Army colonel tracked ex-partner with secret device
Col Terry Southwood, 57, bombarded Sarah Crossley-Weir with messages and turned up at her home several times after she ended their relationship.
His 'relentless' behaviour left her so frightened she was 'suicidal' and increased her home security.
Col Southwood graduated from Sandhurst and retired after a 37-year career in the army with 'exemplary conduct'.
He avoided a prison sentence after a judge received references to his 'positive character', but was handed a five year restraining order against Ms Crossley-Weir.
Bournemouth Crown Court heard the retired officer, from East Stour, Dorset, spent most of his career in the Royal Army Medical Corps in Salisbury.
He had been in a relationship with Ms Crossley-Weir for four years and moved in with her and her four children in July 2021.
About a year later she told him she needed space and asked him to move out. He 'took that badly' and downed half a bottle of whisky, which reacted with medication and left him hospitalised.
Ms Crossley-Weir then told him she did not want him to see her children any more and he 'reluctantly' moved out.
Casey Chard, prosecuting, said that on Aug 30 2022 he sent 23 text messages to Ms Crossley-Weir 'in quick succession, professing his love'.
On Sept 16 2022, Col Southwood left flowers and a note outside her house with a note that said: 'This is from the heart. Don't be mad with me, I miss you in every way. I have a sun tattooed on my chest because that's what you are. I think you will think bad of me for doing this. I miss you all, T.'
Mr Chard said that three days later she became suspicious about a tracking device in her car.
She had 'noticed on her mobile an air tag had been located near her', and was 'able to track the device to the vicinity of her car'.
Col Southwood then told her he had 'done something stupid' and later confessed to putting the tag in the vehicle.
In November and December Col Southwood sent Ms Crossley-Weir two handwritten letters and 86 text messages, prompting a non-molestation order to be granted.
Ms Crossley-Weir told the court she became 'terrified to step outside' because of 'unrelenting' contact attempts from her ex-partner, and sought advise from a domestic abuse support worker to install alarms and cameras.
She added: 'To be reduced to feeling suicidal was horrendous. I was terrified of absolutely everything, severely depressed and suffering with extreme anxiety. It rendered me incapable of functioning.'
Col Southwood admitted one offence of stalking.
Graham Gilbert, defending, said: 'He is remorseful, no relationship is meant to end up in front of your honour.
'His military history is lengthy and distinguished, in the circumstances he found himself in that career he showed exemplary conduct in difficult personal circumstances.'
In sentencing him, Judge Susan Evans acknowledged his service and 'PTSD'. She said she could avoid sending him to prison and gave him a community order for his 'positive character'.
She added: 'Following the breakdown of the relationship it is quite clear your mental health declined and you became depressed. It is very much to your credit you're now working full time and clearly valued by your employers.'
Judge Evans gave him a 12-month community order with 120 hours of unpaid work and 25 rehabilitation days. She also ordered him to pay £500 costs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
Children of Briton jailed in India for seven years without trial protest Modi's UK visit
As prime minister Sir Keir Starmer toasted what he called a 'historic day' for British- Indian relations at Chequers, just yards from Downing Street two young Britons stood with posters taped to their jackets and baggage. Alois Christian Michel and his sister Alienor were not protesting a government policy or trade deal. They were pleading for the freedom of their father Christian Michel. Michel, a British national, has spent over six years incarcerated in India's notorious Tihar Jail without trial. Despite bail orders from both the Delhi High Court and India's Supreme Court, he remains imprisoned after failing to meet the conditions set – leaving him trapped in a legal and political limbo with no end in sight. Michel's son, who gave an exclusive interview to The Independent during the protest with his sister, says they have lost patience with successive UK governments. 'The UK government has miserably failed to address human rights violations across Commonwealth countries, particularly in India,' says Alois, 27. 'A British national such as my father has now been illegally detained by Indian authorities for seven years, yet neither the previous government nor the present one has taken any concrete action against this inhumane conduct.' Their protest took place at the same time as Sir Keir and Indian prime minister Narendra Modi were meeting to approve a sweeping trade agreement worth £6bn in investment that is expected to boost Britain's GDP by nearly £5bn. Referring to British officials, Alois says: 'They say they'll 'raise interest' in the case. After seven years, is that all? It's ridiculous.' Michel, a businessman and consultant, was extradited from Dubai to India in 2018 over allegations he acted as a middleman in a 2010 defence deal involving Italian firm AgustaWestland. Indian investigators allege bribes were paid to secure a £322m contract to supply helicopters – charges he denies. India's legal system is notoriously slow and overburdened, which is why it has a law stipulating that a suspect must be released from prison once they have served half of what would have been the maximum sentence if they were convicted. In Michel's case that was seven years, meaning he should have been released midway through 2021. His lawyers argue he should be freed unconditionally – instead, the courts have granted him bail while investigators continue to probe his case. It means that Michel remains in prison because he cannot meet the stringent conditions imposed. He has no address in India, no family members in the country, and no one willing to act as a guarantor – factors that have rendered the bail order effectively meaningless. At a hearing in April, Michel revealed to the court that the only person willing to vouch for him was Jo Johnson, former MP and brother to ex-prime minister Boris Johnson. Back in London, his children remain cut off from their father, their only contact being brief, choked phone calls. 'The last time I spoke to him was last weekend. Less than 10 seconds,' Alois tells The Independent. 'That's all we get. I haven't seen him in nearly seven and a half years.' He was just 20 when his father was extradited. 'I was in the middle of my studies. Everything just stopped,' he recalls. 'Emotionally, financially, it's been really tough. And for my sister… she was just a teenager when our father was taken away.' The siblings have never visited their father in India. The reason, Alois says, is fear. 'He's in Tihar prison. I would like to see him, but how much am I risking by going there? In a country that doesn't follow its own laws, they could arrest me too – use me as leverage with my father,' he says. 'It's too dangerous. And I won't have me put in a position where my father is forced to do anything because of my arrest in India.' They have justification to be concerned. Michel has alleged two separate attempts on his life in prison, claiming that a hired killer confessed to being paid to assassinate him. Despite his appeals, no meaningful investigation was launched, he claims. 'A professional killer tried to kill me twice,' Michel told The Independent during an earlier court appearance. 'He was paid money, and they never investigated who paid him or why.' Michel's legal team argues that the entire case is politically motivated, a claim that gained traction after the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention ruled in 2021 that his detention was arbitrary and called for his immediate release. 'The United Nations has said he should be released. Indian law states he should be released. And yet, here we are,' says Michel's son. 'All we're asking is for the Indian government to follow its own laws. And for the UK government to hold them to it.' 'We really just desperately want something to happen,' says Alois. 'Some people wait in hope. In our case, we wait in despair.' As his ordeal has stretched on, Michel's health has suffered. Earlier this year he was admitted to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) hospital in Delhi for hip surgery, and he has walked with a cane when attending court appearances since. 'We have one fear now,' Alois says. 'That he never comes back.' The broader implications of Michel's detention extend far beyond a single family's suffering. His case has become a litmus test of the UK government's willingness to protect its citizens abroad – particularly when doing so risks complicating lucrative diplomatic engagements. 'The people of Great Britain gave a clear and resounding mandate to the Labour Party to reclaim the country from the grip of bureaucratic dominance and restore the nation's pride,' says Michel's son. 'But this government, too, is proving weak – submissive to bureaucracy, unwilling to defend its own citizens.' Trade, security cooperation and joint efforts against organised crime dominated the headlines around the Modi-Starmer summit. But despite the family's heartbreak, Michel's imprisonment was not raised publicly during Modi's UK visit. Neither leader allowed the media to ask any questions and their talks took place in the prime minister's country residence, away from any public displays of anger in London. 'We are just asking both governments to respect the UN ruling,' Alois says. 'Follow the law, and let him go.'
The Sun
30 minutes ago
- The Sun
Brits to be blocked from adult content TONIGHT with booze-style ID or face-scan checks replacing ‘ridiculous' tickbox
MILLIONS of Brits will be blocked from adult content online at midnight tonight unless they pass booze-style age checks. The new rules mean you'll need to prove you're over 18 – including by showing ID or scanning your face with a phone. 3 It affects any websites showing porn, or content linked to self-harm, suicide, or eating disorders. This includes social media apps too. The new Ofcom rules enforce the Online Safety Act, and kick in on Friday, July 25. 'It's really the rubber hitting the road,' Oliver Griffiths, group director for online safety at Ofcom, told The Sun. 'The situation at the moment is often ridiculous because people just have to self-declare what their birthday is. That's no check at all.' Major websites like PornHub, X (formerly Twitter), and Reddit have already vowed to follow the rules. Reddit will remain open, but will require an age check if you attempt to view adult content on the site. Shockingly, around 8% of children aged eight to 14 have accessed online porn in a given month, Ofcom says. Boys are more likely to visit than girls (at 19% vs 11%). Now Ofcom can crack down on this behaviour, by blocking youngsters from accidentally stumbling on all kinds of adult content – not just porn. 'One is pornography. The other one is making sure that we've got highly effective age assurance in place for things that aren't illegal but are highly harmful for children,' Griffiths said, speaking to The Sun. 'So that could be suicide content, self-harm, or eating disorders. Don't risk ignoring four free iPhone tricks built to save your life 'And we will be starting an enforcement programme next week if there are websites dedicated to that who haven't got proper age gates in place for midnight tonight.' CHECK YOURSELF There are three main ways that Brits will be asked to prove their age. The first one is called an 'age estimation'. This can work by scanning your face with an approved third-party service like Yoti or Persona. 3 Or it could be estimating your age with an email check that examines if it's been linked to a household utility bill. The second option is linking back to info that's held on you. For instance, it could be checking with your bank or mobile phone company – both of which would already know if you're an adult or not. A simple computer handshake works out if you're a child or not, and then you can be cleared for access if you get the go-ahead. The third method is sharing an official document – a bit like showing your ID at the till in a supermarket. You might be asked to show your passport or driver's license online. SAFE SPACE? This might all sound like a privacy nightmare, especially if you're watching X-rated content online. But the adult websites don't actually get the personal info about you. 3 And the age-checking services aren't learning what kind of content you're trying to view either. The age-check is compliant with data protection, and simply gives the adult website a 'yes' or 'no' for your account. You'll remain anonymous and won't have your online habits linked to your identity when you do oe of these checks. Griffiths noted: 'The key bit of information that's needed is purely: is this user a child or not?' Companies are able to choose the method they want – but they can't opt out. If they breach the new rules, they face massive fines. 'These can lead, in the end, to fines of up to 10% of qualifying global revenue for these companies,' Griffiths said. 'So there's real teeth that sit behind this." THE SHOCKING STATS Latest figures show the scale of adult content consumption online... Ofcom stats: Around 8% children aged 8-14 in the UK visited an online porn site or app in a month. 15% of 13–14-year-olds accessed online porn in a month. Boys aged 13-14 are the most likely to visit a porn service, significantly more than girls the same age (19% vs 11%). Our research tells us that around three in ten (29%) or 13.8m UK adults use porn online. Pornhub is the most used site in the UK – Ofcom research says 18% (8.4m) visited it in one month. Children's Commissioner stats: Of the 64% who said that they had ever seen online pornography: The average age at which children first see pornography is 13. By age nine, 10% had seen pornography, 27% had seen it by age 11 and half of children who had seen pornography had seen it by age 13. We also find that young people are frequently exposed to violent pornography, depicting coercive, degrading or pain-inducing sex acts; 79% had encountered violent pornography before the age of 18. Pornography is not confined to dedicated adult sites. We found that Twitter was the online platform where young people were most likely to have seen pornography. The maximum fine is £18 million – but a company can be charged an even higher sum of 10% of global revenue. This is aimed at targeting giant web companies who may be in breach of the rules. DODGY DEALINGS Of course, some youngsters will go out of their way to dodge the checks. It's possible to skirt the ban using a VPN, or Virtual Private Network. These easily-downloaded apps scramble your internet data to boost your privacy from online spies. But they also let you trick websites and apps into thinking you're logging on from another country. Ofcom insiders admit there's no way to stop this – but that doesn't make the new rules redundant. 'Our research shows that these are not people that are out to find porn – it's being served up to them in their feeds,' Griffiths explained. 'And we think that these measures are going to have a really big impact in terms of dealing with that particular problem. Using parental controls and having conversations, feels a really important part of the solution. Oliver GriffithsOfcom 'There will be teenagers – dedicated teenagers – who want to find their way to porn, in the same way as people find ways to buy alcohol under 18. They will use VPNs. 'And actually, I think there's a really important reflection here. It's not just us, in terms of making life safer online. 'Parents having a view in terms of whether their kids have got a VPN, and using parental controls and having conversations, feels a really important part of the solution.' Another fear around the new rules is that by blocking unverified Brits from mainstream sites, they'll seek out adult content in more extreme corners of the web. But Ofcom says the porn industry is aware of this, and is working to get everyone on board. 'This was certainly a concern that when we were working with the adult sector,' Griffiths told us. 'The big sites were saying, well if we age-assure here, then won't that just divert traffic to darker corners. 'And I think it was that sort of sense that everybody needed to move together. 'That's allowed us to get to the position where we've got 6,000 websites hosting porn that are going to have age-assurance in place as of midnight.' CYBER EXPERT'S VIEW Here's what Jake Moore, Global Cybersecurity Advisor at ESET, said… 'Like many new regulations, the Online Safety Act's approach to age verification sounds ideal to stamp out content that isn't intended for younger people. However, there are still details of the act that are missing that could even pose significant privacy and security risks by collecting data such as ID uploads and financial information. 'Whilst this particular thorn in the act's side has taken longer than expected, it has come across technological barriers and not without good reason. While intended to protect children, these measures could potentially collect large amounts of sensitive personal data vulnerable to breaches or surveillance. 'The real push to govern social media platforms will be in the assigned punishment that enforces it but these platforms are often financially incentivised to push harmful content and then ask for forgiveness rather than permission 'The Online Safety Act's approach to age verification is likely to have a few teething problems but the initial step into online age verification will be a huge step towards online safety for children. 'Although some of the ways to verify ages may sound like they pose potential privacy and security risks by collecting data such as ID uploads or financial information, there are methods in place to reduce further harm. Online privacy has been completely avoided since the birth of social media and other sites with harmful content but this is a move towards the classic adage of better late than never.' Picture Credit: Jake Moore / ESET
Reuters
30 minutes ago
- Reuters
Brazil's top court rules out Bolsonaro arrest after 'isolated' restriction breach, but issues warning
BRASILIA, July 24 (Reuters) - Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes on Thursday decided not to order the arrest of former President Jair Bolsonaro for what he called an "isolated" breach of restrictions imposed last week. Moraes in his decision, however, warned that if Bolsonaro breaches them again, he will be jailed. The justice kept the restraining orders against the former president in place, and clarified he is not blocked from giving interviews.
