A DENTAL nurse spread naked pictures of her ex-boyfriend’s lover around the neighbourhood after delivering a sinister message.
Mikayla Fox, 34, masterminded the callous revenge porn plot which culminated in dozens of copies of the nude images being produced, a court heard.
The single mother-of-two texted her ex with a nude image she had acquired of the woman and included the sinister message: ”‘Send this to ya bird.
“If she ever rings me giving s*** about not being about to have kids again I will be posting them everywhere.’”
The naked pictures, which did not show the victim’s face, were later posted on lampposts, telephone poles and even inside and outside her local pub over the following days.
The victim who works as a retail sales assistant saw the intimate images and said the embarrassment left her unable to sleep.
And she also said she was afraid to return to work fearing that it would also be been sent to her boss after the abhorrent crime.
In a statement to police, she said: “This has made me feel horrendous.
“I am worried about what is coming next.”
Fox of Chadderton, Oldham, who who works at a dental surgery in the town later admitted sending the image via WhatsApp ”out of frustration” but insisted she had not posted the pictures around the victim’s neighbourhood.
At Tameside magistrates court, Fox faced three months in jail under sentencing guidelines after she pleaded guilty to disclosing private sexual photographs or films with intent to cause distress.
She escaped with eight weeks in prison, suspended for two years after JPs said her children would be ”significantly harmed” if she went to jail.
However, the court accepted her explanation someone else had plastered the intimate pictures around the area.
Earlier Miss Kat Smallwood, prosecuting, said: “The background is that the defendant and the victim both have had a relationship with the same person but at a different time.
“On August 28, a naked image of the victim was sent to a mutual third party on WhatsApp along with a message.
“The image was later printed and posted on telephone posts and street lamp posts in the local area and obviously it had a huge impact on the victim.
”She says she had sleepless nights and and was afraid to return to work after being on annual leave in case her boss was sent a copy of the image.
“She was worried that Fox would do something else. The starting point for sentencing is 12 weeks custody.”
In mitigation Fox’s lawyer Chris Squibbs said: “The guilty plea was entered purely on the basis that she simply forwarded an image that she had been given by a third party. It was not forwarded to the complainant herself but to a guy who she had a relationship with.
“Somehow it found its way into the wider domain and on to certain street furniture in the locality. She does not accept having had anything whatsoever to do with this – and she should not be sentenced for that.
“She has sent the image out of sheer frustration. It is clearly a sensitive image, capable of causing distress. Significantly, she is not found to have to have any responsibility for the posting of it in the wider community.
“There are certain references in the report of the background of this matter. There are certain references to Miss Fox’s vulnerability in relation to the instability disorder and the problems that she has experienced in relation to impulse control and certain difficulties.
“She is a single woman with two young children, aged 12 and 15, and is gainfully employed. She is obviously anxious about her future.
“The references show this was well out of character born out of a sheer moment of madness.
“There was little or no planning. It is not the case that she was to serve the picture on the person herself. She showed remorse and contrition in interview. There is an early guilty plea. She has a lot to lose if she is sentenced to immediate custody.
“She is responsible for two young children and is gainfully employed. She hopes to remain gainfully employed.”
Fox was also ordered to complete 10 days of rehabilitation with the probation service.
She was also made to pay £239 in costs and victim surcharge.
Chairman Helen Norman told her: “This is a very serious matter. Sending a photo of someone to somebody like you did is just abhorrent to everybody, really. It should not have happened.
“There is some distress and harm caused to the victim. The picture may not have been sent to her but it was sent to somebody that she was with. You put in that message that you were going to circulate it to others if she did certain things.
”It was not you who did that, but you threatened to do it and that makes it serious.
“We have to consider whether we can suspend a jail sentence and we have only very limited reasons why we could suspend it.
”But we have heard that you have two children and because you have, there would be a significant harmful effect on them, so we are going to suspend that sentence.”
The JP added: “This matter is serious not least because you are a mum. Think of the example you are setting your children. This says to them: ‘If you are not happy send a photo of your girlfriend to whoever.’
”But once you have sent that photo you do not know what will happen to that photo afterwards.
“You have set an extremely bad example to your boys. They now need to know what is the proper behaviour.”
