A SOMERVILLE woman has been granted a two-year personal safety intervention order protecting her from a Somerville businessman who she says stalked and harassed her. The order was issued at the Frankston Magistrates’ Court on 7 November, which heard the victim endured months of persistent harassment including derogatory behaviour, sexually demeaning behaviour, repeated visits to her workplace, and physical intimidation.
The man whom the order was made against, Jamie (Jay) Scicluna, is the founder and editor of the Somerville Times and Peninsula Local community newspapers. The Magistrate found that Scicluna had referred to the victim as a “c**t”, that he stated he was “out for blood” and “won’t stop until he destroys her.”
The court heard that Scicluna’s intimidatory conduct began after he made a social media post earlier this year about a “violent incident” that occurred between himself and employees at a car wreckers. The victim posted a comment after noticing that a child was present during the incident.
From this point the victim alleged that Scicluna became “quite aggressive in the way that he spoke about me”, which included an online video that “alluded to the fact that he had seven people stalking me on social media”.
The victim told the court she felt “quite alarmed” and that “he was really quite unhinged”. “I felt a little freaked out by some of the things [associates] were saying [from conversations with Scicluna],” the victim told the court.
The victim said she had no prior contact with Scicluna, except for one occasion about two years ago when he came into her workplace for a brief conversation and to drop off some business cards. “I haven’t had any dealings with him in a professional capacity at all,” she told the court. The victim alleged Scicluna’s behaviour continued to escalate including allegedly driving past her workplace regularly, and on many occasions, “a window would be down, and you could see him staring”, in what she described as “intimidating behaviour”.
On one occasion in April when the victim was visiting the Somerville shops, she alleged Scicluna “was sitting right next to my car with the window down next to me”, which left her shaking. One associate also told her that Scicluna had allegedly “bragged about a petition” that he had circulated among parents at a school, which he sought signatures claiming the victim was a bully.
By this stage, the victim said he was “not going away’”. The victim also said she felt “quite bullied and threatened” by an email he sent her claiming she defamed him on social media. This allegedly occurred after Scicluna posted a message on social media encouraging the community to submit story ideas. The victim said she posted that she had a “story I’d like to share” because she wanted to “call him out for his behaviour” as “I was really upset and probably quite angry”. The victim also told the court that Scicluna had spread false rumours that she had produced content for an adult website.
In April, the victim made an application for an interim personal safety intervention order against Scicluna. This was granted on 26 April. Scicluna, however, breached the order after the victim saw him standing outside her workplace on June 21. She called police and the matter was heard in October where Scicluna was handed a 12-month diversion order.
The victim told the court that Scicluna’s behaviour had a profound impact on her and that she was too afraid to even go to the shops. “I’ve never felt as anxious as I have probably since February this year,” she told the court, which was compounded by her belief that Scicluna was in possession of guns. “I probably thought about that every single day… that he could have a firearm,” she said. “I’ve been stressed, I haven’t slept properly… it’s affected my work a lot.”
Magistrate Charles Tan said he was satisfied on the “balance of probabilities” that Scicluna had “committed prohibited behaviour against the affected person” and was “likely to continue to do so again”. “The evidence I have heard today has concerned me in relation to Mr Scicluna’s behaviour towards [the victim], comments such as ‘out for blood’ and ‘won’t stop until he destroys her’ and just the incessant behaviour does cause me to have concerns for [the victim’s] safety,” he said. “The respondent’s prohibitive behaviour would cause a reasonable person to fear for his or her safety,” he told the court, adding Scicluna’s course of conduct was “demeaning, derogatory and also intimidating”. Magistrate Tan noted Scicluna was not present during the hearing initially claiming “car troubles” had prevented his attendance, and later that he was unable to attend due to having to attend a VCAT hearing later the same day.
The personal safety intervention order remains in place for two years. It prohibits Scicluna from going within five metres of the victim, or communicating or publishing any information about her on the internet. It states that he must not stalk her, and must not get another person to do anything that is prohibited in the order, among other conditions. The Magistrate also issued a Firearm Prohibition Order against Scicluna prohibiting him from “acquiring, possessing, or carrying a firearm or firearm related item”. The order was that any firearms authority held by Scicluna be cancelled and any firearms in his possession be handed in to police immediately.
First published in the Frankston Times – 12 November 2024
