At the inquest into the death of Lucy Meadows, the Lancashire primary schoolteacher who committed suicide shortly after gender transition, coroner Michael Singleton called for the prompt implementation of the recommendations of the Leveson Inquiry into the press. There is only one reason why those recommendations are not being put into action: press obstruction.A Royal Charter to deliver the Leveson press self-regulation scheme was endorsed by all parties in Parliament on 18 March and sent to be formally approved by the Privy Council at its next meeting in May. Before the Privy Council could act, however, leading press proprietors and editors submitted a rival charter proposal designed to delay and obstruct the process.Even though this proposal is hopelessly ill-considered, meeting none of the criteria and failing to comply with even the most basic formalities, this rival proposal had to be considered, with the result that the real Royal Charter is delayed.There is every reason to believe that this cynical group of powerful corporations is planning further delaying tactics, so when their charter scheme fails in the coming weeks they are likely to try another manoeuvre. And in the meantime the introduction of a fair and sensible press self-regulation scheme must wait.The forthright comments of the coroner leave no doubt that a press which for decades (in the words of Lord Justice Leveson) "wreaked havoc in the lives of innocent people" has not yet and is not about to change its ways of its own accord. The case also provides a graphic reminder of the inadequacies of a press complaints system which operates in the interests of the newspapers rather than the public.Miss Meadows faced ridicule and harassment after news of her transition from man to woman was leaked from a school newsletter to the local and national press, in spite of an appeal for her privacy to be respected. Local newspapers and The Sun and The Daily Mail printed lurid accounts of the story, illustrated with wedding photos of the teacher as a man, obtained without permission, and disparaging remarks from the few parents who wanted Lucy Meadows to leave the school.The Blackburn and Hyndburn coroner said he had been "taken aback" by the extent of the media interest in the inquest and decided to research the press coverage at the time. He said he was "appalled" by what he discovered, and went on:"It came as no surprise to me to find out that Lucy had made a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC)."I have a letter from them. They tell me as follows: 'Lucy Meadows first contacted the PCC on January 3, 2013. She raised concerns about i/harassment from the press, ii/ a column written by Richard Littlejohn published in the Daily Mail commenting on her gender transition."On January 4 the PCC opened an investigation into the Richard Littlejohn article, given Miss Meadows' position that it raised concerns it breached clause one - accuracy, clause three - privacy, clause four - harassment."The PCC wrote to the managing editor's office of the Daily Mail and following further exchanges and correspondence the newspaper offered on March 11 to resolve the complaint by removing the article from its website and deleting photographs of his wedding to his former wife."Having carried out what can only be described as a character assassination, having sought to ridicule and humiliate Lucy Meadows and bring into question her right to pursue her career as a teacher, the Daily Mail's response was to offer to remove the article from the website."It seems to me that nothing has been learnt from the Leveson Inquiry or subsequent report."Lucy Meadows was not someone who had thrust herself into the public limelight. She was not a celebrity. She had done nothing wrong. Her only crime was to be different. Not by choice but by some trick of nature..and yet the press saw fit to treat her in the way they did."Had the note she left to me [made] any reference at all to the press, I would have had no difficulty in summonsing various journalists and editors to this inquest to give evidence and be called into account but Lucy Meadows rose above that."One may have expected that she would be distressed but the note she leaves makes no mention of distress, no mention of depression."One may have thought, particularly having read some of the outrageous material published, that she would have been very angry and bitter. She makes no reference to being angry or bitter."You may have thought she may have been very confused...confused in regard to the fact that she could not live as a man and was not allowed to live as a woman but she does not do that."Lucy Meadows presents in that letter of being a highly intelligent, articulate person who had given a great deal of thought, whose planning was meticulous and whose last thoughts were in those who might find her in order to warn them of the risk."The coroner said: "I would like to think that the reports of this inquest would be sympathetic and sensitive. I do not hold my breath. To date they have been sensational and salacious. I have little doubt under the current PCC system they will continue to be because if a complaint is made they can always withdraw it from the website, long after all the damage has been done."I want to make it known that I will be preparing a report under rule 43 of the Coroners Rules that unless action is taken it could lead to further fatality."I intend to send a report to Maria Miller MP, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport."I will be writing to the Government to consider now implementing in full the recommendations of the Leveson Report in order to seek to ensure that other people in the same position as Lucy Meadows are not faced with the same ill-informed bigotry as seems to be displayed in the case of Lucy.Turning to the reporters present at the inquest, he concluded,"And to you, the press, I say shame. Shame on all of you."Hacked Off agrees with the coroner. So does Parliament, so do many victims of press abuse and so, according to the polls, does the public at large. The Leveson recommendations should be implemented. Regrettably the people who run some of our national newspapers, including the Daily Mail, continue to insist that only they can be trusted to organise an effective and fair press regulation system.