Claire Dent, 49, (pictured) said she did not think it was illegal to fit the device on spouse Paul Dent's work van during the 'difficult' and 'protracted' breakdown of their marriage.
'tag
Okay, so I need to create a concise summary of the given text. The text is about Claire Dent, an estranged wife who used an Apple AirTag on her ex-husband's van during a child support dispute. She ended up being charged with stalking but avoided a restraining order by claiming she didn't know it was illegal. The summary should be without any additional commentary, just the facts.
First, I'll identify the main points: who Claire Dent is, her actions with the AirTag, the reason (child support), the court's decision, and the outcome. I should make sure to mention that she pleaded guilty to stalking, received a community order, and didn't face a restraining order because she claimed ignorance of the law.
I need to be careful not to include any extra details or opinions. The summary should be clear and to the point, sticking strictly to the facts presented in the text.
So, putting it all together, the summary should succinctly convey Claire Dent's actions, the legal consequences, and the outcome of her case.
Claire Dent, 49, an estranged wife, secretly placed an Apple AirTag on her ex-husband's van during a child support dispute. She tracked him for two months, intending to gather evidence. Charged with stalking, she pleaded guilty, claiming she didn't realize her actions were illegal. She received a 12-month community order, 12 rehabilitation days, 40 hours of unpaid work, and was fined £364. No restraining order was imposed.
