Fighting for our right to rehabilitation: online articles are a life sentence

Adam is taking the Daily Mail to court in a landmark case that could change his life, and also set a precedent for thousands of others that have received life sentences from the media.

This is his story.

Charged with a crime

In 2015 I faced the toughest 3 days of my life. I went to court. Not just any court. The Crown Court. I had been charged with a minor crime from an incident which had occurred a year before. I was disgusted with myself and genuinely sorry for what I had done and the effect it had on others. 5 minutes of madness was all it took to have caused considerable distress to the victim. I was drunk on a night out and had an altercation. I knew I had behaved terribly. I had apologised, but it wasn’t enough.

I didn’t tell anyone

Our case was laid out on day 1. I had no previous convictions and was absolutely mortified about the prospect of anyone finding out, so I kept it all to myself. I had no friends or family to support me, but most importantly I had no witnesses. No member of the public had seen the altercation. Everyone agreed I was in the wrong that night, especially me. The question for the jury was whether it amounted to a crime. It was my word against his. I knew there was a serious chance I would be convicted.

Named in the national press

Day 2: My life changed forever. My friend sent me a link to an article the Daily Mail had written about me. They had taken pictures at the court without me knowing. They wrote about my school, my job, my small ex-council flat. Everything. They made things up about the incident. I was made to look appalling. I wasn’t a public figure, so I guess they had to make the article as salacious as possible, so it was worth reading. And it was a great read. I had definitely behaved appallingly on that night, but was I an appalling person? The comments under the article were worse. The whole world hated me. My life would never be the same again. The judge took a moment to ask whether the jurors had seen the article. Most raised their hand. I assumed the remainder would have later Googled it. The judge asked that the jurors ignore the article, but would they? I had to take the stand. I trembled as I recounted my side of the story. I could see the cynicism in the eyes of the jurors. I was a bad apple.

My mistake was to opt for the Crown Court instead of the Magistrates where these ‘low level’ crimes are normally tried. My solicitor convinced me the Crown Court was the way to go because it has lower conviction rates. He didn’t tell me about the potential for media coverage that could ruin my life. Forever. Regardless of whether I was convicted or not. I had thought about the possibility of media interest, but having researched it I noted there were thousands of convictions of this type every year, so I assumed my case wasn’t newsworthy. I was wrong.

A fair sentence

Day 3 was sentencing. The jury considered the case for 7 hours, but they had no choice but to convict me based on the evidence. I was guilty. A convict. The judge sentenced me to a small fine and community service. I accepted it fully and apologised again. I had already lost my job for hiding the arrest from my employer. I had lost most of my friends who had all seen the article. This seemed like a fair punishment. I threw myself into the community service with enthusiasm. I thought about the victim every day during the community service. I wondered whether he had got the closure he deserved. It can’t have been easy for him recounting the incident.

The day after sentencing, the Daily Mail wrote another article. No more ‘inverted commas’. They laid into me, and it was brutal. Perhaps I deserved it, I thought. I went to Nando’s that night and everyone was looking at me. I got a takeaway and went home. I called my friends and family to tell them the whole story. They already knew the Daily Mail version.

A clean slate?

I tried to be optimistic. The judge told me the conviction would become ‘spent’ after 2 years and wiped from my criminal record. He explained that this would ‘clean the slate’ and give me a second chance. I hung on to this good news. I’d paid the price, so maybe this was an opportunity to move on with my life. Get a new job, settle down, stop drinking. However, in the back of my mind I had an intense feeling of anxiety. The Daily Mail articles. What could be done?

A refusal from the Daily Mail

After the community service ended, I emailed the Daily Mail. I explained the details of the case; told them how I had repented; explained that there were some inaccuracies in the stories; and begged them to remove the articles so I could move on with my life. They replied asking for proof of the inaccuracies. They refused to change the articles except for some minor details which I could prove were false. I couldn’t prove everything, but apparently the burden of proof was on me, even though they were the accuser. I emailed them with fresh evidence dozens of times, but it was like speaking to a brick wall. I would have to live with the articles for now.

Hope for a fresh start dashed

In 2016 I applied for a job. My friend had introduced me to his boss, and it went well. At the second meeting with the boss, he offered me a job which I accepted on the spot. He knew about my past as I had told him on the first meeting. His view was that the crime was minor, and I had paid the price and had been honest with him. He was willing to take a chance on me. I met the HR team and told them too. I never heard from them again… They ghosted me. My friend told me they Googled me and found the Daily Mail articles. I was devastated. My fresh start had been dashed. The boss called me and apologised. There was nothing he could do. The HR team felt the articles posed a reputational risk.

I consoled myself by thinking perhaps this would all be resolved once the convictions became ‘spent’ a few months later in 2017. After all, the idea behind the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act was that minor ex-offenders should be given a second chance and treated as if they hadn’t committed the crime. This, they thought, was good for society as it would reduce reoffending levels and allow ex-offenders to be productive once again. My plan was to write to the Daily Mail again in 2017. I spent months drafting an email to them.

A life sentence from the Daily Mail

In 2017 my convictions became ‘spent’ and I had been fully rehabilitated. I was delighted! Finally, 3 years since that 5-minute incident, I could put it behind me. I sent the email to the Daily Mail the moment I received the news, begging them again to remove the articles on the basis that I had been rehabilitated. They ignored me. I chased them. They ignored me again. When I eventually threatened them with legal action, they replied saying I had no grounds. How could this possibly be? How could my right to rehabilitation not matter? Their legal team eloquently explained that their right to press freedom outweighed my rights. It dawned on me that I might have to live with this forever. The Daily Mail had given me a life sentence. I felt hopeless and needed to escape. I started drinking again. Heavily.

Nevertheless, I kept battling. I applied for hundreds of jobs in new sectors, thinking that perhaps a change of direction would prove I was a new person. Despite being grossly underqualified for the jobs, I got a few bites. Then the dreaded HR conversation would occur. I was honest. They found the articles and it was all over. Again and again. What was I to do?

Articles help end my business

In 2018 I decided enough was enough and I started my own business. The only way I could be employed again was to employ myself. I used the last of my savings to start a technology company. We got a partnership, and things were looking up. We needed some funding, so I wrote a pitch. Miraculously a someone gave me a small investment. I spent 15 hours a day working on the business. We were still lossmaking, but we had potential.

In 2022 we decided we needed another round of funding. Another miracle. We got it! A big American investor thought we were worth a punt. This was incredible news. We signed the term sheet and celebrated. Finally, everything was behind me, until… they called me and told me they would be doing a background check. This was normal for them. My heart sank. I filled out their 20-page questionnaire. Questions about my identity, previous convictions etc etc. I explained everything about the conviction to them, but I knew what the outcome would be. They withdrew once they saw the Daily Mail articles. I was back to square one. After 6 months of negotiations with the new investor, my company had run out of money. Curtains.

Daily Mail refuse to listen

I pleaded with the Daily Mail. I explained what had happened with the jobs, the investor, everything. They refused to listen. They hated me. Over 50 emails had been exchanged and they’d had enough. They told me they would cease any further correspondence.

By that time, after investing everything into the business, 5 years of no salary, followed by 2 years on a tiny salary I was completely broke. Since the incident, I had done everything I possibly could to move on with my life. I couldn’t do any more. All I wanted was to get back on my feet. I had a 2-year-old boy and a baby on the way. How would I ever be able to support them? I was at rock bottom.

Finally finding help

That’s when I discovered charities like Unlock, who help people with criminal records. I joined message boards and read blogs. There were thousands like me. Rehabilitated offenders with life sentences from journalists. I did my research and discovered that no-one had taken it all the way to court. It was time to take action.

I applied for a pro-bono lawyer through the wonderful charity Advocate. I had to prove I was basically bankrupt. I did so and they appointed me a barrister who would work on my case for free. The kindest, most generous person I have ever met. She helped me draft countless emails and letters to the Daily Mail, but the brick wall held strong. We offered the Daily Mail a compromise whereby the articles would be anonymised. Nothing. My barrister advised me that we would have to take them to court. She explained the risk that the case could get allocated to the High Court and, if we lost, I would have to pay the Daily Mail’s huge legal fees.

I decided I had nothing to lose.

Taking a stand

So here we are. On the brink of a landmark case that could change my life, and also set a precedent for thousands of others that have received life sentences from journalists.

Help me. Help yourselves. It’s time to take on the Daily Mail.

All identifying details have been omitted from this post in the hope that the writer can, one day, achieve anonymity. Unlock supports this action and hopes the claimant will succeed in setting a precedent for those affected by these issues.