*MS against The Press

The Press published an article on June 23, 2025 titled: Concerns of ‘predatory behaviour’ spur local action.

The story reported a Lyttelton's woman’s comments on Facebook and to a meeting of the Banks Peninsula Community Board meeting about how she had experienced predatory behaviour, stalking and an attempted abduction. The article included comment from the local senior police sergeant who said police were not aware of such incidents.

*MS complained:

” The article presented [the woman’s] narrative without sufficient scrutiny or balance. It gave undue weight to her claims while excluding vital context about her conduct.

“I had previously submitted a confidential statement to a local council board documenting [her] pattern of misleading public behaviour and misuse of legal processes.... I have since provided further supporting evidence, including a video, which validates my original statement.

“The Christchurch Press failed to incorporate or acknowledge this information, leaving readers with an incomplete and misleading impression.”

She raised her concerns in an anonymous email to The Press.  In a second email she urged them to “consider a follow-up piece that addressed the community impact, including the distress caused to individuals who have been wrongfully implicated or maligned, and the police’s clear statement that no such incidents have been reported. Without that, the original article continues to circulate rumours and amplify unsubstantiated claims”.

In its response The Press said the story was carefully written to angle on the local community response to concerns raised and made it clear the allegations were just that. Police comment in the story was sufficient to cast some doubt about the issues being alleged.

“Despite that, the story reports on alleged safety issues in the town because they have been aired at a public meeting and considered by both the community board and Harbour Business Association with a number of safety solutions considered. It is clearly a matter which has had considerable public discussion, and it is our role to report on these discussions.”

Given that responses were sought from a number of groups in Lyttelton the article was fair, accurate and balanced.

The Media Council notes the story reported one woman’s views about safety which were raised publicly on social media and at a community board meeting. This was reported with due care as it was balanced by comment from police who said they were unaware of the stalking behaviour complained of.

The Press were not aware of the women’s alleged pattern of behaviour when it published the story, and it was understandable they were wary of taking it further when concerns were raised in an anonymous email.  

The story might have been handled differently if The Press had known earlier of those concerns, but that doesn’t make the story unsound or in breach of Council Principles as it clearly cast doubt on the veracity of the claims made. 

*Name withheld to protect the complainant.

Decision:  No grounds to proceed.