A domestic abuser who secretly filmed his victim giving evidence during his trial and then posted it on TikTok has been convicted of contempt of court.
Andrejs Romanovs was warned the courts are “not places of entertainment” after he filmed a sheriff, solicitors and his victim from the dock.
The 38-year-old courier driver dubbed Latvian music over the top of the footage and posted it on social media, but was caught when his ex was sent a link and alerted the authorities.
Earlier this week Romanovs was handed 240 hours of unpaid work as an alternative to custody after being found guilty of engaging in a course of behaviour that was abusive of his ex-partner.
Between May 1 2020 and April 27 2021, Romanovs repeatedly shouted and swore at the woman, damaged a door, removed lighting from the walls of an address in Aberdeen causing them to break, threw a phone at her and withheld child benefit payments.
He also repeatedly turned up at her home and banged on the door, sent her derogatory and abusive messages and threatened her.
A three-year non-harassment order was also imposed.
‘Was the effect of the music to ridicule the proceedings’
The TikTok video, which featured appearances by solicitor David Sutherland and Sheriff Iain Nicol, caused Romanovs’ ex “sufficient concern” to report it when she discovered the video earlier this week.
As she was classed as a vulnerable witness she gave her evidence via a video link, which Romanovs filmed and then added music before posting on the popular social media platform.
Sheriff Andrew Miller said: “Mr Romanovs, I have decided that your conduct in making that unauthorised recording that, in itself, amounts to contempt of court but, in my view, the situation is aggravated or made more serious by the fact you subsequently put the recording on social media.”
Sheriff Miller went on: “What was put on social media was a video of the complainer giving evidence in court during the trial.”
Fiscal depute Tom Procter confirmed that any audio the video may have originally had was covered by music when it was posted on TikTok.
Sheriff Miller asked: “Was the effect of the music or the general presentation of this material on social media to ridicule the proceedings or make light of the proceedings or was it something else?”
‘Clearly it is contempt of court’
Mr Procter was unable to provide information as to the intention of the post or style of music other than it being Latvian.
Defence agent Alex Burn acknowledged the conduct was “clearly a serious matter”.
He said he had checked the building and there was signage stating that recording court business was not allowed, but that his client may not have fully understood these due to language difficulties.
Mr Burn said the case in question had been in a courtroom which was open to the public and was not a private hearing, but added: “Clearly it is contempt of court to engage in such activities.”
Sheriff Miller, addressing Romanovs directly, said: “You admit that during the trial you made a recording of part of the proceedings including video images of your ex-partner giving her evidence which you then posted onto a social media platform.
“I can think of no basis on which you could have imagined that was a legitimate and appropriate thing to do.
‘The courts are not places of entertainment’
“It’s contempt of court to record court proceedings without the authorisation of the court.
“As Mr Burn points out, the courts are public spaces which members of the public are entitled to enter so that they can observe the workings of the courts unless, for good reason, the court requires to prevent public entry.
“The courts are not places of entertainment.
“The work of the courts is not for random publication on social media platforms.
“Conduct of this kind carries the obvious risk that it would intimidate and distress any witnesses featured in such a recording and it may also deter other members of the public from participating as witnesses in court proceedings.
“It’s for all of these reasons I must take a serious view of this matter, and I certainly do take a serious view of it.
“At a very basic level, you must have realised and appreciated at the time that what you were doing was wrong.”
He ordered Romanovs, of Beachview Court, Seaton, to pay a fine of £420.
For all the latest court cases in Aberdeen as well as crime and breaking incidents, join our Facebook group.