THE INDEPENDENT Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) has rejected a complaint submitted by Pembrokeshire resident Sally Ann Nolan regarding a court report published by the Pembrokeshire Herald and related concerns about the conduct of journalist Thomas Sinclair.

The complaint related to an article headlined “Hearing adjourned for Haverfordwest man accused of two assaults”, published on 30 July 2025, together with certain comments posted on the newspaper’s Facebook page and on personal social media accounts.

IPSO’s decision Following an initial assessment, IPSO’s complaints team determined that the submission did not raise a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice and therefore declined to take the complaint forward.

1. Alleged breach of Clause 3 (Harassment) Ms Nolan complained that a comment posted on the Pembrokeshire Herald’s Facebook page described her as “delusional” and suggested she was “making up nonsense”. She linked this to the conduct of journalist Thomas Sinclair.

The comment in question was not made by Mr Sinclair. IPSO explained that complaints concerning a journalist’s conduct can only be considered if they are submitted to the publication or to IPSO within four months of the alleged conduct. As the events complained of occurred in July 2025 and the complaint was first received by IPSO on 9 December 2025 (more than four months later), this aspect of the complaint fell outside IPSO’s jurisdiction. IPSO therefore declined to consider it further.

2. Alleged breach of Clause 9 (Reporting of crime) Ms Nolan contended that the article breached Clause 9 by naming her and her partner as the alleged victims of the assaults without first obtaining their permission.

IPSO acknowledged Ms Nolan’s distress at seeing the names published. However, it noted that the names had already been stated in open court. Under the principle of open justice, newspapers are entitled to report information that has been made public during court proceedings unless a specific reporting restriction has been imposed by the court. The Editors’ Code does not require publications to contact complainants, victims or other individuals before publishing details that emerge in open court. IPSO therefore found no possible breach of Clause 9.

3. Additional matter The complaint also contained an allegation that Mr Sinclair had driven a vehicle without a valid MOT. IPSO reiterated that it only considers issues that fall within the scope of the Editors’ Code of Practice and does not provide advice or rulings on general legal matters. It therefore did not consider this point.

Response from the newspaper A spokesperson for the Pembrokeshire Herald stated that

• the vehicle mentioned in the complaint was not owned by the newspaper at the relevant time and Mr Sinclair did not drive it
• the publication reports court proceedings in the public interest and in accordance with any reporting restrictions imposed by the courts

A spokesperson for Carmarthenshire Herald Limited said the publication stood by its court reporting, which is produced in the public interest and in line with any restrictions set by the courts.

The spokesperson added that an allegation raised in the complaint concerning a vehicle and an MOT was incorrect, stating that the vehicle referred to was not owned by The Herald at the time and that Mr Sinclair did not drive it.

IPSO has said complainants are entitled to request a review of a decision to reject a complaint.