Auckland baker takes Pebbles Hooper to court for harassment

An Auckland baker claims Pebbles Hooper has subjected her to sustained online bullying and accused her of child abuse, wheras the social commentator claims she was exercising her right to freedom of expression.

Bernadette Gee, the owner of Auckland bakery Magnolia Kitchen, is seeking relief from Hooper under the Harmful Digital Communications Act after the commentator made a number of social media posts about Gee and her family.

Both Gee and Hooper explained their various Instagram posts at a substantive hearing on Wednesday at the Auckland District Court in front of Judge Nevin Dawson.

Hooper raised concerns claiming Gee exploited her children to sell products on the Magnolia Kitchen Instagram.

READ MORE:* Influencers turn to the law for 'tit for tat' online spats* Pebbles Hooper crowdfunds legal fees to fight influencers' allegations * Pebbles Hooper charged with breaching suppression order* Pebbles Hooper on what she learned from social media drama

In lawyer Karlene O’Halloran’s opening statement, she said Hooper’s posts on Instagram caused Gee serious harm and were in breach of the principles of the Act.

However, Hooper's lawyer Ron Mansfield said his client was simply exercising her right to freedom of expression as a social commentator.

During the Covid-19 level 4 lockdown, Magnolia Kitchen, which is based in Silverdale, was considered an essential business and was able to continue selling confectionery online after approval from MBIE.

Gee told Stuff in 2020 she received death threats and abuse for continuing to operate.

Around the same time, Hooper began posting about the business, questioning how essential it was, the court heard.

Hooper also accused Gee of abusing her young children and reported the matter to Oranga Tamariki.

On Wednesday, O’Halloran alleged Hooper manipulated videos and screenshots from her business’s Instagram account, where she shared her cake-making skills as well as her personal life.

Hooper removed them from their original context and posted them on her own Instagram, the court heard.

The allegations of child abuse “took flight”, the court heard. Despite Oranga Tamariki investigating, they were not substantiated, O’Halloran said.

A video played to the court showed Gee addressing her followers after getting off the phone with Oranga Tamariki.

“This is what harassment looks like ... because some psycho bully has decided they hate me,” she said.

“You are not concerned about my children ... I hope you feel like you’ve achieved and done what you set out to do so. You have broken me.”

In his opening statement to the court, Mansfield said the videos in question “paint concern” relating to Gee’s treatment of her children.

“Other people should be entitled to express their opinion about children crying, upset, and the applicant calling the child names in a demeaning sense,” Mansfield said.

He said the social commentator had been silenced from posting about Magnolia Kitchen due to an interim court order.

“She has her own followers, because she provides social commentary on online activity and whether it meets with social norms.”

He said this kind of “advertising” on a business page is likely to encourage debate and discussion.

An Instagram video taken from Magnolia Kitchen’s page and played to the court showed Gee’s youngest son crying, and his father telling him he would get a “smack in the face” if he carried on.

Another showed him disposing of his father's beer bottle.

During Mansfield’s cross-examination of Gee, further videos were played, including one showing Gee giving her young son, then three years old, alcohol.

Gee said it was merely five millilitres of champagne, and she is raising her children to be responsible around alcohol.

A screenshot from another video appeared to show Gee with her hands around her son’s neck.

She told Mansfield the shot had been taken out of context, and she was merely pretending to strangle her child, comparing it to cartoon character Homer Simpson strangling his son Bart.

“The video in its entirety does not portray what this image portrays,” she said.

She uses her business Instagram account as her personal account and displays “tongue in cheek” humour, she said.

“If you follow my business and are familiar with my brand, it’s part of my sense of humour.”

In response to the claims, Hooper said she contacted Oranga Tamariki out of concern for the children’s welfare which caused her anxiety and not in retaliation because she thought Gee was reporting her posts.

“[they were] suffering at the hands of someone who is incapable of self-awareness,” Hooper said.

”The children can't consent to be an advert.”

Hooper said she wanted to share her honest opinion online.

O'Halloran accused Hooper of enticing her followers to go and view Magnolia Kitchen’s page, however Hooper said she hoped her followers had minds of their own.

Gee’s lawyer said the bullying almost ceased as soon as the interim orders against Hooper were put in place last year.

“I didn’t go searching for this, I don’t care...I was sent it by people who were just as revolted by it,” Hooper said.

“I don’t have the influence to mind control the public.”

Hooper said Gee, whose Magnolia Kitchen Instagram account has 215,000 followers, has to be prepared to receive negative feedback in the social domain.

Hooper said there was never any personal vendetta against Gee.

“You don’t need to exploit children in a safe place to sell cakes,” Hooper said.

When asked by Judge Dawson if she had any regrets about the actions she took against Gee, Hooper said no.

“I would prefer to never see children in distress online,” Hooper said.

Judge Dawson reserved his decision.