Magdalena Spratek (pictured) was accused of demanding £15,000 from Leon Sturridge
A teaching assistant has been cleared of blackmailing the elder brother of England striker and Premier League star Daniel Sturridge after he sent her a photo of his manhood.
Football fan Magdalena Spratek was due to stand trial today, accused of demanding £15,000 from Leon Sturridge with menaces after he messaged her with the explicit image of his penis.
He was allegedly threatened that if he did not pay the money, the intimate photo would be exposed to the media.
However, 30-year-old Miss Spratek was formally cleared of blackmail when Mr Sturridge failed to give evidence for a third time.
Judge Charles Macdonald QC refused an application from the prosecution to adjourn, despite being told he could not attend court because his partner gave birth on Monday.
He described Mr Sturridge, whose 28-year-old brother has recently transferred on loan from Liverpool to West Bromwich Albion, as ‘a reluctant witness who wasn’t playing’.
Miss Spratek’s trial had already been delayed from starting at Maidstone Crown Court in Kent on Wednesday by his absence and the prosecution issued him with a witness summons.
Mr Sturridge was due to give evidence via a TV link with Birmingham Crown Court, believed to be close to his home.
But when he again failed to turn up and the judge refused to adjourn, the prosecution decided to offer no evidence against Miss Spratek.
Miss Spratek (pictured with her partner outside court) was cleared when her accuser did not show up to court
As a jury had already been sworn in on Wednesday, it was directed by Judge Macdonald to formally return a not guilty verdict.
The case has been dogged by delays since the alleged blackmail on October 24 2016.
At a previous hearing, prosecutor Vivian Walters outlined the prosecution case against Miss Spratek, who describes herself on social media as a huge Liverpool fan.
She also once organised an online tribute, backed by Liverpool FC Supporters’ Committee, to mark the departure of former captain Steven Gerrard from the club.
The court was told she and Mr Sturridge were friends, with contact on social media and meeting on at least one occasion.
Their online conversations were said to be ‘friendly and flirtatious’ on both sides, culminating in an exchange on October 23 2016 when Mr Sturridge indicated he was going to send what he described as ‘a naughty photo’ to her.
Miss Spratek, who is believed to work at a nursery school near her home in Maidstone, Kent, then received the image of his penis.
However, Miss Walters said she did not reply. Mr Sturridge messaged her again but again there was no reply.
Daniel Sturridge (pictured playing against Manchester City on January 31) recently transferred to West Bromwich Albion
‘The following day he got a message from a different social media account he didn’t recognise, demanding money or the photograph would be supplied to the media,’ added the prosecutor.
‘Mr Sturridge reported it to police and the defendant was arrested. She made no comment in her interview.’
The court heard investigations revealed that it was allegedly Miss Spratek’s bank account that the money was to be paid into.
The demand came from a social media account set up in a third party’s name but one which also corresponded to Miss Spratek’s email address, added Miss Walters.
The IP address used also allegedly corresponded to her home. It was further alleged that a draft of the blackmail demand was found on Miss Spratek’s phone, as well as a number of variations.
One was said to be in the unsent messages section, with a copy of the full demand found in the notes section of the device and timed at 6am. Miss Walters said however there was no record of the actual sent message.
At the same previous hearing in October last year, the court was told Miss Spratek would claim in her defence at trial that the demand was made by a third party, who she named, and without her knowledge.
Miss Spratek was accused of threatening to share a picture of an explicit picture allegedly sent to her by the Premier League star’s brother
Her barrister at the latest hearing, Ms Chetna Patel, also told the court that Mr Sturridge was required to give evidence as parts of his statement to police were disputed.
Judge Macdonald was told the trial had had two previous false starts on September 14 last year, and then October 16. On both occasions, Mr Sturridge did not attend.
When the trial was finally fixed in December last year to be heard this week, Mr Sturridge did not notify the prosecution or police of his child’s pending birth or even that his partner was pregnant.
It was also said that although the birth was uncomplicated, Mr Sturridge was unavailable as he was looking after her other child, aged seven.
But in refusing the request for an adjournment, Judge Macdonald said he was doubtful whether Mr Sturridge would ever attend court.
‘There is no evidence at all as to why he cannot find someone else to look after this child or leave the child temporarily with the partner, who has an apparently healthy newborn to look after, a situation faced by countless mothers in this country and abroad all the time,’ added the judge.
‘There is no proper explanation for his third failure to attend. The defendant, apart from when she was ill, has repeatedly co-operated and surrendered for trial.
‘The complainant has failed to draw any attention to any difficulty with this date. I think the truth of this matter is that he is a reluctant witness and I am doubtful he will ever attend and so an adjournment would be unreasonable.’
When informed the prosecution would therefore be offering no evidence, Judge Macdonald added: ‘The complainant is the trouble here. He is not playing.’