A tattoo artist has lost a High Court libel fight after suing a woman who accused him of seriously sexually assaulting her.
William Hay took legal action against Nina Cresswell after she published material online alleging that he had sexually assaulted her in 2010, when she was a 20-year-old student, following a meeting at a nightclub in Sunderland. He said the "publications" caused him "great embarrassment, distress and damage to his reputation" and he wanted damages.
But a High Court judge has ruled against Mr Hay after concluding that Ms Cresswell had "proved" that he "sexually assaulted her" and established a "statutory defence of truth". Mrs Justice Heather Williams also said Ms Cresswell had shown that "statements complained of" were "on a matter of public interest".
The judge has outlined detail of her conclusions in a written ruling published online and named Mr Hay and Ms Cresswell. She had considered arguments at a High Court hearing in London in February.
"The natural and ordinary meaning of the defendant's publications in relation to the claimant is that the claimant had violently sexually assaulted her," said Mrs Justice Williams in her ruling.
"This imputation was substantially true. The defendant has proved that the claimant sexually assaulted her."
She said the "statutory defence of truth" had been "established". Mrs Justice Williams heard that Ms Cresswell had: published a blog; sent a Facebook message, and email, to Mr Hay's girlfriend and business partner; published two Facebook posts; and published a post on Instagram.
"The defendant says that her primary intention in publishing these materials was to alert women who could otherwise become victims of sexual assault at the hands of the claimant, in particular in the context of his work as a tattooist," said the judge.
"In summary, she says that in May 2010, when she was a 20 year old student, she met the claimant in 'Passion' nightclub, via a mutual friend... and that he seriously sexually assaulted her as he was walking her home."
Mr Hay denied sexually assaulting Ms Cresswell. Mr Justice Williams said: "The claimant does not admit that the defendant was sexually assaulted on her way home from the nightclub and he maintains that if such an assault occurred, he was not the perpetrator and the defendant's allegation in this regard is a deliberate fabrication on her part."
She said Northumbria Police officers had decided not to treat Ms Cresswell's complaint of sexual assault as a crime. Mrs Justice Williams said she regarded some of the evidence she heard as being "of particular significance".
"She promptly reported the crime to the police, believing that they would investigate the matter and bring the perpetrator to justice," said the judge. However, her treatment by the police was deficient and their investigation superficial.
"She was interviewed whilst she was still affected by alcohol and had not slept. She was not given the chance to check any record that officers had made of what they believed she had said.
"A number of misunderstandings likely arose and her words that the assault was 'like a nightmare' were misconstrued and accorded undue significance. The officers also placed too much weight on CCTV footage from (a bar), failed to undertake the fuller investigation that was warranted and prematurely assessed and rejected her credibility, deciding not to treat the defendant's allegation as a crime within hours of her first report to police."
Ms Cresswell, who did speak not publicly about the "assault" for a decade, had told the judge about "key steps" which led to her decision to "publish".
"She reported the sexual assault to the police shortly after it happened," said Mrs Justice Williams.
"After speaking to her whilst she was still under the influence of alcohol and when the investigation was still at a preliminary stage, the police wrongly decided within a matter of hours that no crime had been committed."
The judge added: "She was disillusioned and disheartened by the police response, and she felt that there was no point in her trying to take matters further at that time.
"She did not then speak publicly about the sexual assault for 10 years, but remained very upset about it and increasingly felt guilty that in not speaking out about the claimant's conduct she may have failed to protect other women.
"She was aware that he continued to work as a tattooist at a prominent tattooing parlour."
Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
