A BARRISTER and his wife launched a 'campaign of embarrassment and threats' against a young mother after she had an affair with the husband, a court heard.

Jonathan Simpson, 48, and Katherine Simpson, 49, who is a property lawyer, allegedly sent letters to the father of the woman's child.

The husband turned up at her child's school to drop leaflets, even though a restraining order had been made against him, Southwark Crown Court heard.

At the time of the allegations the woman - who cannot be named for legal reasons - had a young child and was pregnant.

David Sapiecha, prosecuting, said the Simpsons had been married for 20 years and were living in Winchester, Hampshire, when the affair began.

“That affair ended but Jonathan Simpson thereafter continued to contact [the woman].

“Despite being verbally warned by the police to desist he continued.”

Following this a harassment order was handed to the barrister in October 2014 but after he kept contacting the woman a restraining order was put in place, jurors heard.

He had been alleged to have attended her child's school and turned up at the woman's home after being served with the initial notice.

Flowers were sent to the woman and Mr Simpson even tried to reach her via her father, Mr Sapiecha claimed.

The prosecutor said communications were also sent by Mrs Simpson which resulted in her also being given a harassment notice.

She is said to have sent text message and emails to the woman around Christmas 2014 - just weeks after her husband was given a restraining order.

Mr Sapiecha said: “The allegations are in essence that both defendants carried out a campaign of embarrassment and threats against the woman.

“Their activities were obviously, the prosecution say, distressing and alarming - they were harassing her.

“It might be that they felt the restraining order was an emblem of shame - there may well have been elements of revenge.

“Whatever the reason the methodology was vulgar and amounted to misconduct.

“They have attempted to veil the threats - they have sent communications to those close to her rather than directly to her, knowing that the recipients were bound to reveal the contents to her through human nature.”

A letter sent from Mrs Simpson to the father of the woman's child in January 2015 was read to jurors.

In the letter, she wrote: “My husband had an 18 month affair with the mother of your child.

“She has a lot to learn about affairs with married men and telling lies.”

The letter described the affair in the note as an “intense and emotional sexual relationship”.

Mrs Simpson added that she and her husband made only two requests of the woman - that she drop the restraining order and that she stay out of Winchester.

“If she agrees or chooses to meet these requests she will find all her problems over,” the wife added.

“Her attempt to steal my husband through her attempts at sexual and emotional manipulation will be my unmaking.

“Two can play at that game.

“I have more material than you could possibly imagine concerning her escapades.

“CCTV has already captured far too much of her and Jonathan.”

The letter seemed to suggest that no harm would come to the wellbeing of the woman's child and repeatedly asserted that the letter should not be passed on.

But it added that if the woman were to adopt that social services would be told everything about her behaviour.

A letter from Mr Simpson was also written to the same man weeks later after the couple received no reply, jurors heard.

He alluded to a book which he claimed he was writing that would reveal details of his affair.

Mr Simpson described himself as a “remarkably fair person” and suggested the woman had “more than one iron in the fire”.

Another letter was sent by Mrs Simpson shortly afterwards, this time to the woman's sister in law.

One passage of it read to the jury stated: “Her lies to the police will threaten hers and [her child's] well-being forever.”

Mr Simpson is alleged to have breached the restraining order against him by turning up at the child's school.

He and his wife had contacted the school outside of normal hours in advance to announce his visit, it is said.

The barrister was allegedly planning to leaflet parents outside the school.

“Having been told not to contact her directly or indirectly he goes to her child's school when she is likely to be there.

“The idea of leafleting other mothers would be bound to strike fear in [the complainant] if he had not done so already.”

After a meeting with the deputy head Mr Simpson “purposely drew attention to himself” so that the alleged victim knew he was there, the prosecutor claimed.

There was also a meeting on a train between Jonathan Simpson and a former partner of the woman who he recognised, jurors heard.

"Mr Simpson was talking loudly about his sexual relationship with her on the train.

"Eventually Mr Simpson was moved by a train inspector."

The couple have denied stalking the woman and argue that the restraining order against Mr Simpson was not breached.

In an interview with police Mrs Simpson is said to have branded the woman a "gold digger".

"The defendants say in essence she lied in her statement when she was obtaining the restraining order against Jonathan Simpson,' the prosecutor explained.

"They say they were embarking upon a reasonable route intending to gain evidence to prove her lies in order to have the restraining order overturned by the court.

"The prosecution say their actions were in fact by way of intimidation and bullying threats."

The Simpsons, both of Clifton Terrace, Winchester, each deny a single count of stalking involving series alarm or distress.

Mr Simpson is also charged with acting in breach of a restraining order.

The trial continues.