Couple accused of harassing neighbours were praying, court told

The couple pleaded not guilty to harassment, with Sheila Jacklin stating the chanting was part of her Sanskrit mantras.

• Vivek Mishra
• 12 September, 2024

Follow Us

By: Vivek Mishra

Nigel and Sheila Jacklin, a couple from Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex, accused of harassing their neighbours, were praying, a court heard.

The dispute began over “noisy” building work and has lasted 11 years, according to The Telegraph.

The couple were charged with harassment for allegedly chanting and pointing fingers at their neighbours, Dr Stephane Duckett and his partner, from a nearby beach. However, the Jacklins claimed the actions were part of their Hindu prayer routine.

Nigel Jacklin, 62, was also charged with assault during a separate incident outside his home. Both denied all charges.

On Tuesday, all charges were dropped when the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) requested an adjournment, which the court refused, resulting in no evidence being offered, the newspaper reported.

The couple pleaded not guilty to harassment, with Sheila Jacklin stating the chanting was part of her Sanskrit mantras.

The Jacklins have faced several investigations but claim no action has been taken against them in any previous cases. Nigel Jacklin criticised the investigations, calling them an abuse of police power, and said they have spent tens of thousands of pounds on legal fees.

The long-running dispute began when Duckett and his partner bought and converted a nearby property. The Jacklins made several complaints about the neighbours, which led to a community protection warning and restrictions on entering an exclusion zone around the neighbour’s property. The couple also reported being harassed during Mrs Jacklin’s prayer in 2022, reported The Telegraph.

The CPS stated they were unable to proceed due to the court’s refusal of an adjournment. Sussex Police said their investigation was thorough and impartial, based on evidence provided, but the case was not pursued further after the court’s decision.