Editor plans to issue legal proceedings against council over ‘unfounded’ slurs

Martin Shipton

A newspaper editor says he is likely to start court proceedings against a local authority within days after it failed to meet a legal deadline over grossly offensive comments posed about him on Facebook by its clerk.

Tom Sinclair edits The Pembrokeshire Herald, which has published a series of articles relating largely to personality clashes between the clerk to Neyland Town Council, Libby Matthews, and some of its present and former councillors.

Mr Sinclair is claiming that since the articles were published, he has become the subject of a vilification campaign.

In a pre-action letter sent to the council on December 7, he stated: “On 8 October 2025, you published on your official Facebook page a statement accusing me and The Pembrokeshire Herald of: “targeted… bullying articles” “relentless, belligerent and targeted reporting”, causing distress deliberately. The statement was presented as fact, not opinion, without evidence and without offering any right of reply.

“The clear defamatory meaning is that I am a malicious, unethical and bullying journalist who abuses press freedom to harass a public official.

“This meaning is false and gravely damaging to my professional reputation.

The clear defamatory meaning is that I am a malicious, unethical and bullying journalist who abuses press freedom to harass a public official.

This meaning is false and gravely damaging to my professional reputation.

“Serious harm is clearly established: the post has been viewed, commented on and shared thousands of times in a small community.

“A comment labelling me a ‘nonce’ remained visible beneath your statement for eight weeks.

”On 6 December 2025, your Clerk posted publicly: ‘Hey guess what, Tom… FUCK YOU too – saddest man alive!”.

“This is a vindictive personal attack by your Proper Officer in her public capacity. The reputational damage and distress caused are substantial and ongoing.”

Damages

Mr Sinclair concluded by stating: “To avoid immediate court proceedings, I require the following within 14 days:

1. £50,000 in damages (including aggravated damages)

2. Immediate removal of the 8 October 2025 post in full

3. Publication of an agreed apology on your Facebook page and website for a minimum of 28 days

4. A written undertaking never to repeat the allegations and to properly moderate defamatory comments on official channels

5. Payment of my reasonable legal costs.”

The clerk has also posted a message to present and former councillors about complaint hearings they are facing. She tells them: “Fuck you!”

We asked Ms Matthews to comment, but she did not do so.

Defamation

Having heard nothing from the council, Mr Sinclair wrote to it again this week stating: “Despite being placed on formal notice of a defamation claim:

* No acknowledgement or response has been received;

* No explanation for the Council’s silence has been provided;

* No meaningful engagement with the Protocol has occurred.

“This continued failure to respond is now procedurally significant.

“I note that one defamatory comment previously visible on the Council’s social-media platform has now been removed after 10 weeks online. While this is noted, it does not remedy the core complaint.

“The Council’s official statement published on or about 8 October 2025, accusing me and my publication of “targeted” and “bullying” conduct, remains live and uncorrected on the Council’s website and/or official platforms.

“The continued publication of that statement, following formal notice of dispute and in the absence of any response, constitutes knowing continuation of the alleged wrongdoing.

“Further, and of serious concern, is the conduct of the Town Clerk, Ms Libby Matthews, since service of the pre-action letter, including:

* Sharing, promoting and endorsing third-party defamatory material concerning me;

* Publicly liking and commenting upon such material in a manner that amplifies its allegations;

* Making crass and derogatory remarks about me on social media;

* Failing to ensure timely moderation of plainly defamatory content on official Council platforms.

“This conduct has occurred after the Council was on notice of the dispute and materially aggravates the harm complained of.

“Taken together, the Council’s silence, continued publication, and failure to restrain or address the conduct of its statutory officer raise serious concerns regarding governance, maladministration, and reckless disregard for the foreseeable consequences of continued publication.

“Please confirm whether the Council has notified its insurers of this claim and whether it has obtained independent legal advice in relation to the matters raised.

“Unless I receive a substantive response within seven days of the date of this letter, I will proceed on the basis that the Council has chosen not to engage meaningfully with the Pre-Action Protocol.”

Statement

Mr Sinclair received simply an acknowledgment of his letter, together with the following statement: “Council shall discuss and decide on how they wish to proceed and you shall be notified in due course of their response.

“Under standard expectations of response, you shall receive engagement within 28 days of this email.”

Mr Sinclair told Nation.Cymru: “I am shocked at the council’s failure to respond properly within the prescribed legal deadline and shall be discussing the matter with my barrister with a view to issuing proceedings in the next few days.

“I feel that I have no alternative but to defend my integrity as a journalist and the right to freedom of expression.”