There was a time when I viewed the Telegraph as one of the last British newspapers to practice real journalism. Obviously its columnists included wingnuts like Mark Steyn and Barbara Amiel, but the news seemed to be reasonably objective.

Over the last few months, however, the paper has utterly disgraced itself. Presumably because of its new proprietors’ views on the upcoming election, it now grossly distorts the facts of stories that it reports in order to stir up public outrage.

The most recent example is this piece on Linda Walker, who shot at some teenage yobs’ feet with an airgun. She was convicted of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence, which is fair enough, given that she was obviously guilty.

This charge (because it also encompasses crimes such as putting revolvers to people’s heads) carries a maximum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. This case does not carry that sentence: while I haven’t read the sentencing guidelines for this charge, I’d happily stake my balls [*] that the recommended tariff for an offence such as Ms Walker’s ranges between non-custodial-sentence and short-custodial-sentence.

The judge in Ms Walker’s case told her "All sentencing options remain open" while granting her bail ahead of sentencing. This is a warning that she may get a custodial sentence, and also an indication that she may not (and thereby a strong indication that any prison sentence will be short). It most definitely does not involve Ms Walker being "warned yesterday that she faced up to 10 years in prison", as the article claims.

Were it not for the Telegraph’s despicable behaviour on previous ‘self-defence’ cases, I might assume that the author, Nigel Bunyan, was an ignorant moron. Given the organ’s history, however, the only reasonable assumption is that it’s trying to deceive the easily led sections of its readership.

[*] Speaking as a Wales fan, this is no idle bluster.