The journalistic integrities of Brighton and Hove's famous news hack Frank Le Duc and BHN's editor Jo Wadsworth, have been called into question by the citizen journalist Matt Taylor, independent Parliamentary candidate for Brighton Kemptown 2024.
Journalistic integrity is a term used to describe the ethical standards and principles that journalists should abide by when gathering and reporting information. It encompasses a range of principles including accuracy, neutrality, independence, impartiality, and honesty, all of which serve to protect the integrity of the profession. These principles are essential for maintaining trust and credibility within the news media and for safeguarding society's right to know.
A complaint against Jo Wadsworth has been sent to Frank Le Duc and as of publication, there has been no reply.
 |
| Faces disguised for privacy reasons |
Matt Taylor's complaint against Jo Wadsworth in full:
On Thursday 1 Oct, 2020 at 4:18PM, an article written by Jo Wadworth was published on the Brighton and Hove News website, with the headline, “Conspiracy theorist given suspended sentence over fake Satanic abuse claims.”
Within the article, Jo Wadsworth referred to me as “a notorious Brighton conspiracy theorist,” who had been given a suspended jail sentence for “spreading fake Satanic abuse claims.”
This is in itself false reporting, because I used the word, “alleged,” which was posted on the public court documents, and a significant word, which changes the whole ethos and meaning of the story, which Jo Wadsworth chose to omit, and by doing so, changing the whole truth of the story.
Jo Wadsworth chooses to distort the FACTS of the story, to sell a false narrative based on her own personal prejudice against me.
Jo Wadsworth goes on to falsely state that I had “harassed ****** police and crime commissioner (PCC) **** ******.”
I have never been charged with harassment of **** ****** and nor have I been convicted of harassing **** ******.
Jo Wadsworth falsely claimed I “fabricated claims,” about a certain London actor, that he abused children and drank babies blood.
Again, Jo Wadsworth is intentionally omitting the word “alleged,” which changes the whole story if it was included.
A word which was printed on the public court documents, and a word which Jo Wadsworth choose to omit because she held a preconceived and prejudicial opinion of me, having in July 2019, replied to me, “Matt, you bombarded us with the emails that were pretty much proof of your stalking claims. I'm staggered you were never convicted.”
For your information, Sussex Police are currently investigating a complaint I’ve made against two individuals who have continually been harassing and stalking me since 2017, who use Jo Wadsworth’s article as their tool of harassment.
Within my complaint, I claim these two individuals are also responsible for pretending to be ***** *******, who I believed was making derogatory and malicious comments towards me. It was a direct result of these provocations, that I published a series of videos and social media posts from June 2019 to February 2020 in which I referred to ***** ******* as an “Alleged Satanic cult leader.”
Jo Wadsworth wrote the following, “Based on these discredited claims, Taylor, 49, made and published a series of videos and social media posts from June 2019 to February 2020 in which he referred to ***** ******* as a Satanic cult leader.”
She clearly and intentionally chose to omit the word “alleged.” And in doing so, distorted the FACTS of the story to suit her own narrative towards me, that I ought to already be convicted for harassment, citing me bombarding BHN with emails.
Claiming I started making “outlandish allegations” against the *PCC, is an offensive to the victims of Sussex Police corruption.
Do you really think it's warranted for a 74 year old man, be sent to prison for allegedly sending a threatening email?
Man, 74, sent ****** police commissioner menacing email - BBC News
If you can’t see the bigger picture here, you shouldn’t be calling yourselves journalists.
On Wednesday 6 May, 2020 at 3:03PM, an article written by Jo Wadsworth was published in the Brighton and Hove News website, with the headline, “Police commissioner’s harasser ordered not to stalk her lawyer.”
Within the comment section, two years ago, a person identifying as Ace, made the following comment:
“It appears a certain obsessive internet Troll appears obsessed with this man, including making the false allegation he’s a stalker? Matt Taylor has not, to the best of my understanding, been convicted of stalking. A stalking protection order is not the same as a harassment charge; however, it appears said troll appears hell-bent on muddying water in their attempt to conflate one with the other. If you are going to go around mouthing off about all and sundry then at least try to get your facts right.”
Ace was making the factual point that I have never been convicted of stalking, and that a stalking protection (should be Prevention) order is not the same as a harassment charge.
This is correct, and Ace was correct to state, “it appears said troll appears hell-bent on muddying water in their attempt to conflate one with the other. If you are going to go around mouthing off about all and sundry then at least try to get your facts right.”
To which Jo Wadsworth replied;
“Hi Ace,
Matthew Taylor was convicted of harassment on 1 October last year:
We haven’t claimed that he has been convicted of stalking. However, it is accurate to say he has been made the subject of a stalking order.”
Two years later, having been reminded of the article, because this is the article which is always referred to, I wrote the following only 2 days ago.
“Correction. I wasn’t and have never been convicted of harassment on 1 October 2019.
I was at the RCJ for an injunction against me blogging, and I was found in contempt of that order, nothing to do with stalking.
Get your facts straight Jo.”
I believe Jo Wadsworth has gotten her facts mixed up. Having written the article in May 2020, and referring to being convicted of harassment on 01 October last year, Jo Wadsworth was referring to the events at the RJC concerning **** ******, which happened in October 2018.
As acknowledged by Jo Wadsworth within her own reporting;
“Eventually, a court imposed a civil injunction to prevent him from contacting or writing about her. In October 2018, he was given a four-year sentence suspended for two years for breaching the order.”
This confirms that I have never been charged or convicted of stalking. And that by stating I was convicted of harassment in October 2019, distorts that fact, that I was in fact found guilty of contempt, against a civil injunction preventing me from contacting or writing about her.
And again, Jo Wadsworth incorrectly reports I was given a four-year sentence, when it was four months.
AGAIN, GETTING THE FACTS WRONG.
WRONG: I was not found guilty of harassment on 01 October 2019.
RIGHT: I was found guilty of contempt in October 2018
WRONG: I did not call ***** ******* a “satanic cult leader.”
RIGHT: I did call ***** ******* an “alleged satanic cult leader.”
WRONG: I was given a four year suspended sentence.
RIGHT: I was given a four month suspended sentence.
Two days ago, Jo Wadsworth left the following comment:
“Hi Matt, you’re right, it was 8 September, 2020. You were sentenced on 30 September, 2020 (the story I linked to has these dates right, I got slightly muddled when making the comment, apologies for that).
I’ve just gone back and double checked, and I would be happy to send you an extract of the court results confirming you were found guilty of harassment at the morning session in courtroom 1 of Brighton Magistrates Court. The full charge was:
BETWEEN 26/06/2019 – 13/02/2020 at BRIGHTON IN THE COUNTY OF
SUSSEX pursued a course of conduct which amounted to the harassment of
***** ******* and which you knew or ought to have known amounted to
the harassment of him in that YOU MADE AND PUBLISHED A SERIES OF
VIDEOS AND SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS IN WHICH YOU REFERRED TO ***** ******* AS AN ALLEGED SATANIC CULT LEADER.
Contrary to section 2(1) and (2) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
ASN/Seq No.: 1900000000001044416N/003”
To which I left a comment, which was removed from the BHN website, and a comment I sent Jo Wadsworth via Twitter.
“Thank you for your correction.”
To which Jo Wadsworth replied:
“It's not a correction - I never claimed you had been convicted of harassing **** ******. I correctly said you had been convicted of harassing someone else.”
I believe I have demonstrated that Jo Wadsworth’s journalism has fallen short of professional.
I wasn't found guilty of harassment on 01 Oct 2019, as Jo Wadsworth reported I was.
This is incorrect. I was found guilty of contempt, of an injunction preventing me from blogging about ****** PCC. No mention of harassment or stalking.
Jo Wadsworth’s false reporting of my story has resulted in prolonged and exhaustive harassment and stalking against me, and other innocent third parties.
I wish this to be my formal complaint against Jo Wadsworth.
Yours sincerely,
Matthew Taylor
Independent Parliamentary Candidate for Brighton Kemptown 2024
www.Brighton2222Project.wordpress.com
www.KingArthursPoliticalParty.wordpress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment