Home Australia The jilted bride-to-be is fined for bombarding her ex-fiancé with messages, emails and texts accusing him of sleeping with new women after their split.

The jilted bride-to-be is fined for bombarding her ex-fiancé with messages, emails and texts accusing him of sleeping with new women after their split.

0 comments
Adele Layman, 32, (pictured) repeatedly messaged and called warehouse supervisor Jamie McDougall over a 13-day period after their breakup.

A jilted bride-to-be has been fined for bombarding her ex-fiancé with messages, emails and texts accusing him of sleeping with other women after their split.

Adele Layman, 32, repeatedly messaged and called warehouse supervisor Jamie McDougall over a 13-day period after their breakup.

One of his messages read: “I hope you’re having a great time leaving us,” while another said: “This guy texts me saying you’re sleeping with Caz and you’re kidding me.” . ‘He knew he was right all along.’

McDougall, who at the time was planning a dream trip to Vietnam, insisted that he had not slept with anyone.

But the mother-of-two, from Rudheath, Northwich, emailed him saying: “Have fun finding a cheeky eyed vixen to wear my ring.” Enjoy your dirty dirty bitches from there.

Police were later called and when questioned, the former care assistant admitted she had been “emotional and jealous” following the breakdown of the couple’s four-year romance.

According to Facebook, the couple announced their engagement on Christmas Eve 2019.

At Warrington Magistrates’ Court, Layman pleaded guilty to harassment without violence and was also ordered to pay £117 in costs and victim surcharge.

Adele Layman, 32, (pictured) repeatedly messaged and called warehouse supervisor Jamie McDougall over a 13-day period after their breakup.

McDougall, (pictured) who was planning a dream trip to Vietnam at the time, insisted he had not slept with anyone.

McDougall, (pictured) who was planning a dream trip to Vietnam at the time, insisted he had not slept with anyone.

Justices of the peace rejected a prosecution application for a restraining order against her after hearing she was already subject to a non-abuse order imposed in family court.

Nicola Parr, prosecuting, said: ‘The complainant has provided a statement. He was with the defendant for four years. He described the ratio as very up and down depending on the defendant’s mood.

‘The relationship ended around August 2023 and she then received numerous emails, calls and messages from the defendant.

‘On November 24, the complainant received an email saying: ‘This guy sends me a message saying that you are sleeping with Caz and that you are kidding me.’ ‘He knew he was right all along.’ The complainant said he had not slept with anyone and told her she had no reason to contact him.

‘Later that night we received further emails from the defendant. ‘Have fun finding a sassy-eyed vixen to wear my ring. So you want everything to be okay for (our daughter) when you say things like that. Enjoy your dirty, slutty bitches over there.

‘Mr McDougall had made a personal joke on Facebook about an upcoming trip to Vietnam and believed the defendant was looking at his Facebook profile despite having been blocked from the account.

‘On November 30, the complainant received a WhatsApp message: ‘I hope you have fun finding your little shits.’ He ignored the message.

‘There were several other messages on December 1, including ‘I hope you are having a great time leaving us’ and another message on WhatsApp of a photo of his daughter that he had posted on Facebook.

When asked, the former care assistant admitted that she had been

When asked, the former care assistant admitted she had been “emotional and jealous” following the breakdown of the couple’s four-year romance. In the photo: Adele Layman.

At Warrington Magistrates' Court, Layman pleaded guilty to harassment without violence and was also ordered to pay £117 in costs and victim surcharge.

At Warrington Magistrates’ Court, Layman pleaded guilty to harassment without violence and was also ordered to pay £117 in costs and victim surcharge.

‘The complainant immediately deleted the messages. On December 2, she again received messages referring to a relationship she believed he had and he said no. From 12:20 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. there were five missed calls from a hidden number and then three more missed calls. Then, on December 3, she received another message on WhatsApp and four more missed calls to which she did not respond.

‘The accused has no previous convictions. She is of good character. With respect to the sentencing guidelines, the crime is aggravated because it is internal in nature, but it is at the lowest level of category.’

Mitigating, Layman’s lawyer Richard Sibeon said: “This was a period of behavior between November 23 and December 5, a relatively short period of time, just over a fortnight.” It was the end of a relationship and the end of relationships brings with it human emotions, bitterness, jealousy, anger and frustration. That’s really the nature of the contact here.

According to Facebook, the couple announced their engagement on Christmas Eve 2019.

According to Facebook, the couple announced their engagement on Christmas Eve 2019.

‘She has a two-year-old daughter with this young man and that relationship ended. She accepts that she had contacted him when he did not want that contact and contact at a level that was above and beyond what it should be.

‘It was relatively juvenile, silly and offensive, but not like the most serious guy we might see in court. There was no suggestion of threats. He has lost his good character by pleading guilty. She lives alone and has two children. She has a seven-year-old son from a previous relationship.

“I asked her why the police had not addressed this as a warning, but she wanted the matter addressed today.” She now has a criminal record. She knows that when she has a problem she can seek help and she has the support of her mother. But she accepts that the relationship is over. An application for a restraining order on this occasion is neither necessary nor proportionate.

Sentencing lay judge Alan Ayers said: ‘We have heard everything that has happened. We understand that it was the end of a relationship and we believe that his lawyer explains the matter quite succinctly. We think this is on the lower end of the scale and that’s how we’re going to treat it.

‘We believe the non-sexual abuse order is sufficient and we don’t want to overcomplicate things. ‘We want to give the family court judge leeway to do what he wants in the best interests of the children.’

You may also like