Ex-wife is spared jail for waging a vendetta of lies at clergyman
A CLERGYMAN’S ex- wife who waged an ‘ obsessive campaign’ against her former husband has escaped being jailed.
A high court judge ruled that locking up Jean Gibbs, 60, would not stop her false claims against methodist minister Charles Gibbs that he had abused their son.
But mrs Justice Lieven ordered the sale of Gibbs’ house so that her former husband, 70, can raise money to pay his legal bills.
mr Gibbs, who now lives on the Isles of Scilly, said his ex-wife had repeatedly accused him of abusing their now grown-up son. She had breached judges’ orders not to make such claims and he wanted her jailed for contempt.
mrs Justice Lieven, who analysed the case at hearings in the Family Division of the High Court in London, has ruled in his favour. But she concluded that jailing Gibbs, of Attleborough, Norfolk, would not halt the ‘vendetta’.
Another judge imposed a nine-month jail term, following an earlier application by mr Gibbs, three years ago. Gibbs had spent fourand-a-half months in jail and had ‘recommenced’ sending emails as soon as she came out. The judge said she had decided that the best way to protect mr Gibbs was to publish a ruling which showed the truth.
Gibbs had publicised ‘the most lurid allegations’ to as wide an audience as possible, said the judge. This had a devastating impact on mr Gibbs’ quality of life and his ministry.
‘mr Gibbs applied to commit his ex-wife to prison for breaching two orders of the court that she should not publish allegations that he had abused their son 20 years ago,’ said mr Justice Lieven in her ruling, which was published yesterday.
The judge added: ‘I have come to the clear conclusion that mrs Gibbs’ allegations are not true. She frequently alleges that various people have believed her when on examination this is not true.’
mrs Justice Lieven said jailing Gibbs would not persuade her to end the campaign. She added: ‘I therefore consider the more effective remedy is for me to publish a full and detailed judgment, so that mr Gibbs can distribute this to anyone who has been sent mrs Gibbs’ allegations.’
She added: ‘I have also ordered the sale of mrs Gibbs’ house to pay the costs of the various proceedings mr Gibbs has been forced to bring.’
‘Her allegations are not true’