Builder spared jail over texts sent to woman’s employer
A CIVIL servant fell victim to fradulent texts sent by a builder who messaged her employer claiming she had disclosed classified information.
Mark Francesco, 47, fabricated text messages and sent them to the Welsh Government, in order to fraudqulently claim that the worker had aired her personal opinions on the Covid-19 response, elected leaders and First Minister Mark Drakeford.
The complaint was taken seriously by the woman’s employer, who launched an investigation and disciplinary proceedings against her.
It was quickly established that she had not sent the messages and she was fully exonerated, but it took 11 months before Francesco admitted the fraud.
A sentencing hearing at Cardiff Crown Court on Friday heard the defendant was aggrieved after the woman complained about the quality and cost of work he had carried out on her home.
Civil proceedings were in progress when Francesco contacted the Welsh Government and first made the false claims against the woman on December 4 last year.
In an email read out to the court, the defendant said: “She shared classified information to me in regards to Covid-19 in
March and April this year and she committed perjury to a court. I am a builder who took [this woman] to court for non-payment”.
Following that email, the builder sent 12 screenshots which purported to be messages sent by the Welsh Government worker.
Prosecutor Cat Jones said: “It is now accepted those messages were completely false and fabricated and were deliberately and fraudulently inserted in a message chain to expose the victim to risk of loss which would have been the loss of her employment as a civil servant at the Welsh Government.”
Following the investigation, the woman was found not to have sent the messages to Francesco and there was no case to answer. The defendant was subsequently arrested and initially maintained he had been sent the messages by the victim.
But Francesco, of Llantarnam Drive, Radyr, Cardiff, later pleaded guilty to committing fraud by false representation.
In a victim personal statement read out to the court, the victim tearfully spoke about the impact Francesco’s lies had had on her.
She said: “When I was first shown the fraudulent messages, I immediately felt a gaping pit open in my stomach. I felt shock, disbelief, confusion and absolute horror followed by fear and dread. What was going to happen to me?
“My employer classified them as grossly offensive and in breach of the civil service code. Given the severity of the messages, formal disciplinary proceedings were instigated. They were solely based on Mr Francesco’s fraudulent text messages.
“If the investigation found against me, I had no doubt I would be immediately dismissed for gross misconduct.
“Once the process started I was powerless, with no control over what happened. I was facing dismissal in a few weeks.
“I am proud of my civil service career. After 30 years, I am highly regarded. I had every reason to believe my career would continue to flourish, including promotions, until my planned retirement in 14 years time. But a set of fraudulent text messages, created in my name by Mark Francesco, changed all of that. I faced ruin.”
She added: “The work investigation, while necessary, meant a loss of dignity, loss of my reputation, loss of respect by my colleagues. My personal life was trawled through, it was intrusive. I was forced into an investigation based on lies. I felt like a criminal, but I was innocent.
“All this because of fraudulent text messages. The injustice makes me so angry.”
In mitigation, Christopher Rees admitted his client’s behaviour was “contemptible” but claimed the defendant did not want his victim to lose her job.
He said Francesco, a married father-of-two, had previously been a firefighter and had received a commendation for saving someone’s life when offduty.
Sentencing, Recorder Bilal Siddique said: “What you did was criminal, it was unlawful, it was malicious and it was vindictive. It was entirely unjustified and totally disproportionate to anything you felt aggrieved about. This was a misguided and stupid action in poor judgement.”
Francesco was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment suspended for 12 months. He was also ordered to carry out 80 hours of unpaid work, a rehabilitation activity requirement of 30 days and was made subject to a restraining order.