and Reporters Without Borders, asked three police representatives on the Government-coordinated National Committee for the Safety of Journalists to take action in four ways that could help “secure a safer future for women working in journalism in the UK”.

Scroll down to see the full letter and list of who signed it

The journalists fear that a “significant” increase in online abuse against women in journalism over the past decade could impact media freedom and diversity by making them want to leave the industry.

Research conducted by Women in Journalism and Reach last year found that 18% of around 400 women journalists who responded had considered leaving the media industry altogether as a result of abuse and threats online.

The letter, sent on Friday to mark International Women’s Day, said improving the recording of crimes against journalists and whether attacks are as a result of their work would help reveal the scale of the problem and, as a result, allow effective responses to be found and social media platforms to be held to account.

It also asked for these statistics to be regularly reported back to the committee and government.

It asked for national guidance and training for police to be issued so they can understand the “gendered nature of online violence, the connections between online and physical violence, and best practice in dealing with such crimes”.

Finally it called for better dialogue between police forces and journalists “to ensure attacks can be quickly reported and effectively dealt with and perpetrators held to account”.

National newspaper editors to have signed the letter include ex-Women in Journalism chair and former Mirror editor Alison Phillips who left the newspaper group a month ago and her successor Caroline Waterston, the Sunday Mirror and Sunday People’s Gemma Aldridge, The Guardian’s Katharine Viner, The Observer’s Paul Webster, Chris Evans at The Telegraph, Tony Gallagher at The Times, Sun editor-in-chief Victoria Newton, Reach Scotland editor-in-chief David Dick and Gary Jones at the Express.

Broadcasters showing support include Sky News special correspondent Alex Crawford, who last week coordinated a separate letter calling for international journalists to be allowed into the Gaza Strip, Channel 4 News presenter Cathy Newman and international correspondent Lindsey Hilsum, ITV News presenters Julie Etchingham and Mary Nightingale and political editor Robert Peston, and BBC disinformation and social media correspondent Marianna Spring – who alone is the target of more than 80% of online abuse flagged within the BBC.

Editors of regional brands across Reach and Newsquest, including the Manchester Evening News, Liverpool Echo and Belfast Live, are also represented.

Also signing was Women in Journalism chair and ITN chief executive Rachel Corp, who said in an interview around mental health this week: “Unfortunately, there are still things which are harder for women as journalists, particularly around online safety and the kind of abuse people can receive.”

Reach is the biggest commercial news publisher in the UK and unusually has an online safety editor working to support staff and work on internal and external measures to try and crack down on abuse. The third partner behind the letter, Reporters Without Borders, has published multiple reports about online harassment and sexism affecting journalists.

Full letter sent to police chiefs:

Violence against women working in journalism in the UK has increased significantly over the past decade, much of it conducted online. While all journalists may be subject to online abuse, women are far more likely to experience gendered attacks: recent research showed that three-quarters of women working in the UK journalism and media industries had experienced rape or death threats, harassment, stalking, misogyny or sexual approaches online in connection to their work.

We are deeply concerned about the impact of online violence on media freedom and diversity. Research conducted by the UK’s largest commercial publisher Reach Plc and Women in Journalism (1) found women were leaving front-line jobs in journalism and minimising their online profiles in order to avoid online violence against them. There is also compelling evidence (2) to show that women of colour, women who openly share their faith, LGBTQ+ women, women with disabilities, and women from working class backgrounds are significantly more likely to experience violence and hate online. The chilling effect of online violence – likely to get worse as we head towards elections – stifles press freedom and creates spaces for disinformation to thrive; it also risks making journalism less diverse at a time it needs more than ever to be representative.

We are also worried about the impact on individuals. Women journalists who experience serious online violence, such as stalking, death or rape threats, or receiving unsolicited pornographic content from anonymous accounts, report long-term impacts on their professional and personal lives, including depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts and post-traumatic stress disorder. There is a growing awareness of the link between online and physical violence; fear that online attacks may lead to ‘real-life’ attacks is palpable among those who experience violence online.

Yet despite the rise in online violence, there are worrying inconsistencies in the way police handle, record and respond to online crimes against women journalists nationwide. Women journalists reporting online crimes to police often feel their case is quickly dismissed, or that their fears are perceived as an overreaction – a fact which adds to their trauma and makes it all the more likely they will leave the profession.

We need to stop this cycle. The cycle of women feeling unsafe in their work. The cycle of women feeling unheard. We need to secure a safer future for women working in journalism in the UK.

So today, on International Women’s Day, we come together to ask you – as police representatives charged with working on the safety of journalists – to work with us for change. We have four simple asks which could make a world of difference to our industry both now and in the future:

• Improve the recording of crimes against journalists. Accurate reporting – including clearly recording when attacks are related to a journalist’s work – is essential if we are to understand the scale of the problem, formulate effective responses and hold social media platforms to account.
• Provide national-level guidance for police on online violence against journalists, and training on the gendered nature of online violence, the connections between online and physical violence, and best practice in dealing with such crimes.
• Report back to government. As police representatives on the National Committee for the Safety of Journalists, we call on you to regularly report back figures of crimes against journalists to the Committee.
• Improve dialogue between police and industry. Police forces should establish direct and effective channels of communication with journalists and representative bodies to ensure attacks can be quickly reported and effectively dealt with and perpetrators held to account.

Today, we as journalists and media leaders join Reporters Without Borders UK, Women in Journalism and Reach Plc to ask you to do everything you can to break the cycle of abuse that risks sidelining women from journalism. Let’s work together to break the cycle and secure a safer future for women working in journalism.

Full list of signatories on the letter:

1. Alex Crawford – Foreign correspondent, Sky News
2. Alex Stepney – Policy and External Affairs Director, News UK
3. Alison Gow – Media consultant
4. Alison Phillips – Journalist
5. Andrew Colley – Regional Editor, Newsquest Cumbria
6. Anna Highfield – Senior News Reporter, Architects’ Journal
7. Anthony Baxter – Deputy Managing Editor, LBC Newsgathering
8. Antonella Mulè – Chief Strategy and Corporate Development Officer, Reach
9. Anu Anand – Journalist
10. Benedicte Paviot – France 24´s UK Correspondent
11. Carole Cadwalladr – Journalist, The Guardian and The Observer
12. Caroline Waterston – Editor, Mirror
13. Catherine Philp – World Affairs Editor, The Times
14. Cathy Newman – Presenter, Channel 4 News
15. Chris Evans – Editor, The Telegraph
16. Christina Lamb – Chief Foreign Correspondent, Sunday Times
17. Clothilde Redfern – Director, Rory Peck Trust
18. Colin Hume – Head of Learning & Development, National World
19. Daisy Wyatt – Associate Editor, The Daily Express
20. Daniel Gorman – Director, English PEN
21. David Dick – Editor In Chief (Scotland), Reach Plc
22. David Higgerson – Chief Digital Publisher, Reach Plc
23. Dawn Alford – Executive Director, Society of Editors
24. Deborah Bonetti – Director, Foreign Press Association in London
25. Dhruti Shah – Freelance Journalist
26. Dominic Ponsford – Editor-in-Chief, Press Gazette
27. Donna Ferguson – Award-winning freelance journalist
28. Donna-Louise Bishop – Specialist reporter (obituaries), Newsquest
29. Dr Maja Šimunjak – Senior Lecturer in Journalism
30. Dylan Jones – Editor-In-Chief, Evening Standard
31. Edd Moore – Audience and Content Director, South West, Reach plc
32. Eoin Brannigan – Editor-in-Chief, Belfast Telegraph and Sunday Life
33. Fiona O’Brien – UK Director, Reporters Without Borders
34. Fleur Launspach – UK correspondent Dutch national news NOS
35. Gary Jones – Editor, Daily Express and Sunday Express
36. Gavin Foster – Editor, Northern Echo
37. Gavin Thompson – Regional Editor, Newsquest Wales
38. Gemma Aldridge – Editor, Sunday Mirror and The People
39. Graeme Brown – Editor, Birmingham Mail and BirminghamLive
40. Hanna Geissler – Health Editor, Daily Express
41. Hannah Storm – Media Safety Consultant and Co-Director, Headlines Network
42. Helen Dalby – Audience and Content Director, Reach
43. Hilly Janes – Associate Lecturer, Media School, London College of Communication
44. James Brindle – Chief Executive Officer, The Journalists’ Charity
45. James Evelegh – Editor, InPublishing
46. James Harding – Editor and Founder, Tortoise Media
47. Jenny Kean – Writer and researcher
48. Jessica Ní Mhainín – Policy and Campaigns Manager, Index on Censorship
49. Jodie Ginsberg – CEO, Committee to Protect Journalists
50. John Crowley – Editor, FT
51. John Wilson – Editor, Hereford Times, Newsquest
52. Jonathan Paterson – Managing Director, The News Movement
53. Joy Yates – Regional Editor, Newsquest Cumbria
54. Julie Etchingham – Anchor, ITV News at Ten
55. Karin Goodwin – Co-editor and Journalist, The Ferret
56. Karyn Fleeting – Delivery Director, Reach Plc
57. Katharine Viner – Editor in Chief, Guardian News & Media
58. Katie French – Regional Editor, Newsquest
59. Leona O’Neill – Journalist
60. Liam Fisher – Head of talkSPORT
61. Lindsey Hilsum – International Editor, Channel 4 News
62. Lisa Bradley – Deputy Head of Journalism, University of Sheffield
63. Liz Green – Journalist, broadcaster
64. Liz Nice – Editor
65. Marcela Kunova – Editor, Journalism.co.uk
66. Maria Boyle – Luxury travel writer and PR director
67. Maria Breslin – Editor, Liverpool Echo
68. Marianna Spring – Disinformation and social media correspondent, BBC
69. Martin Little – Audience Transformation Director, Reach Plc
70. Mary Nightingale – Presenter, ITV Evening News
71. Michael Adkins – Senior Editor, Newsquest
72. Michela Wrong – Journalist and Author
73. Michelle Stanistreet – NUJ General Secretary
74. Natalie Fahy – Editor, Nottinghamshire Live
75. Nic Keaney – Managing Editor
76. Owen Meredith – CEO, News Media Association
77. Patricia Devlin – Investigative Journalist
78. Patrick Ward – Print ACE
79. Paul Caruana Galizia – Reporter, Tortoise Media
80. Paul Linford – Publisher, HoldtheFrontPage
81. Paul Webster – Editor, The Observer
82. Professor Julie Posetti – Global Director of Research, International Center for Journalists; Professor of Journalism, City, University of London.
83. Rachel Corp – CEO for ITN and Chair of Women in Journalism
84. Rana Rahimpour – Freelance Iranian-British journalist
85. Rebecca Whittington – Online Safety Editor, Reach
86. Richard Duggan – Regional Editor North West, Newsquest
87. Richard Porritt – Regional Editor, Newsquest
88. Richard Reeves – CEO, AOP (Association of Online Publishers)
89. Richard Wallace – Head of TV, News UK
90. Robert Peston – Journalist
91. Rodney Edwards – Editor, The Impartial Reporter
92. Ruth Hardy-Mullings – Head of Content
93. Sangita Myska – Journalist & LBC Radio Presenter
94. Sarah Collins – Editor at talkSPORT
95. Sarah Lester – Editor, Manchester Evening News
96. Sarah Macdonald – Founder/Director Make Waves Ltd
97. Sharmeen Ziauddin – Editor in Chief, She Speaks We Hear
98. Sheena McStravick – Editor, Belfast Live
99. Simon Murfitt – Senior Editor, Newsquest London
100. Simon Pitts – Chief Executive, STV
101. Sonya Thomas – Freelance Journalist and Writer
102. Sophia Smith Galer – Freelance Journalist and Content Creator
103. Steffan Rhys – Editor, WalesOnline
104. Tim Lethaby – Regional Editor, Newsquest South West
105. Tim Levell – Programme Director, Times Radio
106. Toby Granville – Editorial Development Director, Newsquest
107. Tony Gallagher – Editor, The Times
108. Victoria Macdonald – Health and Social Care Editor
109. Victoria Newton – Editor-in-Chief, The Sun
110. Wayne Ankers – Editor, YorkshireLive
111. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown – Journalist, Columnist, Author

The post News industry urges police to ‘break cycle of abuse’ against women in journalism appeared first on Press Gazette.

Police mounted a covert surveillance operation following the arrest of journalists Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney in a bid to unmask one of their sources, a tribunal has heard.

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal was told that the arrest of Birney and McCaffrey in 2018 was a “disruptive” tactic to see if the reporters would reach out to the source after their release from custody.

The tribunal is examining allegations that the award-winning journalists were subject to unlawful covert surveillance by UK authorities.

It heard a series of new revelations as the case opened on Wednesday, including allegations that the Metropolitan Police illegally obtained McCaffrey’s phone data in 2011 – data that police in Northern Ireland subsequently secured seven years later as part of another probe into the reporter’s work.

In 2018, Northern Ireland-based McCaffrey and Birney were controversially arrested as part of a police investigation into the alleged leaking of a confidential document that appeared in a documentary they made on a Troubles massacre.

The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), citing a conflict of interest, asked Durham Police to lead the investigation into the inclusion of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland document in the No Stone Unturned film on the 1994 UVF massacre in Loughinisland, Co Down.

The PSNI later unreservedly apologised for how the men had been treated and agreed to pay £875,000 in damages to the journalists and the film company behind the documentary.

The settlement came after a court ruled that the warrants used by police to search the journalists’ homes and Fine Point Films had been “inappropriate”.

‘Whole purpose was to unmask the journalistic source’

In 2019, Birney and McCaffrey lodged a complaint with the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) asking it to establish whether there had been any unlawful surveillance of them.

The tribunal case began in London on Wednesday and was due to sit for two days but the hearing was adjourned before lunch on the opening day due to the late disclosure of police documents.

One of those documents was a directed surveillance authorisation approved by former PSNI chief constable George Hamilton.

This gave the green light for covert surveillance of an individual whom officers suspected of being the source of the leaked document from the Police Ombudsman’s office.

Prior to adjourning the case, tribunal chair Lord Justice Singh invited counsel for the journalists to outline their cases in broad terms.

Ben Jaffey KC, representing McCaffrey, said the directed surveillance authorisation document, which he got first sight of at 7.30am on Wednesday, was key to the case.

“The nature of the operation is now pretty clear,” he said.

“It was to arrest the two journalists with the intention of releasing them the same day – the intention was not to ask any serious questions or because they needed to be interrogated under arrest. But because they wanted to create what is sometimes euphemistically called a disruption or a surprise.

“They would then be released at the end of the day and then aggressive covert attempts would be made to see if they got in contact with their source.

“The whole purpose of the operation was to unmask the journalistic source.”

The surveillance operation was conducted for two weeks before Mr Hamilton granted an application for it to be cancelled.

Jaffey set out a series of grounds challenging the legality of the surveillance authorisation. He disputed a police contention that the operation was not intrusive.

He said a reference to obtaining recorded audio indicated the strategy was to be intrusive.

The senior counsel said surveillance of that nature required approval of a judicial commission, not solely a chief constable.

Jaffey said the authorisation application was done at the request of the senior investigating officer, Darren Ellis of Durham Police.

He claimed the document contradicted Ellis’s statement to the tribunal in which he said he was unsure whether a directed surveillance authorisation was progressed in the case.

During the hearing, Jaffey also questioned the legal basis for a police request to Apple for an emergency preservation order on Fine Point Films’ iCloud account following the arrest of the journalists.

The tribunal also heard that as part of the 2018 investigation, police “reinterrogated” phone data it requested from the Metropolitan Police in London related to McCaffrey.

‘This case is a shambles’

It emerged that the Met Police obtained McCaffrey’s data in 2011 in another investigation aimed at revealing the identity of a source.

Jaffey said he and his client were only made aware of this revelation last Friday.

“We had no idea that communication data had been obtained in that operation,” he said.

The lawyer added: “It seems overwhelmingly likely that that communications data authorisation was unlawful.”

He claimed the PSNI’s subsequent move to source the data secured from the Met for the 2018 investigation was also unlawful.

The tribunal was already set to probe claims that the PSNI itself unlawfully accessed Mr McCaffrey’s phone records in 2013 as part of an unrelated investigation into his journalistic work.

McCaffrey had been investigating alleged police corruption around the time his data was accessed by the PSNI in 2013.

Jaffey said the PSNI had acknowledged that its actions in that case had been unlawful and the only matter for the tribunal to determine was the remedy.

“What happened there is that there was no prior authorisation and there was no attempt to apply the correct legal test,” he said.

The police forces represented at the hearing will respond to the applicants’ case when the substantive hearing resumes.

Earlier Jaffey criticised the late disclosure of police documents.

“This case is, I’m afraid, a shambles which is not ready for considered judicial determination at the moment,” he said.

Birney’s counsel Stephen Toal KC also expressed concern at the late disclosure.

“This is not the approach that is taken in Northern Ireland to matters of discovery and disclosure,” he said. “It is a shambles and it certainly is not indicative of how we usually do cases there.”

Lord Justice Singh, who was sitting on the tribunal panel alongside Lady Carmichael and senior barrister Stephen Shaw KC, told all legal parties in the case to agree “rigorous directions” to ensure the case could resume again without undue delay.

The respondents in the case are the PSNI, Durham Police, MI5, the Security Service Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and several Government ministers.

Birney and McCaffrey: ‘We still need answers’

Outside court, Birney and McCaffrey expressed shock at the details that had emerged on the first day.

“I think it was stunning just to hear our counsel outlining just what has been going on since 2011,” Birney told reporters outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

“It is still somewhat shocking.”

McCaffrey said: “It’s shocking, but there’s still much more that we need to know – we still need answers.”

He added: “Three different police forces in the UK have been trawling journalists, every journalist in the UK should tonight be asking themselves was I one as well. Was it me?

“And they should be going to the IPT and asking and finding out have they been victims like Trevor and myself.”

Séamus Dooley, Irish secretary at the National Union of Journalists, said: “Today’s revelations were deeply disturbing. NUJ member Barry McCaffrey was the subject of sustained surveillance over a much longer period than we could have imagined.

“No matter how dark and murky we had suspected the behaviour of the authorities, today’s brief hearing has confirmed a far more egregious breaches of process. The NUJ’s fears about abuse of investigatory powers have been proven to be fully justified.”

He added: “At the heart of this case is the right of journalists to operate in a democratic society. Source protection cannot be guaranteed when due process is ignored.

“If those responsible for the rule of law cannot be trusted they certainly should not be given special powers, in the name of security. We welcome the fact that hearings will be in public, and that the truth will emerge in open court.”

The post Police ‘mounted surveillance op’ after journalists’ arrest in bid to find source appeared first on Press Gazette.