The Press Ombudsman has decided not to uphold a complaint from Mr Michael Blount that Crime World breached Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy), Principle 3 (Fair Procedures and Accuracy), Principle 4 (Respect for Rights), Principle 7 (Court Reporting) and Principle 8 (Prejudice). The complaint refers to a court report published in December 2025.
The article is about the withdrawal by the complainant of a damages claim which followed an incident in which the complainant claimed that a woman had driven her car at him twice outside his home, knocking him down and injuring him. The man denied a claim that he had been campaigning to stop teachers from parking outside his home. He also denied slamming his hands on the bonnet of the woman’s car and throwing himself to the ground in a bid to stop her parking.
The article stated that after the Judge advised him that his evidence was being recorded and that there “could be serious consequences for him if the court found he was not telling the truth” the complainant had consulted with his lawyer and had withdrawn his case.
The Complaint
On Principle 1, the complainant said the headline was “misleading, distorted and inaccurate”. He said the publication had failed to “distinguish objective facts”.
On Principle 3, he said the publication had not applied “fair play in reporting”.
On Principle 4, he said the publication had “fabricated the publications headline” to imply he was behaving dishonestly. He said the reference to him as an “OAP” was “politically incorrect and classic ageism”.
On Principle 7, he said the publication had failed to show “fairness and accuracy in legal reporting”.
On Principle 8, he said “ageism is prejudice.”
The complainant provided the Press Ombudsman with videos and screenshots in support of his complaint. She has reviewed this material.
The Publication’s Response
The publication stated that the article was a “fair and accurate court report” on the complainant’s withdrawal of his civil claim. It said this was the role of the media, and that such reporting was protected by Principle 7.1 which states that “nothing in the Code shall limit or prohibit the fair and accurate reporting of legal proceedings”. It said it was for the court to determine the outcome of the complainant’s litigation.
The Decision
The Press Ombudsman’s role does not include re-litigating a case which has already been withdrawn from court by the complainant. She has no comment to make on the material supplied by Mr Blount.
She is satisfied that the Crime World article is a fair and accurate court report, that its headline is also fair and accurate. She does not find that the reference to the complainant in the headline as an “OAP” [old age pensioner] is ageist. She notes that in the article the complainant is referred to as a “75 year old pensioner”. She finds that the article has not breached the Code of Practice under any of the Principles cited by the complainant.