[2025] UKUT 113 (AAC)

The Appellant’s evidence on this first question was at best equivocal. On several occasions he told us that he took responsibility for messages that had been sent from his mobile phone. Yet at the same time he argued that the use of language, spelling, punctuation and grammar was not consistent with his own usage, and that this was indicative that the messaging – or at least some of it – was not genuinely his. There were also incorrect references in the messages to his age and sexual orientation. He explained that others, including casual visitors to his home he had made contact with through e.g. Grindr, would have had access to his phone.

We found this purported explanation implausible. When first questioned by the police, the Appellant accepted that he had used sites such as Grindr and did not suggest that the messages from his phone had been sent by any third party. There was no explanation as to how some other individual could have had access to the Appellant’s phone over the period of several months covered by the messages in question. We accordingly are driven to agree with the TRA panel that all the messages in question were sent by the Appellant.