A woman who risked exposing the identity of a sexual offence victim in a series of Facebook posts – while protesting the perpetrator’s innocence – has been fined by the Royal Court in the island’s first case of its kind.

Appearing in the Royal Court yesterday, Natasha Carol Kennedy (46) admitted publishing information likely to identify a person against whom a sexual offence had been committed.

The Facebook posts were made after the perpetrator’s conviction and included the first name of the victim, the name of their best friend, and the first name of the offender.

The Court heard it was the first offence of its kind to come before Jersey’s courts.

Crown Advocate Luke Sette explained that Kennedy made “multiple posts” on her Facebook feed supporting the offender and his supposed innocence.

“Less likely that others would come forward”

The prosecution argued that, in doing so, she had provided details could be pieced together to reveal the victim’s identity.

“That risk is more acute in a small jurisdiction,” Crown Advocate Sette said.

He added that identifying a victim would make it “less likely that others would come forward to give evidence in the future”.

Victims of sexual assaults are guaranteed complete anonymity from the moment they make a complaint – and it is strictly illegal to publish any information that could reveal their identity.

The guarantee of anonymity is to ensure that victims of sexual assaults are not too frightened or humiliated to report what had happened and are not too embarrassed by the publicity of a court appearance to testify.

Posts visible for months

The Facebook posts remained visible for around three months, despite being brought to police attention shortly after they were posted and Kennedy being asked to take them down.

When Kennedy was arrested, she gave no comment in interview, but she did provide login details to her Facebook account.

Advocate Lucy Marks, defending, said Kennedy had pleaded guilty and had been co-operative, and suggested that the case might have been dealt with in the Magistrate’s Court.

She added: “This was not a blatant and deliberate attempt to identify the victim.”

She accepted that people who knew the victim may have been able to work out their identity from the Facebook posts, but said: “Other people would not have had enough information to identify.”

The Jurats accepted the Crown’s suggestion of an £800 fine. Advocate Marks pointed out that Kennedy was reliant on benefits.

As a result, they allowed her to pay at the rate of £100 per month.

The Bailiff, Sir Timothy Le Cocq, was presiding with Jurats Dulake and Opferman.