On 26 November 2023 a complaint was made to IMPRESS, by Vanessa Boon, about the Derby News article “Vanessa Boon: behind the public façade”

Derby News provided a comprehensive and detailed response that dismissed all of the alleged breaches of the IMPRESS Standards Code.

Full text of the Derby News response , Appendix 1,

On escalation, IMPRESS conducted a limited investigation after having dismissed most of the complaint. An adjudication has been issued which is summarised below. IMPRESS found that Derby News had conducted a compliant and thorough newsgathering process which assured the accuracy of the article.

Minor breaches were found in s 1.2 and 1.3 of the Standards Code. These are disputed by Derby News on factual grounds which are detailed in the new article.

Complaint : “Vanessa Boon: behind the public facade”

IMPRESS Summary:

An Impress ruling found that Derby News breached the Impress Standards Code in the article ‘Vanessa Boon: behind the public façade’, first published on 26 November 2023. Having dismissed complaints on the grounds of 4 (Discrimination), 5 (Harassment), 6 (Justice) and 7 (Privacy), Impress determined there were grounds to investigate Accuracy clauses 1.1, 1.2 and
1.3 of the Standards Code and found that Derby News:

• Had taken reasonable steps in its newsgathering inquiries to achieve accuracy in the published content (no breach of clause 1.1).
• Had not adequately distinguished various statements of fact from opinion, primarily in relation to the allegation that the Complainant had authored the poster (breach of Clause 1.2).
• Had omitted three key points of information it had received from the Complainant (cited in the full adjudication) regarding her position that she was not the author of the poster which might have enabled readers to reach their own conclusions about who had authored the poster, resulting in a misrepresentation (breach of Clause 1.3).

A link to the full adjudication can be accessed here:

========================================================================================================

On 24th June 2023 a harmful and potentially libellous poster was sent via email to a number of people in Derby, some of whom were in influential positions. The poster was alleged to be from “Derby CityZen Concern” describing itself as “Action by Men taking a stand against men who abuse women”.

Whilst it was presented as a “Safeguarding Alert – APPROACH WITH CAUTION warn your friends, local schools, youth and community groups”, the content, which was directed, specifically, against 2 named Derby men (referred to in this article as Man A and Man B) was clearly designed to cause considerable reputational damage to both of them.

Neither of the men had been given the opportunity to challenge, or even comment on the accusations made against them, nor were the recipients made aware of the real context, or factual integrity, behind the posters. Both men question the validity of the accusations made.

Whilst the document purports to be from a “Men’s Group” a simple check of the metadata (Document properties) shows the author to be Vanessa Boon.

Boon, who is the Chair of International Women’s Day in Derby and a Vice Chair / Director of Derby Sound Community Radio CIC, describes herself as “The Joyful Disruptor”, and:

“Equity, Diversity and Social Justice specialist offering engaging projects, creative community action and workshops to disrupt systemic inequalities. Training includes Bias Hides in Open Minds and Courageous Conversations to create change. Empowering, inspiring positive action events for under/mis-represented groups to counter internalised oppression. Licensed Trainer of highly acclaimed Springboard women’s development programme.”

She is also part of Hope not Hate Derby, Derby Violence Against Women and Girls, a supporter of Derby Stand up to Racism amongst other groups.

When I approached her, originally, on 3rd July 2023, Boon denied authoring the document; she has maintained this position since then. Although not initially being concerned about the thought of possibly being framed, it was evident that her name being on the document was a compelling question and one of public interest.

In her own personal analysis involving contacting Canva (on-line graphic design software) support and an anonymous Digital Forensic Analyst, she concluded that her name appeared on the poster following an unusual sequence of events.

Boon claims that on the 12th June 2023 the “Men’s group” sent her an email, containing a link to an on-line Canva document, requesting her to provide comments against “their” investigation into Man A. Much of the content is similar to the subsequent 24th June issued poster. She explains that she downloaded/converted this simple on-line text document from a Canva link into a pdf and subsequently added in comments; it was at this point that she claims that the pdf took her name as the author. Her assertion is that when she sent her comments back on the 15th June 2023, the “Men’s group” edited this pdf, and completely transformed it into the poster that was then emailed out on the 24th June. The Digital Forensics Analyst concluded that someone editing the metadata to change the author name was unlikely.

Superficially, this might seem plausible, however:

• The original link took Boon to an on-line document for her to add her comments; there was no need to make a download.
• Downloading from Canva into a pdf does not change the author to the name of the person downloading the document (it retains the original author’s name). This has been confirmed by Canva support and by test. The downloaded pdf has Boon as the author (confirmed by her and the Digital Forensics Analyst) which means that she must have been the original author of the Canva document on the link apparently sent by the “Men’s group”
• The downloaded pdf document was not editable. This has been confirmed by Canva support and by test.
• The document sent by Boon to the “Men’s group’ was on 15th June 2023 22:32 – the “Men’s group” poster was created on 15th June 2023 18:58:10 – some 3.5 hrs earlier. So, Boon’s pdf could not have been the source of the poster.
• The poster was created from Canva ( ref: metadata) not from an edited pdf.
• Further comments:
  • A Canva link can only be opened by someone with a Canva account which Boon has. A simple request to add in text to a document would have been more practical using the ubiquitous Microsoft Word or within the body of an email.
  • It is unclear why Boon responded to an anonymous email from an individual hiding behind a secure, “proton” email account “Swiss end-to-end encrypted email service”. A more professional response would have been to have ignored it.

Boon was central to a community activity against Man A in 2021. She facilitated a group of anonymous women referred to as the “Survivor’s Circle”, who claimed to have been in abusive relationships with Man A. Rather than accepting the outcome of conventional processes to deal with any complaints, Boon led a one-sided, “community intervention” and “transformative justice” process which ultimately proved unsuccessful.

An output from this “Circle” was an email in April 2021 which Boon characterises as a “helpful optional tool” initiated by one of the group members to inform others on a “need to know” basis; viewed objectively, it reads as a document with a clear intent of imparting severe reputational damage onto Man A. The email was widely circulated and was later subject to screenshot, posted and shared on Facebook by many within the community.

I asked Boon whether she “condoned” the action of the person from the Survivor’s Circle ( which she professionally facilitated) to issue this damaging email against Man A in April 2021. She refused to answer a direct question by suggesting that the term was “loaded”.

Boon states clearly that she has no knowledge of who the “Men’s group” is; it seems to operate completely covertly despite its aims being very laudable within the community. An email I have seen from the “Men’s group” includes very detailed information relating to the activities of the “Survivor’s Circle” – including the nature of evidence apparently supplied to the Police. This can only have been known by someone from within the “Survivor’s Circle”. The general writing style of the “Men’s group” emails bear notable similarities to that of Boon’s.

Opinion

It’s understandable that Boon would want to distance herself from such a venomous, sinister and reprehensible poster. In her own words “I don’t agree with what they (“Men’s group”) have done and how they did it and the tabloid style problematic language, there are truths within it..”

I was forwarded the poster from a recipient within the community who referred to it as “troubling”. Initially, I was cautious. When it became apparent that the author name in the metadata was Vanessa Boon and that she has history with Man A, then I felt it worthy of further investigation, as a matter of public interest. Boon is engaged in a number projects involving public money and public bodies.

It was made clear to Boon, from the outset, that this investigation was solely focussed on the June 2023 poster and I would not be commenting on the legitimacy, or otherwise, of the claims made in the poster ( or from the “Survivor’s Circle”) , although it is fair to say that the claims in the poster have not been subject to any form of natural justice – “requires the right to be heard, the right to be treated without bias, and a decision being based on relevant evidence”.

Boon’s main defence support was from an anonymous Digital Forensic Analyst who, according to Boon ” works at a well-regarded private digital forensics firm, which serves police and legal clients, and previously worked as an analyst within the police service“. Despite the high profile nature of their professional services, Boon seemed coy in disclosing their name, so that their evidence could be checked. Apparently, the Digital Forensics firm’s position was that “They have agreed that their advice and details may only be passed to my (Boon’s) legal representative and criminal justice agencies”

Their advice was very dubious, convenient and lacked rigour and, in important ways, flawed.

There are 2 possible explanations for this poster, either:

There is a “Men’s group” made up of “teachers, social workers, youth workers, bouncers, venue managers, artists and other roles” which remains totally covert within Derby, hides behind anonymous email addresses, doesn’t respond to direct requests for information, has a venomous position on Man A and Man B ( but no one else), approaches Boon for help and then frames her – or edits a pdf document, 3.5 hrs before it was sent and which unwittingly attracted Boon’s name via a series of unnecessary and implausible steps made by her, writes authoritatively on the status of the prevailing police process into confidential and sensitive cases, as if they have the knowledge of someone from within the private “Survivor’s Circle”, and is actively mimicking Boon’s writing style…and that Boon is a completely innocent party albeit surprisingly, participating in an unnecessary dialogue on highly sensitive issues with this anonymous “Men’s group”.

Or:

There is no “Men’s Group” and it is a total fabrication by Boon. The “author” of the Canva poster was Vanessa Boon ( her name is on it) and she overlooked the fact that she left her “fingerprints” in the metadata. She has a history of antipathy towards Man A. She has had connections with Man B and is a natural link between the 2 men and is very knowledgeable on the activities of the “Survivor’s Circle”

In short, it is a matter of fact that the author’s name on the 24th June poster is Vanessa Boon. Boon, incriminates herself, further by providing the other compelling and damning fact that it is her name on the pdf document that she sent to the “Men’s group”, on the 15th June; that, conclusively, confirms her as the author of the 12th June “Men’s group” document. The fact that the 15th June document post-dated the creation of the poster ultimately undermines Boon’s implausible alibi.

The philosophical principle of Occam’s Razor favours the simplest explanation over a more complex one.

In my opinion, the simplest explanation is the most plausible one, and that Boon was the author/creator of the poster and completely fabricated the charade of a “Men’s group” to cover up her personal vendetta against Man A and Man B.

This is very surprising behaviour from Vanessa Boon and is inconsistent with someone who is publicly espousing high principled community values.

Despite consistently advising Boon that the investigation was not focussed on the women in the “Survivor’s Circle” ( nor the men in question), but on her personal actions and behaviour, she has cynically tried to use the “survivors and witnesses” as her “human shield”.

“I would prefer none of this to be in the media for legal and human reasons; it will be stressful for many people to see me wrongly, and unfairly framed and discredited and to see an article suggesting that these men are innocent – by enabling a perpetrator to use Derby News to paint me in this way undermines the survivors and witnesses I have supported and spoken up for and can affect their chance of justice.”

Vanessa Boon

An article in Derby News will not affect any form of justice through the conventional processes; it is also not a “platform” for any third party nor an attempt to “suggest innocence”. However, it may provide some insight into how Vanessa Boon operates, in reality, behind the public façade.

Vanessa Boon comment

The core of the article was issued to Boon on 1 November 2023 for comment – no response was given. The full draft of the article was sent to her on 18 November 2023 to give her the opportunity to provide a comment for inclusion in the article – no draft was provided.

An email was received from her on 24 November 2023, following her pre-publication complaint to IMPRESS ( press regulator) claiming inaccuracies in the article. Again, I invited her to detail, specifically, which aspects of the article were inaccurate, or misleading. I confirmed that, depending on her response, I would either edit the article, add her response as a comment, or defer publication – no response has been received. The broad basis of the rest of the complaint, albeit not detailed, largely relates to issues which have never been the subject of this investigation. The objective of the complaint, as well as other legal threats, was clearly to prevent publication of this investigation – despite this, I have decided to proceed with publication in the public interest.