Geldof may face criminal charges for identifying on Twitter two women whose babies were abused by Lostprophets singer
Peaches Geldof has offered an apology for revealing on Twitter the names of two women whose babies were abused by the singer Ian Watkins, after it emerged that she could face criminal charges for the disclosures.
Geldof told her 166,000 followers she had assumed the names of the women "had been released for public knowledge".
The mothers of the two infants, a boy and a girl, are subject to lifelong anonymity orders to prevent the identities of their children becoming public.
South Wales police confirmed on Thursday they were investigating whether to prosecute Geldof and other internet users who may have identified the two young victims.
The mothers, both in their 20s and fans of Watkins's band, Lostprophets, pleaded guilty to a series of sexual offences alongside the singer on Tuesday.
On Friday, Geldof explained that the offending tweets had been deleted and that she had learned a lesson from the incident. But in a series of tweets she argued that the identity of women should be revealed.
"The question of wether [sic] or not to give anonymity to criminals in cases like this will go on forever. However these women and Watkins will be gettings [sic] three-meals a day, a double bed, cable TV etc- all funded by the tax payer alongside not being named apparently. It makes me sad. I deleted my – tweets however and apologise for any offence caused."
Identifying victims of sexual offences is a crime under the Sexual Offences Act and carries a fine of up to £5,000, but publishers who flout the law often pay a further sum in compensation to the victim.
South Wales police, whose detectives led the Watkins investigation, codenamed Operation Globe, said it was investigating Geldof's deleted posts alongside lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Detective Chief Inspector Peter Doyle, senior investigating officer from the force, said: "We are aware that the names of Ian Watkins's co-defendants have been published on social media channels. Clearly, there is strong public feeling about this case and many people are using social media forums to talk about the issues involved.
"We are currently in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service regarding the matter and will take action if appropriate.
"Our primary objective as an organisation remains the safeguarding of vulnerable people and children. Victims of sexual abuse have a right to anonymity in order to protect their future welfare and we urge those discussing the issues raised online to be careful about using information that identifies victims in cases like this."
A CPS spokesman confirmed it was involved in the investigation.
The CPS said in a statement: "Anonymity for victims of sexual offences is a vital component of the criminal justice process. The CPS is liaising with South Wales police in relation to their investigation into allegations that the names of two women convicted alongside Ian Watkins have been placed in the public domain, contrary to legislation that protects the identity of victims by banning the publicising of information which would identify them." Reported by guardian.co.uk 19 hours ago.
Peaches Geldof has offered an apology for revealing on Twitter the names of two women whose babies were abused by the singer Ian Watkins, after it emerged that she could face criminal charges for the disclosures.
Geldof told her 166,000 followers she had assumed the names of the women "had been released for public knowledge".
The mothers of the two infants, a boy and a girl, are subject to lifelong anonymity orders to prevent the identities of their children becoming public.
South Wales police confirmed on Thursday they were investigating whether to prosecute Geldof and other internet users who may have identified the two young victims.
The mothers, both in their 20s and fans of Watkins's band, Lostprophets, pleaded guilty to a series of sexual offences alongside the singer on Tuesday.
On Friday, Geldof explained that the offending tweets had been deleted and that she had learned a lesson from the incident. But in a series of tweets she argued that the identity of women should be revealed.
"The question of wether [sic] or not to give anonymity to criminals in cases like this will go on forever. However these women and Watkins will be gettings [sic] three-meals a day, a double bed, cable TV etc- all funded by the tax payer alongside not being named apparently. It makes me sad. I deleted my – tweets however and apologise for any offence caused."
Identifying victims of sexual offences is a crime under the Sexual Offences Act and carries a fine of up to £5,000, but publishers who flout the law often pay a further sum in compensation to the victim.
South Wales police, whose detectives led the Watkins investigation, codenamed Operation Globe, said it was investigating Geldof's deleted posts alongside lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Detective Chief Inspector Peter Doyle, senior investigating officer from the force, said: "We are aware that the names of Ian Watkins's co-defendants have been published on social media channels. Clearly, there is strong public feeling about this case and many people are using social media forums to talk about the issues involved.
"We are currently in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service regarding the matter and will take action if appropriate.
"Our primary objective as an organisation remains the safeguarding of vulnerable people and children. Victims of sexual abuse have a right to anonymity in order to protect their future welfare and we urge those discussing the issues raised online to be careful about using information that identifies victims in cases like this."
A CPS spokesman confirmed it was involved in the investigation.
The CPS said in a statement: "Anonymity for victims of sexual offences is a vital component of the criminal justice process. The CPS is liaising with South Wales police in relation to their investigation into allegations that the names of two women convicted alongside Ian Watkins have been placed in the public domain, contrary to legislation that protects the identity of victims by banning the publicising of information which would identify them." Reported by guardian.co.uk 19 hours ago.