Kingofpop4ever3000
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,533
- Points
- 0
Yes. That is the part that's especially disgraceful, in my opinion.
Latest on MJJC
- Latest Michael Jackson News
- Click Here to Join Our Community
- Follow us on Twitter
- Wanna talk Michael? Come join the chat rooms
- The Michael Jackson Chart Watch
- Become an MJJC Patron
- Join the Premium Member Group and Get Lot's of Extra's
- Major Love Prayer - Worldwide Monthly Prayer Every 25th
- MJJC Exclusive Q&A - We talk to the family and those in and around Michael
- Join us in the Chat Rooms
- Find us on Facebook
Phone-Hacking Trial:- Tabloids and Murdock
- Thread starter jamba
- Start date
Yes. That is the part that's especially disgraceful, in my opinion.
There is a law--slander/defamation of character/libel, but it is really hard to prove against a "public person" b/c you have to prove the info is false and that it was known to be false by the paper and that the intent was malicious. I think that's how the Demon got off with claiming that the videotape of MJ molesting a child existed (she also claimed love letters existed).
I don't know why the standard of proof for a 'public person' has to be so much higher than for a regular, non-public person. IMO the law protecting public persons needs to be changed b/c it is almost impossible to prove that media committed slander/defamation of character/libel.
More 'It never occurred to me" and "I didn't know it was illegal'--from R. Brooks, who is sounding more and more like Alfred E. Neuman of the tabs.
"Rebekah Brooks: I never thought £80k for 'military contact' might be illegal
Phone-hacking trial hears former Sun editor challenged to explain series of emails on her 11th day in the
Nick Davies
The Guardian, Monday 10 March 2014 15.16 EDT
It did not occur to Rebekah Brooks that a "military contact" for whom she authorised more than £80,000 of payments over a five-year period might be a public official and, therefore, that the payments might be illegal, an Old Bailey jury has heard.
In her 11th day in the witness box, Brooks was challenged by the prosecution to explain a series of emails, written between 2004 and 2009, when she was editing the Sun, in which a journalist asked her to authorise the payments for his "number one military contact" and his "ace military contact".
The court has heard that the cash was received by a public official at the Ministry of Defence, named as Bettina Jordan-Barber.
Cross-examined by Andrew Edis QC for the crown, Brooks said repeatedly that she had not known the identity of the source and suggested that it could have been a retired military figure or a journalist: "I didn't think that 'my number one military contact' or 'my ace military contact' was a public official."
She agreed with Edis that the source was providing stories located all over the world, that they often involved military discipline and that all of them turned out to be true.
"It doesn't sound like it's a man in a pub in Aldershot," he said. Brooks said that the journalist dealing with the source was experienced and very well connected in the military: "I did not assume that he was paying a public official."
She said she had never asked the journalist to name the source, nor had she asked what category of person it was. Edis put it to her: "You really were just acting as a rubber stamp, weren't you?"
"Yes," she said.
Edis suggested that this was because she knew where the money was going, that this was the source that brought in the best stories. "It's not likely to be a retired colonel, is it?"
"It could have been a retired colonel," she said. "I didn't know who this source was but, because of the way the military works, we often had senior ex military people writing and being involved in the paper."
She also repeated that she had relied on her knowledge of the journalist involved, who was very well connected in military circles. Edis said: "You decided not to do your job because you thought he was doing his?" She had asked lots of questions about stories, she said: "What I didn't do is read these emails and assume that there was potential criminality involved."
Edis suggested that there was an obvious risk that it was a public official who was receiving the cash. "I think if you read the emails all together, I accept that," she replied. "But that's not how I read them."
Edis said that during 2009 there were six emails about payments and suggested that she had a good memory. She replied: "Sometimes at the Sun – I kid you not – people would ask me what we splashed on last week, and I couldn't remember."
Brooks agreed that a selection of the stories which were mentioned in the emails were not stories which could be justified in the public interest. She said: "I would not have authorised these payments to a public official because they didn't pass the 'public interest' test." Edis asked her whether in any of the emails anybody ever mentioned the public interest. "No," she said.
The trial judge, Mr Justice Saunders, asked her to clarify whether she was saying that she had thought about the source and assumed that it could not be a public official or whether she was saying that it had never occurred to her that the source might be a public official. "It didn't occur to me," she said.
Brooks denies conspiring to commit misconduct in public office.
The trial continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/10/rebekah-brooks-military-contact-phone-hacking
"Rebekah Brooks: I never thought £80k for 'military contact' might be illegal
Phone-hacking trial hears former Sun editor challenged to explain series of emails on her 11th day in the
Nick Davies
The Guardian, Monday 10 March 2014 15.16 EDT
It did not occur to Rebekah Brooks that a "military contact" for whom she authorised more than £80,000 of payments over a five-year period might be a public official and, therefore, that the payments might be illegal, an Old Bailey jury has heard.
In her 11th day in the witness box, Brooks was challenged by the prosecution to explain a series of emails, written between 2004 and 2009, when she was editing the Sun, in which a journalist asked her to authorise the payments for his "number one military contact" and his "ace military contact".
The court has heard that the cash was received by a public official at the Ministry of Defence, named as Bettina Jordan-Barber.
Cross-examined by Andrew Edis QC for the crown, Brooks said repeatedly that she had not known the identity of the source and suggested that it could have been a retired military figure or a journalist: "I didn't think that 'my number one military contact' or 'my ace military contact' was a public official."
She agreed with Edis that the source was providing stories located all over the world, that they often involved military discipline and that all of them turned out to be true.
"It doesn't sound like it's a man in a pub in Aldershot," he said. Brooks said that the journalist dealing with the source was experienced and very well connected in the military: "I did not assume that he was paying a public official."
She said she had never asked the journalist to name the source, nor had she asked what category of person it was. Edis put it to her: "You really were just acting as a rubber stamp, weren't you?"
"Yes," she said.
Edis suggested that this was because she knew where the money was going, that this was the source that brought in the best stories. "It's not likely to be a retired colonel, is it?"
"It could have been a retired colonel," she said. "I didn't know who this source was but, because of the way the military works, we often had senior ex military people writing and being involved in the paper."
She also repeated that she had relied on her knowledge of the journalist involved, who was very well connected in military circles. Edis said: "You decided not to do your job because you thought he was doing his?" She had asked lots of questions about stories, she said: "What I didn't do is read these emails and assume that there was potential criminality involved."
Edis suggested that there was an obvious risk that it was a public official who was receiving the cash. "I think if you read the emails all together, I accept that," she replied. "But that's not how I read them."
Edis said that during 2009 there were six emails about payments and suggested that she had a good memory. She replied: "Sometimes at the Sun – I kid you not – people would ask me what we splashed on last week, and I couldn't remember."
Brooks agreed that a selection of the stories which were mentioned in the emails were not stories which could be justified in the public interest. She said: "I would not have authorised these payments to a public official because they didn't pass the 'public interest' test." Edis asked her whether in any of the emails anybody ever mentioned the public interest. "No," she said.
The trial judge, Mr Justice Saunders, asked her to clarify whether she was saying that she had thought about the source and assumed that it could not be a public official or whether she was saying that it had never occurred to her that the source might be a public official. "It didn't occur to me," she said.
Brooks denies conspiring to commit misconduct in public office.
The trial continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/10/rebekah-brooks-military-contact-phone-hacking
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Well I hope the military do something about the public official who took money for divulging information. ^^It seems that Brooks want the court to believe that she really did not know what was going on. It would be interesting if the military guy claims Brooks knew and then gives details.
The source who got the $$ was a 'public official':
"The court has heard that the cash was received by a public official at the Ministry of Defence, named as Bettina Jordan-Barber."
So Brooks was authorizing big payouts but didn't care to find out who was at the receiving end b/c if she had, she would have found what she was doing was illegal (bribing public officials).
Today there is testimony re Piers Morgan and how he hacked Brooks' phone to find put what stories she was working on (overheard by witnesses at a dinner party where Brooks and Piers were). I'll post it later.
Thanks fopr reading and checking this thread, Petra!!!
Bubs
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,856
- Points
- 0
Seemingly that repressed memory hit on Rebekah too.
----------------
Rebekah Brooks: I don't recall Piers Morgan saying he hacked my phone
Ex-Sun editor tells phone-hacking trial she does not remember Mirror rival claiming he had been listening to her messages
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Tuesday 11 March 2014 15.53 GMT
Rebekah Brooks has no recollection of Piers Morgan, the former Daily Mirror editor, saying in 2004 he had hacked her phone, the Old Bailey has heard.
Brooks, who was editor of the Sun at the time, told the court she could recall the dinner party but did not remember the account given by a guest who testified in the phone-hacking trial in December that she overheard Morgan saying to her "I already know what your splash, or your cover, is going to be because I have been listening to your messages."
"I do not remember Piers Morgan saying he had hacked my phone," Brooks told the trial.
She said she remembered that she had been working on the Sun's exclusive leak of the Hutton report into the death of Iraq weapons inspector David Kelly.
"I had got up a couple of times at least, maybe two or three times to take some quite serious calls on it [the Hutton report]," she said.
The court has heard that lawyer Ambi Sitham had been invited to the party by her then boyfriend Neil Reading, a PR friend of Andy Coulson's whose birthday Morgan and Brooks were celebrating.
She told the jury in December that Brooks had asked Morgan: "Been hacking my phone again, have you Piers?"
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC put it to Brooks: "She may have been right, but you just can't remember it."
Brooks replied: "He may have said it, I just can't remember it."
During cross-examination Brooks was also questioned about testimony given by one of David Cameron's friends, Dom Loehnis, that they had discussed hacking at a party to celebrate the prime minister's 44th birthday in October 2010.
She said she remembered discussing the difficulty Cameron's head of communications Andy Coulson had at the time because of the reports about phone hacking at the time.
"I remember sitting next to Mr Loehnis and discussing Andy Coulson with him and the issue of Andy Coulson being the spokesperson and being part of the story.
"It did not strike me as unusual for me to have said to him in the late 1990s this issue [hacking] was live, because I think in the 1990s or mid-1990s that there were stories around about the security flaw."
Brooks also said she chose not to answer questions in her interview with police in July 2011 on the advice of her lawyers, instead opting for a prepared statement.
"I was very keen to give a prepared statement to refute what I considered to be abhorrent allegations were made about me," Brooks said.
Edis put it to Brooks that "you have had an entirely fair opportunity to answer questions if you chose to". Brooks said: "Well, that is not the legal advice I was given."
Brooks and Coulson deny being involved in a conspiracy to hack phones.
The trial continues.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/11/rebekah-brooks-piers-morgan-phone-hacking-trial
----------------
Rebekah Brooks: I don't recall Piers Morgan saying he hacked my phone
Ex-Sun editor tells phone-hacking trial she does not remember Mirror rival claiming he had been listening to her messages
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Tuesday 11 March 2014 15.53 GMT
Rebekah Brooks has no recollection of Piers Morgan, the former Daily Mirror editor, saying in 2004 he had hacked her phone, the Old Bailey has heard.
Brooks, who was editor of the Sun at the time, told the court she could recall the dinner party but did not remember the account given by a guest who testified in the phone-hacking trial in December that she overheard Morgan saying to her "I already know what your splash, or your cover, is going to be because I have been listening to your messages."
"I do not remember Piers Morgan saying he had hacked my phone," Brooks told the trial.
She said she remembered that she had been working on the Sun's exclusive leak of the Hutton report into the death of Iraq weapons inspector David Kelly.
"I had got up a couple of times at least, maybe two or three times to take some quite serious calls on it [the Hutton report]," she said.
The court has heard that lawyer Ambi Sitham had been invited to the party by her then boyfriend Neil Reading, a PR friend of Andy Coulson's whose birthday Morgan and Brooks were celebrating.
She told the jury in December that Brooks had asked Morgan: "Been hacking my phone again, have you Piers?"
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC put it to Brooks: "She may have been right, but you just can't remember it."
Brooks replied: "He may have said it, I just can't remember it."
During cross-examination Brooks was also questioned about testimony given by one of David Cameron's friends, Dom Loehnis, that they had discussed hacking at a party to celebrate the prime minister's 44th birthday in October 2010.
She said she remembered discussing the difficulty Cameron's head of communications Andy Coulson had at the time because of the reports about phone hacking at the time.
"I remember sitting next to Mr Loehnis and discussing Andy Coulson with him and the issue of Andy Coulson being the spokesperson and being part of the story.
"It did not strike me as unusual for me to have said to him in the late 1990s this issue [hacking] was live, because I think in the 1990s or mid-1990s that there were stories around about the security flaw."
Brooks also said she chose not to answer questions in her interview with police in July 2011 on the advice of her lawyers, instead opting for a prepared statement.
"I was very keen to give a prepared statement to refute what I considered to be abhorrent allegations were made about me," Brooks said.
Edis put it to Brooks that "you have had an entirely fair opportunity to answer questions if you chose to". Brooks said: "Well, that is not the legal advice I was given."
Brooks and Coulson deny being involved in a conspiracy to hack phones.
The trial continues.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/11/rebekah-brooks-piers-morgan-phone-hacking-trial
Justthefacts
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,072
- Points
- 0
What in hell is going on. Hacking into people's phones what kind of nonsense is this? Goodness this can't be life
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Well it seems it was normal business practices for some--the way they earned their money. It sort of reminds me of the people who wake up early and go out checking each house to see which door is opened and then robbing the owner. That is normal business practices for them too.
Bubs
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,856
- Points
- 0
and if they get caught, they claim that they didn't know it was illegal to enter the premises because the doors were open.
re Bettina Jordan-Barber--the 'ace military contact' who got big bucks (about $160k over a 5 year period) approved by Brooks. She was discussed above.
This relates to Count 5 against Brooks--that she committed conspiracy to commit misconduct (illegally bribe) a public official (Bettina, an employee in the Ministry of Defense)
"The jury was shown an email from a Sun journalist to Rebekah Brooks, the Sun's then editor, asking for payments to be made to his "top military contact" and listing the above stories. Brooks replies, "of course". The payments are described by the journalist as "cheap at the price". Further stories, emails and payment requests relating to Sun stories about Sandhurst and other army matters were then shown to the jury. In another email to Brooks, the journalist calls the source for his stories "my ace military contact". Every story was linked by the prosecution to emails in which Brooks personally approves a large number of payments ranging from £750 to £2000 for the articles.
The next witness called by the prosecution to speak on charge five was Belinda Verne, the head of the army secretariat based in Hampshire. The role of the secretariat is to advise ministers and the press office. One of her employees was Bettina Jordan-Barber who, the witness told the court, would have had access to information about disciplinary matters and army casualties. Her job, however, did not involve direct access to the media. Jordan-Barber had a high level of security clearance known as "developed vetting" which allowed her to access secret and sensitive material. The witness was then shown a redacted copy of an armed forces policy and confirmed it required all staff to report any leak of information to a "security officer".
http://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2013/12/05/phone-hacking-trial-secretariat-and-sun
This relates to Count 5 against Brooks--that she committed conspiracy to commit misconduct (illegally bribe) a public official (Bettina, an employee in the Ministry of Defense)
"The jury was shown an email from a Sun journalist to Rebekah Brooks, the Sun's then editor, asking for payments to be made to his "top military contact" and listing the above stories. Brooks replies, "of course". The payments are described by the journalist as "cheap at the price". Further stories, emails and payment requests relating to Sun stories about Sandhurst and other army matters were then shown to the jury. In another email to Brooks, the journalist calls the source for his stories "my ace military contact". Every story was linked by the prosecution to emails in which Brooks personally approves a large number of payments ranging from £750 to £2000 for the articles.
The next witness called by the prosecution to speak on charge five was Belinda Verne, the head of the army secretariat based in Hampshire. The role of the secretariat is to advise ministers and the press office. One of her employees was Bettina Jordan-Barber who, the witness told the court, would have had access to information about disciplinary matters and army casualties. Her job, however, did not involve direct access to the media. Jordan-Barber had a high level of security clearance known as "developed vetting" which allowed her to access secret and sensitive material. The witness was then shown a redacted copy of an armed forces policy and confirmed it required all staff to report any leak of information to a "security officer".
http://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2013/12/05/phone-hacking-trial-secretariat-and-sun
Last edited:
more on the trial of R. Brooks,and her fear of a dawn raid by police on her home, being arrested, bad photos, etc--gotta love that she was arrested in a dawn raid!
Rebekah Brooks was 'paranoid' about being arrested in runup to NoW closure
Husband Charlie Brooks tells phone-hacking trial wife woke up and 'whacked' him, thinking police were about to raid their home
Lisa O'Carroll
The Guardian, Friday 28 March 2014 12.23 EDT
"Rebekah Brooks was so paranoid about being arrested in the months running up to the closure of the News of the World, she woke one night and "whacked" her husband because she thought the police were about to raid their home, the Old Bailey has heard.
Brooks also kept from her husband the fact she was getting almost daily advice from Tony Blair in the days around the closure of the News of the World at the height of the phone-hacking crisis in 2011.
Giving evidence at the phone-hacking trial for the first time on Friday, her husband Charlie Brooks told how they had re-arranged flights home from the Caribbean in April 2011 to avoid a potentially "career ending" photograph being taken of her being arrested at Heathrow airport.
Brooks, the former chief executive of News of the World publisher News International, was arrested in July 2011 following reports in the Guardian that Milly Dowler's phone had been hacked by the paper.
However, she made abrupt changes to her holiday plans in April that year when she was phoned to be told a reporter on the News of the World had been arrested and his desk cleared by company lawyers.
Charlie Brooks told how they spent two days in their hotel bedroom on 14 and 15 April 2011 on conference calls back to London and how his wife had been advised that it was "highly likely" that she would be arrested when they landed.
"We changed our arrangements because Rebekah's big paranoia was the killer photo," said Brooks.
Asked what this meant, he added: "The career-ending photo is being led away from your home or Heathrow, handcuffed, surrounded by police. You are never going to get another job."
Charlie Brooks has denied one charge of conspiring to pervert the course of justice by concealing computers and other material from police investigating phone hacking after his wife's arrest on 17 July 2011, three months after their Caribbean holiday.
He told how she had spent the intervening period so paranoid about a dawn raid that one night she woke up and "whacked" him, telling him to get dressed because the police were outside on a dawn raid. It transpired, he said, that it was the dustbin man.
The jury heard that the night following the Guardian's report that Dowler's phone had been hacked, Brooks was so convinced she was going to be arrested, that they decided they could get some respite by spending the night in the Wyndham Hotel, near their home in Chelsea Harbour.
"We weren't staying in a hotel to do a midnight flit to Venezuela, it was just to get a good night's sleep," said Charlie Brooks. "Since coming back from holiday in April, we had been pretty much living under the threat of a dawn raid."
Brooks told jurors that he and his wife and James Murdoch, the then News International chairman, spent the night of the 4 July 2011, when the Guardian's Dowler hacking story was published, wondering whether they had been the subject of a "political hit" involving the police and the Labour party.
Earlier he had been asked by his defence counsel, Neil Saunders, if there had been any history between Rebekah Brooks and the Labour MP Tom Watson, who was at the vanguard of the assault on News International. "Yes, Mr Watson hates my wife," he said.
"James, Rebekah and I and James Murdoch's wife spent all evening wondering what was going on, whether it was true, whether it was a political hit.
"The conversation from James ranged from 'this was too awful to be true, to this couldn't have happened'. However there was too much accuracy in what had been said for it to be just a political hit. They weren't stupid enough to think this is our enemies trying to derail the BSkyB bid."
He said the reaction that night over dinner "oscillated between appalled and disgusted". He added: "Were Milly Dowler's voicemails really deleted? What are we going to do, how are we going to react? How can any of our employees do that? This is disgusting."
Earlier Brooks told how he believed an attack by the Labour MP Chris Bryant on News International in the Commons was "pretty aggressive" and unfair. There had been a series of leaks to the Guardian and, he said, it seemed that News International was the last to know what was going on.
"By the end of 4 July, my understanding was that this was another leak, it looked as if it went from the police to the Guardian and from the Guardian to Tom Watson and to Mark Lewis [The Dowler family's lawyer] to beef it up," he said.
He and his wife went home that evening and continued to discuss the issue. Later that day he emailed her to remind her of the conversation the previous night, telling her the "belt and braces" approach was important.
If she was going to put out a statement she needed to include "two great important points" they had discussed – that the police had been sitting on the information that Dowler's phone had been hacked for nine years and that her voicemails had been deleted.
He sent a second email that day advising his wife to "think swan baby". Asked by his counsel to explain what he meant by this, he said he thought "you may be thrashing round underwater" but you could be "serene" above like a swan. She was "under the cosh, the wolves were out to get her" and he felt this was "pretty supportive advice".
Brooks was asked abut the text exchanges between his wife and Blair, which were revealed to jurors previously in the trial.
In one she told Blair how supportive Rupert and James Murdoch had been and that she felt it was "GB", Gordon Brown's supporters, out to get News International.
Was he aware of the Blair texts, Brooks was asked. "No, I wasn't," he replied.
Did his wife mention it? "No, she didn't."
Brooks told jurors that Rupert Murdoch was determined that his wife would not resign over the Dowler allegations.
"Mr Murdoch senior had spoken to me on the phone after the Milly Dowler allegations and he knew Rebekah was very upset," he said. "Rebekah was saying post Milly Dowler allegations she wanted to resign and Mr Murdoch didn't want her to resign, and he explicitly told me that if she was showing any signs that she was going to resign I was to ring him personally in America and stop her resigning."
Earlier this week the trial has heard that Murdoch also phoned Brooks's PA, Cheryl Carter, to make sure she also stopped her from resigning.
On 6 July, two days after the Dowler story was published, his wife was getting a "battering" in the papers. She was on the front pages of every paper in the country and he felt that even in hard times "there was no harm in having a bit of humour". He fired off a text to her saying: "Coverage not too bad in the Racing Post."
Brooks told jurors that he and his wife did not want security but they were told they needed it.
He said it was a "double edged sword". "It was nice to know you wouldn't be attacked but we did not know these people," he told the jury.
They were "as likely" as anyone to tip off other newspapers' photographers regarding their whereabouts. "We did not need to tell them where we were going, they would follow us anyway."
On 10 July, security were not told that the Brooks's were going from their home in Oxfordshire to James Murdoch's house 25 minutes away or onward to London to meet Rupert Murdoch, Brooks said.
Brooks, described by her husband as "emotionally shredded", finally departed from News International after a phone call on 14 July 2011 from James Murdoch to Charlie, telling him that Rupert's position had changed and it was now the view that she should resign.
"I did what James Murdoch told me, which was to ring Rebekah and tell her that things had changed and tell her that she should resign," he said.
"It was an ironic call really. Rebekah said 'thank God for that, I have been telling the [company] since 5 July that I should resign' ... I think Rebekah was relieved."
Earlier the trial heard that Rebekah Brooks had not told her husband about her contact with Blair, including the hour long conversation she had with him on 11 July, the day after the News of the World closed.
She had been sent home by James Murdoch to get some rest after the tumultuous events of the previous week but had not switched off her phone.
Asked what she was doing when she received an email from James Murdoch saying "what are you doing on email?", her husband replied: "I imagine lying on her bed fiendishly working on her Blackberry and not resting at all."
When James Murdoch called later that week to tell Charlie she should resign, he said it was easier than phoning her directly. "Rebekah was in a pretty emotionally shredded state, it would just have been enough to run it by me," said Brooks.
Asked if he knew about the conversation with Blair, Charlie Brooks said: "I didn't know she had been on the phone to Tony Blair for an hour. I didn't listen to her conversations but I could see that she wasn't doing what she was supposed to be doing, which was resting."
The trial continues."
Rebekah Brooks was 'paranoid' about being arrested in runup to NoW closure
Husband Charlie Brooks tells phone-hacking trial wife woke up and 'whacked' him, thinking police were about to raid their home
Lisa O'Carroll
The Guardian, Friday 28 March 2014 12.23 EDT
"Rebekah Brooks was so paranoid about being arrested in the months running up to the closure of the News of the World, she woke one night and "whacked" her husband because she thought the police were about to raid their home, the Old Bailey has heard.
Brooks also kept from her husband the fact she was getting almost daily advice from Tony Blair in the days around the closure of the News of the World at the height of the phone-hacking crisis in 2011.
Giving evidence at the phone-hacking trial for the first time on Friday, her husband Charlie Brooks told how they had re-arranged flights home from the Caribbean in April 2011 to avoid a potentially "career ending" photograph being taken of her being arrested at Heathrow airport.
Brooks, the former chief executive of News of the World publisher News International, was arrested in July 2011 following reports in the Guardian that Milly Dowler's phone had been hacked by the paper.
However, she made abrupt changes to her holiday plans in April that year when she was phoned to be told a reporter on the News of the World had been arrested and his desk cleared by company lawyers.
Charlie Brooks told how they spent two days in their hotel bedroom on 14 and 15 April 2011 on conference calls back to London and how his wife had been advised that it was "highly likely" that she would be arrested when they landed.
"We changed our arrangements because Rebekah's big paranoia was the killer photo," said Brooks.
Asked what this meant, he added: "The career-ending photo is being led away from your home or Heathrow, handcuffed, surrounded by police. You are never going to get another job."
Charlie Brooks has denied one charge of conspiring to pervert the course of justice by concealing computers and other material from police investigating phone hacking after his wife's arrest on 17 July 2011, three months after their Caribbean holiday.
He told how she had spent the intervening period so paranoid about a dawn raid that one night she woke up and "whacked" him, telling him to get dressed because the police were outside on a dawn raid. It transpired, he said, that it was the dustbin man.
The jury heard that the night following the Guardian's report that Dowler's phone had been hacked, Brooks was so convinced she was going to be arrested, that they decided they could get some respite by spending the night in the Wyndham Hotel, near their home in Chelsea Harbour.
"We weren't staying in a hotel to do a midnight flit to Venezuela, it was just to get a good night's sleep," said Charlie Brooks. "Since coming back from holiday in April, we had been pretty much living under the threat of a dawn raid."
Brooks told jurors that he and his wife and James Murdoch, the then News International chairman, spent the night of the 4 July 2011, when the Guardian's Dowler hacking story was published, wondering whether they had been the subject of a "political hit" involving the police and the Labour party.
Earlier he had been asked by his defence counsel, Neil Saunders, if there had been any history between Rebekah Brooks and the Labour MP Tom Watson, who was at the vanguard of the assault on News International. "Yes, Mr Watson hates my wife," he said.
"James, Rebekah and I and James Murdoch's wife spent all evening wondering what was going on, whether it was true, whether it was a political hit.
"The conversation from James ranged from 'this was too awful to be true, to this couldn't have happened'. However there was too much accuracy in what had been said for it to be just a political hit. They weren't stupid enough to think this is our enemies trying to derail the BSkyB bid."
He said the reaction that night over dinner "oscillated between appalled and disgusted". He added: "Were Milly Dowler's voicemails really deleted? What are we going to do, how are we going to react? How can any of our employees do that? This is disgusting."
Earlier Brooks told how he believed an attack by the Labour MP Chris Bryant on News International in the Commons was "pretty aggressive" and unfair. There had been a series of leaks to the Guardian and, he said, it seemed that News International was the last to know what was going on.
"By the end of 4 July, my understanding was that this was another leak, it looked as if it went from the police to the Guardian and from the Guardian to Tom Watson and to Mark Lewis [The Dowler family's lawyer] to beef it up," he said.
He and his wife went home that evening and continued to discuss the issue. Later that day he emailed her to remind her of the conversation the previous night, telling her the "belt and braces" approach was important.
If she was going to put out a statement she needed to include "two great important points" they had discussed – that the police had been sitting on the information that Dowler's phone had been hacked for nine years and that her voicemails had been deleted.
He sent a second email that day advising his wife to "think swan baby". Asked by his counsel to explain what he meant by this, he said he thought "you may be thrashing round underwater" but you could be "serene" above like a swan. She was "under the cosh, the wolves were out to get her" and he felt this was "pretty supportive advice".
Brooks was asked abut the text exchanges between his wife and Blair, which were revealed to jurors previously in the trial.
In one she told Blair how supportive Rupert and James Murdoch had been and that she felt it was "GB", Gordon Brown's supporters, out to get News International.
Was he aware of the Blair texts, Brooks was asked. "No, I wasn't," he replied.
Did his wife mention it? "No, she didn't."
Brooks told jurors that Rupert Murdoch was determined that his wife would not resign over the Dowler allegations.
"Mr Murdoch senior had spoken to me on the phone after the Milly Dowler allegations and he knew Rebekah was very upset," he said. "Rebekah was saying post Milly Dowler allegations she wanted to resign and Mr Murdoch didn't want her to resign, and he explicitly told me that if she was showing any signs that she was going to resign I was to ring him personally in America and stop her resigning."
Earlier this week the trial has heard that Murdoch also phoned Brooks's PA, Cheryl Carter, to make sure she also stopped her from resigning.
On 6 July, two days after the Dowler story was published, his wife was getting a "battering" in the papers. She was on the front pages of every paper in the country and he felt that even in hard times "there was no harm in having a bit of humour". He fired off a text to her saying: "Coverage not too bad in the Racing Post."
Brooks told jurors that he and his wife did not want security but they were told they needed it.
He said it was a "double edged sword". "It was nice to know you wouldn't be attacked but we did not know these people," he told the jury.
They were "as likely" as anyone to tip off other newspapers' photographers regarding their whereabouts. "We did not need to tell them where we were going, they would follow us anyway."
On 10 July, security were not told that the Brooks's were going from their home in Oxfordshire to James Murdoch's house 25 minutes away or onward to London to meet Rupert Murdoch, Brooks said.
Brooks, described by her husband as "emotionally shredded", finally departed from News International after a phone call on 14 July 2011 from James Murdoch to Charlie, telling him that Rupert's position had changed and it was now the view that she should resign.
"I did what James Murdoch told me, which was to ring Rebekah and tell her that things had changed and tell her that she should resign," he said.
"It was an ironic call really. Rebekah said 'thank God for that, I have been telling the [company] since 5 July that I should resign' ... I think Rebekah was relieved."
Earlier the trial heard that Rebekah Brooks had not told her husband about her contact with Blair, including the hour long conversation she had with him on 11 July, the day after the News of the World closed.
She had been sent home by James Murdoch to get some rest after the tumultuous events of the previous week but had not switched off her phone.
Asked what she was doing when she received an email from James Murdoch saying "what are you doing on email?", her husband replied: "I imagine lying on her bed fiendishly working on her Blackberry and not resting at all."
When James Murdoch called later that week to tell Charlie she should resign, he said it was easier than phoning her directly. "Rebekah was in a pretty emotionally shredded state, it would just have been enough to run it by me," said Brooks.
Asked if he knew about the conversation with Blair, Charlie Brooks said: "I didn't know she had been on the phone to Tony Blair for an hour. I didn't listen to her conversations but I could see that she wasn't doing what she was supposed to be doing, which was resting."
The trial continues."
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Okay so she was terrified of a raid yet was happy to spread photos and stories of other people's raids all over the news. Why didn't she want to let people see her in handcuffs since it was the "public right to know"--you know their usual comment about every sleazy thing they want to print. She is afraid of the photo of the arrest, she is afraid of the security, she is concerned about leaks. Ironic, since it was them leaking and capitalizing on people's information gathered from voice mails that caused them to be arrested. Their motto is let's do it to others, but others can't do the same to us.
How about the reason that if the photo of the arrest is splashed all over the papers, then she won't be able to find another job. Oh please, so Murdock wouldn't give her another job in one of his sleazy publications in another town or country. Didn't they send the secretary to Australia with a job? They could do the same for Brooks, so this story about a photo killing her job chances is just talk.
Then, first Murdock did not want her to resign. Just great. Here your employee is orchestrating the hacking of phones and you claim she should not resign. I guess if the heat did not continue he would not change his mind. He should have been arrested too, because it seems to me that he knew what was going on. However, he has a way of keeping his hands clean while at the same time he is in charge of dirt.
I just love the way in which the husband is giving testimony as though he still does not understand why these people have arrested his wife. They thought they were the subject of a political hit--funny are these people for real!!
How about the reason that if the photo of the arrest is splashed all over the papers, then she won't be able to find another job. Oh please, so Murdock wouldn't give her another job in one of his sleazy publications in another town or country. Didn't they send the secretary to Australia with a job? They could do the same for Brooks, so this story about a photo killing her job chances is just talk.
Then, first Murdock did not want her to resign. Just great. Here your employee is orchestrating the hacking of phones and you claim she should not resign. I guess if the heat did not continue he would not change his mind. He should have been arrested too, because it seems to me that he knew what was going on. However, he has a way of keeping his hands clean while at the same time he is in charge of dirt.
I just love the way in which the husband is giving testimony as though he still does not understand why these people have arrested his wife. They thought they were the subject of a political hit--funny are these people for real!!
Yes, it's absolutely fine with them to destroy other's careers but they got all upset when theirs was threatened. Human dirtbags. I am so glad there is this trial so she can experience somewhat of the torture she put others through and I just hope she ends up behind bars for a long time, but who know if that will actually happen. Since she got rid of all the evidence, it's hard to prove how much she knew re phone-hacking, etc. But there is a lot of circumstantial evidence against her and the others and some have actually confessed and have turned state's witnesses against Andy Coulson, for ex.
That secretary is such a sleaze. Brook's husband sounds like he was telling jokes and thinking his wife would never be arrested. Re Murdock giving Brooks another job--I think it would be hard b/c she was the CEO of News International and former Editor of the Sun and the News of the World, so she is too visible not to attract a lot of attn. The sec is less high profile, of course. Even Murdock could not tough it through in the end. Initially he hoped it would all go away and was refusing, like Brooks, to cooperate with the investigation til they realized it was for real their ass was on the line.
In USA supposedly The Justice Dept is investigating Murdock but so far no charges. Why not????
re Cheryl Carter--Brook's PA for 20 years:
Rebekah Brooks's former PA accused of inventing evidence
Cheryl Carter
Cheryl Carter is accused of retrieving boxes of notebooks belonging to Mrs Brooks and destroying them in an effort to pervert the course of justice.
But Mrs Carter said the boxes contained mostly her own belongings despite being labelled as holding former News of the World editor Mrs Brooks's notebooks.
Both women deny the same charge.
Earlier, Mrs Carter told the phone-hacking trial she would never commit a crime for her ex-boss.
The 49-year-old, of Chelmsford, Essex, worked for nearly two decades as a personal assistant to Mrs Brooks, who was editor of the News of the World, then the Sun, and then chief executive of News International - which owned the newspapers.
'Shouldn't worry'
Asked by her counsel, Trevor Burke QC whether she would ever break the law for her former employer, she answered: "No, I would not commit a crime for Rebekah Brooks."
She added that Mrs Brooks had never asked her to.
rebekah brooks
Mrs Brooks also denies conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
Mrs Carter had asked her son and a colleague's husband to help her pick up seven boxes of notebooks from the News International archive - on the day after the closure of the News of the World had been announced in July 2011.
She said she would never have involved her son in a criminal conspiracy.
Mrs Carter, who was at times very emotional in giving her evidence, described how police investigating the disappearance of the seven boxes searched her home in Essex.
Continue reading the main story
Who are the defendants?
Hacking trial defendants
Read profiles of the defendants
She confirmed she had phoned Mrs Brooks at the time.
"I told her the police had been and asked about some archive boxes but she shouldn't worry because it was my stuff," she said.
Mrs Carter had told the court on Tuesday that the boxes contained her own work and belongings - including cuttings and scrapbooks from the six years she wrote a beauty column for The Sun.
She said the boxes had been labelled as Rebekah Brooks's notebooks because they contained just one notebook that Mrs Brooks had given her when she joined her staff in 1995, and one telephone "record book" labelled with the year 2007.
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC put it to Mrs Carter that the boxes labelled as Mrs Brooks's notebooks were "what it said on the tin". Mrs Carter denied this.
When he suggested her evidence was dishonest, Mrs Carter said: "I was brought up very well. I'm not dishonest."
The defendant became emotional when she was accused of "inventing" a memory of how she packed up the boxes following her police interview.
"Mr Edis, I got dragged out of my bed at 7. I got watched while I went to the toilet, watched while I got dressed," Mrs Carter said.
"I was told I would be handcuffed and put in a cell for four or five hours. I was cold. I was scared.
"Yes, I did get things wrong. I tried my very best."
Boot camp
Mrs Carter also rejected an assertion that she had lied about Mrs Brooks being in the office on the day she collected the boxes of notebooks.
The court heard that in police statements made in November 2011, Mrs Carter told police Mrs Brooks was not at work on that day, but at a "boot camp" with her personal trainer.
Under questioning, Mrs Carter agreed that when she made the police statement she did not know that they knew the date the boxes had been picked up.
Mrs Carter is one of seven people on trial in connection with the phone-hacking affair, which led to the News of the World's closure in 2011.
Mrs Brooks, 45, of Churchill, Oxfordshire, denies conspiring to hack phones and conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.
All seven defendants in the case deny the various charges.
The trial continues.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26751086
Rebekah Brooks's former PA accused of inventing evidence
Cheryl Carter
Cheryl Carter is accused of retrieving boxes of notebooks belonging to Mrs Brooks and destroying them in an effort to pervert the course of justice.
But Mrs Carter said the boxes contained mostly her own belongings despite being labelled as holding former News of the World editor Mrs Brooks's notebooks.
Both women deny the same charge.
Earlier, Mrs Carter told the phone-hacking trial she would never commit a crime for her ex-boss.
The 49-year-old, of Chelmsford, Essex, worked for nearly two decades as a personal assistant to Mrs Brooks, who was editor of the News of the World, then the Sun, and then chief executive of News International - which owned the newspapers.
'Shouldn't worry'
Asked by her counsel, Trevor Burke QC whether she would ever break the law for her former employer, she answered: "No, I would not commit a crime for Rebekah Brooks."
She added that Mrs Brooks had never asked her to.
rebekah brooks
Mrs Brooks also denies conspiracy to pervert the course of justice
Mrs Carter had asked her son and a colleague's husband to help her pick up seven boxes of notebooks from the News International archive - on the day after the closure of the News of the World had been announced in July 2011.
She said she would never have involved her son in a criminal conspiracy.
Mrs Carter, who was at times very emotional in giving her evidence, described how police investigating the disappearance of the seven boxes searched her home in Essex.
Continue reading the main story
Who are the defendants?
Hacking trial defendants
Read profiles of the defendants
She confirmed she had phoned Mrs Brooks at the time.
"I told her the police had been and asked about some archive boxes but she shouldn't worry because it was my stuff," she said.
Mrs Carter had told the court on Tuesday that the boxes contained her own work and belongings - including cuttings and scrapbooks from the six years she wrote a beauty column for The Sun.
She said the boxes had been labelled as Rebekah Brooks's notebooks because they contained just one notebook that Mrs Brooks had given her when she joined her staff in 1995, and one telephone "record book" labelled with the year 2007.
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC put it to Mrs Carter that the boxes labelled as Mrs Brooks's notebooks were "what it said on the tin". Mrs Carter denied this.
When he suggested her evidence was dishonest, Mrs Carter said: "I was brought up very well. I'm not dishonest."
The defendant became emotional when she was accused of "inventing" a memory of how she packed up the boxes following her police interview.
"Mr Edis, I got dragged out of my bed at 7. I got watched while I went to the toilet, watched while I got dressed," Mrs Carter said.
"I was told I would be handcuffed and put in a cell for four or five hours. I was cold. I was scared.
"Yes, I did get things wrong. I tried my very best."
Boot camp
Mrs Carter also rejected an assertion that she had lied about Mrs Brooks being in the office on the day she collected the boxes of notebooks.
The court heard that in police statements made in November 2011, Mrs Carter told police Mrs Brooks was not at work on that day, but at a "boot camp" with her personal trainer.
Under questioning, Mrs Carter agreed that when she made the police statement she did not know that they knew the date the boxes had been picked up.
Mrs Carter is one of seven people on trial in connection with the phone-hacking affair, which led to the News of the World's closure in 2011.
Mrs Brooks, 45, of Churchill, Oxfordshire, denies conspiring to hack phones and conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.
All seven defendants in the case deny the various charges.
The trial continues.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-26751086
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Jamba about Murdock not being able to find a job for Brooks, I see what you are saying. However, sleaze like Murdock have a lot of connections & power in different industries too, so he could easily find Brooks a job if not in a paper but in some other capacity. Look at how they paid that guy with a little job all that money. Brooks could easily be given a job in another publication with a small title, while at the same time be given a big salary and have her do the extra dirty administrative work in the background. Crooks do things like that all the time. I don't put anything past these people. Look at how Bashir went from various networks while in the US even after having to leave each one dishonorably. I would not be surprised if Brooks showed up in New York, because it seems to me a lot of these media people who have to leave their English tabloid publications, find their way into the American media, especially on tv. I hope they all end up in jail too and for a long time.
_______
^^That assistant--tell me doesn't she remind you a little of the instrument. Remember boxes going to instrument's apt? The whole plan and cover up of the contents of the boxes is as sloppy as Muarry getting the boxes out of the storage and him packing up and removing objects from the room.
_______
^^That assistant--tell me doesn't she remind you a little of the instrument. Remember boxes going to instrument's apt? The whole plan and cover up of the contents of the boxes is as sloppy as Muarry getting the boxes out of the storage and him packing up and removing objects from the room.
Last edited:
Yes, I agree re the instrument and the sloppiness of the 'cover up.' I mean Carter saying they were all boxes of HER stuff--oh sure. Does she think we are all idiots?? And the boxes were mislabelled too- REALLY??
Hope the jury can see through this crap.
Yes, I agree Murdock could find her a high-paying job somewhere--I just meant that unless he hides her under a paper bag, the media will find her, so any connection will become public.
That is a HORRIBLE thought that she will end up here--a la Bashit and Piers. Please, NO!! At least Piers took on the gun lobby but IMO he had to know plenty re phone-hacking while he was at the tabs so he does not get a pass from me. I just hope so-called reputable news media here will think 2x before hiring these criminals from the UK tabs.
Andy Coulson, former editor of Murdock Tabloids, lover of Rebekkah Brooks, and Prime Minister's P.R. guy until the phone-hacking scandal is now on the witness stand (and has been.
He is basically claiming the same thing as Brooks: yes, he knew about phone-hacking but didn't know it was illegal (!!!) and so if it was in the 'public interest' he went along with it. However, he does deny specific instances of promoting or allowing phone-hacking--cause if he doesn't, he could end up in jail, which is where he belongs!
"Andy Coulson: I 'rubber-stamped' £1,000 cash for royal phone book
Ex-NoW editor tells court he 'did not believe' Clive Goodman had got directory from police officer when he approved payment
Lisa O'Carroll
The Guardian, Tuesday 22 April 2014 10.50 EDT
Andy Coulson has admitted that he "rubber-stamped" a £1,000 cash payment to a source described by one of his News of the World reporters as a "policeman".
The payment was purportedly made in exchange for a leaked confidential copy of a royal phone directory.
But Coulson told the phone-hacking trial on Tuesday that he "did not believe" his royal editor had got the book from a police officer when he was asked to approve the cash for the leak of the Palace book.
The former News of the World editor told the court that the paper's then royal editor Clive Goodman was "prone to, in my view, creating unnecessary drama" about his stories, was reluctant to go out of the office, and "was a bit resentful" that he wasn't running the news desk.
He described him as "a tricky customer" and said the more he worked with Goodman the more "frustrating" his communications were. "Clive was someone who was quite difficult to get a grip of," he added.
In an email dated 24 January 2003 Goodman told Coulson that "one of the royal policemen has obtained the brand new green book, the telephone directory with all the home numbers of the royal family".
He warned Coulson that "these people will not be paid in anything other than cash because if they're discovered selling stuff to us they end up on criminal charges, as could we."
Coulson said he did not recall the email, but after reading it as part of the preparation for his defence he said it "brought back to me what it was like dealing with Clive Goodman".
Coulson had reacted immediately to Coulson firing off an email two minutes after receiving it by sanctioning the £1,000 payment for the royal directory: "This is fine. Didn't I sign off on purchase of green book quite recently tho?"
He said he "rubber-stamped" the payment and should have challenged the claim that the source was a police officer.
"I did not believe Clive Goodman was paying a policeman. I still don't believe a policeman was paid and I think what I did was to fail to address it properly, but I didn't, because I didn't believe him and I rubber-stamped it," Coulson said.
The email is at the heart of one of the two charges against Goodman and Coulson that they conspired to cause misconduct in public office by making unlawful payments to police officers.
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC has said that the email demonstrates that Coulson was aware of criminality at the tabloid, a charge the former editor denies.
Coulson was also asked about an email in which Goodman said he "scammed" information about Prince Harry's health from a private secretary at the Palace.
Coulson says he believes that "scammed" could have meant "tricked" and that his response to Goodman showed he was "slightly exasperated" with him.
He was asked about a second email in relation to a purported payment request to a "Palace cop". He said "No, I didn't" think his source was actually a police officer.
Coulson also denied any knowledge of a a "new royal source", which the jury has heard was Glenn Mulcaire, which Goodman claimed to have in late 2005.
The former editor said he was under legitimate pressure to come up with new stories, particularly about the "younger royals" and Goodman came to him asking if he could put the new source on a retainer.
"I was minded to agree with him," he said of the £500-a-week payments the paper agreed to make as part of a trial known as the Alexander Project.
Coulson said Goodman did not divulge the identity of his source.
"Clive told me it was somebody who was close to the young royals who he thought over time might produce stories," said Coulson who emphasised that it was "a trial" which he "ended".
Coulson said he did not know that the source of a story about Prince Harry seeking help for an essay while at Sandhurst was a hacked voicemail. He said it looked as if Goodman had some sources, adding "it was never that big of a story".
The present trial, which has now been going for 100 days, continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/22/andy-coulson-cash-payment-royal-phone-book
He is basically claiming the same thing as Brooks: yes, he knew about phone-hacking but didn't know it was illegal (!!!) and so if it was in the 'public interest' he went along with it. However, he does deny specific instances of promoting or allowing phone-hacking--cause if he doesn't, he could end up in jail, which is where he belongs!
"Andy Coulson: I 'rubber-stamped' £1,000 cash for royal phone book
Ex-NoW editor tells court he 'did not believe' Clive Goodman had got directory from police officer when he approved payment
Lisa O'Carroll
The Guardian, Tuesday 22 April 2014 10.50 EDT
Andy Coulson has admitted that he "rubber-stamped" a £1,000 cash payment to a source described by one of his News of the World reporters as a "policeman".
The payment was purportedly made in exchange for a leaked confidential copy of a royal phone directory.
But Coulson told the phone-hacking trial on Tuesday that he "did not believe" his royal editor had got the book from a police officer when he was asked to approve the cash for the leak of the Palace book.
The former News of the World editor told the court that the paper's then royal editor Clive Goodman was "prone to, in my view, creating unnecessary drama" about his stories, was reluctant to go out of the office, and "was a bit resentful" that he wasn't running the news desk.
He described him as "a tricky customer" and said the more he worked with Goodman the more "frustrating" his communications were. "Clive was someone who was quite difficult to get a grip of," he added.
In an email dated 24 January 2003 Goodman told Coulson that "one of the royal policemen has obtained the brand new green book, the telephone directory with all the home numbers of the royal family".
He warned Coulson that "these people will not be paid in anything other than cash because if they're discovered selling stuff to us they end up on criminal charges, as could we."
Coulson said he did not recall the email, but after reading it as part of the preparation for his defence he said it "brought back to me what it was like dealing with Clive Goodman".
Coulson had reacted immediately to Coulson firing off an email two minutes after receiving it by sanctioning the £1,000 payment for the royal directory: "This is fine. Didn't I sign off on purchase of green book quite recently tho?"
He said he "rubber-stamped" the payment and should have challenged the claim that the source was a police officer.
"I did not believe Clive Goodman was paying a policeman. I still don't believe a policeman was paid and I think what I did was to fail to address it properly, but I didn't, because I didn't believe him and I rubber-stamped it," Coulson said.
The email is at the heart of one of the two charges against Goodman and Coulson that they conspired to cause misconduct in public office by making unlawful payments to police officers.
Prosecutor Andrew Edis QC has said that the email demonstrates that Coulson was aware of criminality at the tabloid, a charge the former editor denies.
Coulson was also asked about an email in which Goodman said he "scammed" information about Prince Harry's health from a private secretary at the Palace.
Coulson says he believes that "scammed" could have meant "tricked" and that his response to Goodman showed he was "slightly exasperated" with him.
He was asked about a second email in relation to a purported payment request to a "Palace cop". He said "No, I didn't" think his source was actually a police officer.
Coulson also denied any knowledge of a a "new royal source", which the jury has heard was Glenn Mulcaire, which Goodman claimed to have in late 2005.
The former editor said he was under legitimate pressure to come up with new stories, particularly about the "younger royals" and Goodman came to him asking if he could put the new source on a retainer.
"I was minded to agree with him," he said of the £500-a-week payments the paper agreed to make as part of a trial known as the Alexander Project.
Coulson said Goodman did not divulge the identity of his source.
"Clive told me it was somebody who was close to the young royals who he thought over time might produce stories," said Coulson who emphasised that it was "a trial" which he "ended".
Coulson said he did not know that the source of a story about Prince Harry seeking help for an essay while at Sandhurst was a hacked voicemail. He said it looked as if Goodman had some sources, adding "it was never that big of a story".
The present trial, which has now been going for 100 days, continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/22/andy-coulson-cash-payment-royal-phone-book
More on Andy Coulson and Clive Goodman (a NOTW reporter who was jailed for phone-hacking 7 years ago).
"Phone-hacking trial: Andy Coulson denies bullying NoW reporter
Former editor tells court he did 'nothing to undermine or detract from' royal editor Clive Goodman, who was jailed for hacking
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Tuesday 22 April 2014 09.09 EDT
Phone-hacking trial: Andy Coulson has denied bullying Clive Goodman. Photograph: Mark Thomas/Rex Features
Andy Coulson has denied bullying the News of the World reporter who was jailed for phone-hacking offences seven years ago and later branded a "single rogue reporter" by News International.
He told jurors in the hacking trial that he "liked" the royal editor Clive Goodman and did "nothing to undermine or detract from" him when he was editor.
Goodman who is also a defendant in the trial in relation to payments for royal phone directories, has already testified that Coulson turned into an "aggressive" and "bullying" boss when he became editor of the paper in 2003.
He said he was always being berated by Coulson about his reporting and that it was intended to "degrade" him in front of others.
Asked on Monday by his defence counsel, Timothy Langdale QC, if he ever bullied Goodman, Coulson replied: "No. I'm not a bully."
"If I made a remark in conference or was having a bad day and said something that I shouldn't have said – it's a newspaper – but if I realised it had happened I would apologise. I'm not afraid of apologising."
Coulson added: "I do not wish to bang on about this, but it's quite important. I did nothing to undermine or detract from Clive Goodman."
It was put to him that Goodman had said his status in the paper's daily conferences was diminished as he was "pushed down the list" of those who got to discuss their stories.
Coulson said that it might seem like a small point, but that there might have been one occasion when Goodman spoke after the Sunday magazine person but it was unintentional.
"If that happened I'm very sorry about it, but it was not meant as a slur on Clive Goodman, far from it," he said.
He said he liked Goodman and that he had had a good reputation on Fleet Street as a royal editor during the Princess Diana era, adding that he was a good writer with a "sharp turn of phrase".
Coulson promoted Goodman to assistant editor and gave him his own column, The Carvery, but he said he felt that "Clive always carried some disappointement that he wasn't running the news desk on the News of the World".
Coulson was asked if he knew that Goodman had tasked Glenn Mulcaire to hack phones. "Absolutely not," he replied. Asked if he knew that Goodman "had used hacking techniques to intercept voicemails", he replied "No."
Coulson and Goodman deny all charges against them.
The trial continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/22/phone-hacking-trial-andy-coulson-news-world
"Phone-hacking trial: Andy Coulson denies bullying NoW reporter
Former editor tells court he did 'nothing to undermine or detract from' royal editor Clive Goodman, who was jailed for hacking
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Tuesday 22 April 2014 09.09 EDT
Phone-hacking trial: Andy Coulson has denied bullying Clive Goodman. Photograph: Mark Thomas/Rex Features
Andy Coulson has denied bullying the News of the World reporter who was jailed for phone-hacking offences seven years ago and later branded a "single rogue reporter" by News International.
He told jurors in the hacking trial that he "liked" the royal editor Clive Goodman and did "nothing to undermine or detract from" him when he was editor.
Goodman who is also a defendant in the trial in relation to payments for royal phone directories, has already testified that Coulson turned into an "aggressive" and "bullying" boss when he became editor of the paper in 2003.
He said he was always being berated by Coulson about his reporting and that it was intended to "degrade" him in front of others.
Asked on Monday by his defence counsel, Timothy Langdale QC, if he ever bullied Goodman, Coulson replied: "No. I'm not a bully."
"If I made a remark in conference or was having a bad day and said something that I shouldn't have said – it's a newspaper – but if I realised it had happened I would apologise. I'm not afraid of apologising."
Coulson added: "I do not wish to bang on about this, but it's quite important. I did nothing to undermine or detract from Clive Goodman."
It was put to him that Goodman had said his status in the paper's daily conferences was diminished as he was "pushed down the list" of those who got to discuss their stories.
Coulson said that it might seem like a small point, but that there might have been one occasion when Goodman spoke after the Sunday magazine person but it was unintentional.
"If that happened I'm very sorry about it, but it was not meant as a slur on Clive Goodman, far from it," he said.
He said he liked Goodman and that he had had a good reputation on Fleet Street as a royal editor during the Princess Diana era, adding that he was a good writer with a "sharp turn of phrase".
Coulson promoted Goodman to assistant editor and gave him his own column, The Carvery, but he said he felt that "Clive always carried some disappointement that he wasn't running the news desk on the News of the World".
Coulson was asked if he knew that Goodman had tasked Glenn Mulcaire to hack phones. "Absolutely not," he replied. Asked if he knew that Goodman "had used hacking techniques to intercept voicemails", he replied "No."
Coulson and Goodman deny all charges against them.
The trial continues."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/22/phone-hacking-trial-andy-coulson-news-world
Bubs
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,856
- Points
- 0
Thanks Jamba for posting updates in this case. I'm looking forward that these people gets what they deserve.
I quickly looked what is bullying, from wiki:
"He also suggests that social aggression or indirect bullying is characterized by attempting to socially isolate the target. This isolation is achieved through a wide variety of techniques, including spreading gossip, refusing to socialize with the target, bullying other people who wish to socialize with the target, and criticizing the target's manner of dress and other socially-significant markers (including the target's race, religion, disability, sex, or sexual preference, etc.). Ross[19] outlines an array of nonviolent behavior which can be considered "indirect bullying", at least in some instances, such as name calling, the silent treatment, arguing others into submission, manipulation, gossip/false gossip, lies, rumors/false rumors, staring, giggling, laughing at the target, saying certain words that trigger a reaction from a past event, and mocking."
Can I just point out that MJ was bullied by global media and tabloids, and noone said anything about media bully behaviour. Maybe Coulson didn't realise he was bully, but as his line of work, he didn't realise it was bullying? They bully celebrities all the time.
Bubs;3988261 said:
Yes, good point, Bubs. MJ was bullied for 20 years!!
Here is some info on bullying:
Bullying in childhood "throws a long shadow" into victims' adult lives, suggests research indicating long-term negative consequences for health, job prospects and relationships.
The study tracked more than 1,400 people between the ages of nine and 26.
School bullies were also more likely to grow up into adult criminals.
The study, from Warwick University in the UK and Duke University in the US, concludes bullying should not be seen as "a harmless rite of passage".
The long-term impact of bullying in childhood was examined through the experiences of three different groups - those who had been bullied, those who had carried out the bullying and those who had been both victims of bullying and had also carried out bullying themselves.
Long-term damage
The research, published in Psychological Science, suggests the most negative outcomes were for those who had been both victims and perpetrators of bullying, described in the study as "bully-victims".
Described as "easily provoked, low in self-esteem, poor at understanding social cues, and unpopular with peers", these children grew into adults six times more likely to have a "serious illness, smoke regularly or develop a psychiatric disorder".
By their mid-20s, these former "bully-victims" were more likely to be obese, to have left school without qualifications, to have drifted through jobs and less likely to have friends.
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
We cannot continue to dismiss bullying as a harmless, almost inevitable, part of growing up. We need to change this mindset and acknowledge this as a serious problem”
Dieter Wolke
University of Warwick
All of those involved in bullying, as victims or aggressors, had outcomes that were generally worse than the average for those who had not been involved in bullying.
Those who had been victims of bullying, without becoming bullies themselves, were more likely to have mental health problems, more serious illnesses and had a greater likelihood of being in poverty.
But compared with "bully-victims" they were more likely to have been successful in education and making friends.
There were also distinctive patterns for those who had been bullies, but who had not been bullied themselves.
These "pure bullies" were more likely to have been sacked from jobs, to be in a violent relationship and to be involved in risky or illegal behaviour, such as getting drunk, taking drugs, fighting, lying and having one-night stands with strangers.
They were much more likely to have committed offences such as breaking into property.
However in terms of health and wealth, bullies had more successful outcomes than either the victims of bullying or those who were both bullies and victims.
Such "pure bullies" were identified as often being strong and healthy and socially capable - with their manipulative and aggressive behaviour being seen as "deviant" rather than reflecting that they were "emotionally troubled".
The study included verbal, physical and psychological bullying and the comparisons were adjusted to take into account social background factors, such as family hardship, family stability and dysfunction.
"We cannot continue to dismiss bullying as a harmless, almost inevitable, part of growing up. We need to change this mindset and acknowledge this as a serious problem for both the individual and the country as a whole; the effects are long-lasting and significant," said Prof Dieter Wolke of the University of Warwick.
"In the case of bully-victims, it shows how bullying can spread when left untreated. Some interventions are already available in schools but new tools are needed to help health professionals to identify, monitor and deal with the ill-effects of bullying. The challenge we face now is committing the time and resource to these interventions to try and put an end to bullying."
Emma-Jane Cross, founder of the anti-bullying charity BeatBullying, said: "This groundbreaking study shines a light on what has been an overlooked subject for society and the economy. The findings demonstrate for the first time just how far-reaching and damaging the consequences of bullying can be."
http://www.bbc.com/news/education-23756749
Kids Who are Bullied
Kids who are bullied can experience negative physical, school, and mental health issues. Kids who are bullied are more likely to experience:
Depression and anxiety, increased feelings of sadness and loneliness, changes in sleep and eating patterns, and loss of interest in activities they used to enjoy. These issues may persist into adulthood.
Health complaints
Decreased academic achievement—GPA and standardized test scores—and school participation. They are more likely to miss, skip, or drop out of school.
A very small number of bullied children might retaliate through extremely violent measures. In 12 of 15 school shooting cases in the 1990s, the shooters had a history of being bullied.
http://www.stopbullying.gov/at-risk/effects/
http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/suicide/bullying-and-suicide
http://www.meganmeierfoundation.org/statistics.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying
http://www.bullyingstatistics.org/content/bullying-and-suicide.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-stop-bullying-in-the-workplace/ [27% of adults report being bullied at work]
http://www.latimes.com/science/scie...ullying-suicide-risk-20140310,0,3990497.story
By Karen Kaplan
March 10, 2014, 3:42 p.m.
Victims of bullying were more than twice as likely as other kids to contemplate suicide and about 2.5 times as likely to try to kill themselves, according to a new study that quantifies the emotional effects of being teased, harassed, beaten up or otherwise harmed by one’s peers.
Children and teens who were taunted by cyberbullies were especially vulnerable -- they were about three times as likely than other kids to have suicidal thoughts, the study found.
The findings, published online Monday by the journal JAMA Pediatrics, puts the lie to the old adage about sticks and stones. Cases of kids like 12-year-old Rebecca Ann Sedwick(who jumped to her death in a cement plant after classmates taunted her and asked “Why are you still alive?”
and 15-year-old Jordan Lewis (who shot himself in the chest after being picked on at school) are not just flukes.Experts believe that as many as 1 in 5 teens is involved in some type of bullying, and suicide is one of the leading causes of death among adolescents worldwide. So a team of Dutch researchers decided to investigate the link between the two.
The three researchers scoured the medical literature to find studies published since 1910 that addressed suicide in connection with bullying, teasing, harassment and even “ragging” and “mobbing.” Studies published in English, Spanish, German, French, Dutch, Portuguese and Lithuanian were considered for analysis.
In the end, they identified 34 reliable studies that addressed the issues of peer victimization and suicidal ideation. These studies included data on 284,375 people ages 9 to 21. After crunching the numbers, the researchers calculated that kids who were bullied were 2.23 times as likely to think about killing themselves than kids who had not been victimized.
The study authors sliced and diced their large dataset to compare types of bullying. Previous studies had reported that cyberbullying could be just as bad as traditional bullying. But this time, the researchers found cyberbullying was actually worse -- being bullied in person increased one’s risk for suicidal ideation by a factor of 2.16, while being bullied via email, via text messages or in videos posted on the Internet raised the risk by a factor of 3.12.
“This might be because with cyberbulling, victims may feel they’ve been denigrated in front of a wider audience,” study leader Mitch van Geel said in an interview posted on the JAMA Pediatrics website. In addition, he said, “material can be stored online, which may cause victims to relive the denigrating experience more often.”
When Van Geel and his colleagues broke down the data according to whether children where bullies as well as victims, those who had been on both sides of things were 2.35 times as likely to consider killing themselves than kids who had nothing to do with bullying.
“Peer victimization is related to suicidal ideation for older as well as younger children, boys as well as girls, and victims as well as bully-victims,” they wrote.
The researchers also found nine well-conducted studies about bullying and its relationship to suicide attempts. These studies included data on 70,102 people ages 9 to 21. The Dutch researchers ran the numbers and reported that kids and teens who were bullied were 2.55 times as likely to attempt suicide than their counterparts who had not been victimized. (The dataset wasn’t big enough to allow for additional analysis based on the type of bullying or other factors, the researchers wrote.)
In the United States, between 5% and 8% of teenagers tries to kill themselves each year. But the problem is global, Van Geel said.
“Suicide is one of the most important reasons for adolescent mortality worldwide,” he said. "Schools should take every effort to reduce and prevent bullying."
9 year old boy bullied for my little pony book bag; school forced him not to to bring it to school!!!!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ays-hardball-but-not-with-who-youre-thinking/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/father-school-received-bullying-report-daughter-s-suicide
13 year old girl bullied and commits suicide--parents not told she was bullied and school at first denied she was.
Dorothy Rizzuto Brozek Ambulance Driver • 17 hours ago
The Facts:
• Suicide is the SECOND leading cause of death for ages 10-24
• 1 in 65,000 children ages 10 to 14 commit suicide each year
• More teenagers and young adults die from suicide than from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects, stroke, pneumonia, influenza, and chronic lung disease, COMBINED
• An average of one person dies by suicide every 16.2 minutes
• Bully victims are between 2 to 9 times more likely to consider suicide than non-victims
• Over 3.2 million students are victims of bullying each year
• 71 percent of students report incidents of bullying as a problem at their school
• 1 out 10 students drop out of school because of repeated bullying
• Each day 160,000 students miss school for fear of being bullied
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention is at the forefront of research, education and prevention initiatives designed to reduce loss of life from suicide. With more than 38,000 lives lost each year in the U.S. and over one million worldwide, the importance of AFSP's mission has never been greater, nor our work more urgent.
On March 29th at Centennial Hills Park
"Team Hailee" will be joining the community walk to benefit
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
It is time to do something! Help us bring these facts out of the darkness. Join us on March 29th, for Hailee and for everyone like Hailee who can no longer tell their own story.
Please check out the following link for more info regarding this event
http://afsp.donordrive.com/ind...
Bubs
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2012
- Messages
- 7,856
- Points
- 0
Thanks Jamba.
Michael was bullied more than 20 years. Joe started with bullying and media people continued where Joe left it.
Yesterday when I was reading about bully, and I was thinking of Demon Dimond, she is poster girl of bully, she just hides it behind "reporting" like many others out there.
Michael was bullied more than 20 years. Joe started with bullying and media people continued where Joe left it.
Yesterday when I was reading about bully, and I was thinking of Demon Dimond, she is poster girl of bully, she just hides it behind "reporting" like many others out there.
Bubs;3988794 said:
Agree, Bubs. Sometimes I think all the bullying of MJ in the media made it socially acceptable to bully other people in general. This is why I go crazy when the tabs talk about 'public interest'--how does it help society to promote bullying? It doesn't. MJ even made a point in the B. Walters inteview about how he felt, and then the comment he made earlier about walking in someone's moccasins before you judge them.
"There is no doubt that Michael finds the constant barrage of attacks on him by the media. This is to such an extent that it really hurts him deeply.
When Michael went on the BAD TOUR he broke his vow of silence and agreed to answer one question from PEOPLE magazine journalist Todd Gold. Todd asked Michael what misconceptions the public had of him.
Michael Jackson gave this written reply:
“Like the old Indian proverb says, do not judge a man until you have walked two moons in his moccasins. Most people don’t know me , that is why they write such things in which most is not true. I cry very,very often because it hurts and I worry about the children. All my children all over the world. i live for them. If a man could say nothing against a character what he can prove, his story could not be written. Animals strike not from malice, but because they want to live, it is the same with those who want to criticise, they desire our blood, not our pain. But still I must achieve . I must seek Truth in all things. I must endure for the power I was sent forth , for the world, for the children. But have mercy , for I’ve been bleeding a long time now. M.J."
http://www.michaeljacksonmoon.com/michaels-answer-to-the-media-attacks/
But they ignored it.
That's why I hope this phone-hacking trial will bring these asshats to justice at last. At least I hope they are quaking in their boots about going to jail!
USA needs to do the same as UK is doing.
Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
^^The media have used bullying cloaked in freedoms for decades. The same type of bullying we see among children and teens on the internet is mirrored by the same bullying we see in print or on tv by the media. The children are simply doing what they see and hear. I also laugh when we have the same reporters talking about the "bad" bullying by kids on the internet when the same reporters have made it the basis of their work.
Someone gave be a huge volume of Punch (British publication) with all it most famous cartoons from the 1800 to present. They have political cartoons and at one point high power officials, like Churchill were afraid of these people because they could do a cartoon and crush you. Now isn't that a form of bullying? Years later Punch lost its ability to crush officials by the use of their "ink," but all these types of bullying is carried out today in modern publications and media.
Funny how those 2 guys keep saying that everything is not true. They have a simple defense either they did not know something was illegal or they never did or said something. Here is this guy crying about one person bullying him at the job, when he himself bullies important people as part of his job. Talk about ironic.
Someone gave be a huge volume of Punch (British publication) with all it most famous cartoons from the 1800 to present. They have political cartoons and at one point high power officials, like Churchill were afraid of these people because they could do a cartoon and crush you. Now isn't that a form of bullying? Years later Punch lost its ability to crush officials by the use of their "ink," but all these types of bullying is carried out today in modern publications and media.
Funny how those 2 guys keep saying that everything is not true. They have a simple defense either they did not know something was illegal or they never did or said something. Here is this guy crying about one person bullying him at the job, when he himself bullies important people as part of his job. Talk about ironic.
HIStory
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 6
- Points
- 0
It made some news here that a Czech singer committed suicide yesterday. Apparently it has to do with the tabloid media's merciless hunt for her:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iveta_Bartošová
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iveta_Bartošová
Trial in UK was suspended for illness of the witness Clive Goodman, but now he's better and testified in court re his phone-hacking when he was the 'royal editor' for News of the World under Andy Coulson:
"News of the World royal editor: I hacked Kate Middleton 155 times
Clive Goodman tells phone-hacking trial he himself intercepted princes' voicemails, but has never been asked about it by police
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Wednesday 14 May 2014 11.35 EDT
the former News of the World royal editor has said he hacked the phone of Kate Middleton 155 times
Phone-hacking trial: the former News of the World royal editor has said he hacked the phone of Kate Middleton, now the Duchess of Cambridge, 155 times.
Kate Middleton was hacked 155 times by a reporter on the News of the World who said he snooped on her voicemails on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, the Old Bailey has heard.
Clive Goodman, the paper's former royal editor, also revealed for the first time he directly hacked the phone of Prince William, adding that police had failed to ask him a single question about it in the eight years since he was arrested on related charges.
He told jurors he hacked Prince William 35 times, Prince Harry nine times and the Duchess of Cambridge 155 times.
Goodman said he had not been asked about this by the police or any other authority when he was arrested on related charges in 2006 or any time since.
"I've never been asked before. The Metropolitan police, Crown Prosecution Service did not ask me these questions in 2006 and 2007. I've never been asked by any inquiry any time about this," he said.
He first hacked Middleton on 21 December 2005, the jury heard, and continued to hack her on Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and Boxing Day. His first hack of Prince William was revealed to have taken place at the end of January 2006.
Goodman told jurors: "I'm really not the slightest bit proud of this. I don't want anyone to think I'm not ashamed."
He also hacked the phone of Kate Waddington, the personal assistant to Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, 160 times.
Goodman also said of Glenn Mulcaire, who was also arrested in 2006 for hacking members of the royal household: "Virtually every story in the paper was ground through the Glenn Mulcaire mill."
Under cross-examination by Timothy Langdale QC, who is acting for the paper's former editor Andy Coulson, Goodman told the jury that he was not on trial for hacking and the prosecution had told him he faced no further charges on this offence.
Turning to Langdale, he said: "Now that you are asking them [the questions], I'm quite happy to get them out there and get everything in the open."
He said he was being as "honest and open" as he could be on the subject. "My entire life has been exposed. I've never been asked these questions ... Anyone who wants to ask me questions, they will get straight answers as indeed you are getting today."
He told jurors that Middleton, who was dating Prince William, back in 2005 was a "figure of increasing importance around the royal family. There were discussions of her and Prince William marrying, moving in, settling down. She had started receiving royal status around the royal family."
Langdale put it to him that "one of the things you must have been worried about more than anything else in 2006" was that it would be discovered he was hacking Princes William and Harry and Kate Middleton.
He denied this and said his biggest fear was that he would have to carry the can for all the activities of Mulcaire who was arrested and jailed along with Goodman in January 2007 for hacking-related offences.
"I was terrified of the whole thing. I was more frightened of being blamed for Glenn Mulcaire's hacking," he said.
Jurors have previously heard that Kate Middleton and Prince Harry had been hacked. They have also seen emails relating to alleged hacks of Prince William when he was at Sandhurst in 2006, but Goodman's evidence on Wednesday is the first time it has been admitted.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have known each other since 2001 when they met at St Andrew's University and were exposed by the newspapers as a couple in 2004.
The trial has already heard that personal messages left by Prince William for Kate Middleton in 2006 in which he called her "babykins" were hacked by the News of the World.
Goodman was jailed in 2005 after admitting being involved in the hacking of three royal aides, Prince Charles's communication secretary Paddy Harverson, the prince's aide, Helen Asprey, and Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, private secretary to Princes William and Harry.
He was back in the witness box after an eight-week absence due to illness to finish his evidence.
Because of the long lapse of time between the first part of his cross-examination, the judge opened proceedings by refreshing the jury's memory as to Goodman's previous evidence.
Jurors were reminded that Goodman had claimed that Coulson had told him to tell police he was acting as a "lone wolf" and that he had gone "off the reservation" when asked about his activities in 2006.
Coulson has been charged with one hacking conspiracy, a charge he denies.
The trial continues.
"News of the World royal editor: I hacked Kate Middleton 155 times
Clive Goodman tells phone-hacking trial he himself intercepted princes' voicemails, but has never been asked about it by police
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Wednesday 14 May 2014 11.35 EDT
the former News of the World royal editor has said he hacked the phone of Kate Middleton 155 times
Phone-hacking trial: the former News of the World royal editor has said he hacked the phone of Kate Middleton, now the Duchess of Cambridge, 155 times.
Kate Middleton was hacked 155 times by a reporter on the News of the World who said he snooped on her voicemails on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, the Old Bailey has heard.
Clive Goodman, the paper's former royal editor, also revealed for the first time he directly hacked the phone of Prince William, adding that police had failed to ask him a single question about it in the eight years since he was arrested on related charges.
He told jurors he hacked Prince William 35 times, Prince Harry nine times and the Duchess of Cambridge 155 times.
Goodman said he had not been asked about this by the police or any other authority when he was arrested on related charges in 2006 or any time since.
"I've never been asked before. The Metropolitan police, Crown Prosecution Service did not ask me these questions in 2006 and 2007. I've never been asked by any inquiry any time about this," he said.
He first hacked Middleton on 21 December 2005, the jury heard, and continued to hack her on Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and Boxing Day. His first hack of Prince William was revealed to have taken place at the end of January 2006.
Goodman told jurors: "I'm really not the slightest bit proud of this. I don't want anyone to think I'm not ashamed."
He also hacked the phone of Kate Waddington, the personal assistant to Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, 160 times.
Goodman also said of Glenn Mulcaire, who was also arrested in 2006 for hacking members of the royal household: "Virtually every story in the paper was ground through the Glenn Mulcaire mill."
Under cross-examination by Timothy Langdale QC, who is acting for the paper's former editor Andy Coulson, Goodman told the jury that he was not on trial for hacking and the prosecution had told him he faced no further charges on this offence.
Turning to Langdale, he said: "Now that you are asking them [the questions], I'm quite happy to get them out there and get everything in the open."
He said he was being as "honest and open" as he could be on the subject. "My entire life has been exposed. I've never been asked these questions ... Anyone who wants to ask me questions, they will get straight answers as indeed you are getting today."
He told jurors that Middleton, who was dating Prince William, back in 2005 was a "figure of increasing importance around the royal family. There were discussions of her and Prince William marrying, moving in, settling down. She had started receiving royal status around the royal family."
Langdale put it to him that "one of the things you must have been worried about more than anything else in 2006" was that it would be discovered he was hacking Princes William and Harry and Kate Middleton.
He denied this and said his biggest fear was that he would have to carry the can for all the activities of Mulcaire who was arrested and jailed along with Goodman in January 2007 for hacking-related offences.
"I was terrified of the whole thing. I was more frightened of being blamed for Glenn Mulcaire's hacking," he said.
Jurors have previously heard that Kate Middleton and Prince Harry had been hacked. They have also seen emails relating to alleged hacks of Prince William when he was at Sandhurst in 2006, but Goodman's evidence on Wednesday is the first time it has been admitted.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have known each other since 2001 when they met at St Andrew's University and were exposed by the newspapers as a couple in 2004.
The trial has already heard that personal messages left by Prince William for Kate Middleton in 2006 in which he called her "babykins" were hacked by the News of the World.
Goodman was jailed in 2005 after admitting being involved in the hacking of three royal aides, Prince Charles's communication secretary Paddy Harverson, the prince's aide, Helen Asprey, and Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, private secretary to Princes William and Harry.
He was back in the witness box after an eight-week absence due to illness to finish his evidence.
Because of the long lapse of time between the first part of his cross-examination, the judge opened proceedings by refreshing the jury's memory as to Goodman's previous evidence.
Jurors were reminded that Goodman had claimed that Coulson had told him to tell police he was acting as a "lone wolf" and that he had gone "off the reservation" when asked about his activities in 2006.
Coulson has been charged with one hacking conspiracy, a charge he denies.
The trial continues.
Here's a lawyer for the defense of Stuart Kuttner, former managing editor of NOTW, trying to persuade the jury that the phone-hacking was 'overblown' and really not that bad. Of course not, it was just a MISUNDERSTANDING by WELL-INTENTIONED JOURNALISTS. Hhahahahahaha.
Phone-hacking allegations 'blown out of all proportion', court hears
Ex-News of the World managing editor's counsel says trial driven by police anxiety over botched inquiry into hacking in 2006
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Friday 30 May 2014 09.30 EDT
Jonathan Caplan QC, for the paper's former managing editor Stuart Kuttner, told jurors the trial was driven by the police's anxiety over the first botched investigation into hacking in 2006, when the paper's then royal editor Clive Goodman, also a defendant in the trial, was arrested.
He started his closing speech by reading a transcript of a call Kuttner made to police in 2002 alerting them to a voicemail recording the paper had which might assist them in their hunt for the missing Surrey school girl Milly Dowler.
Kuttner had even told the police the paper had confirmed Dowler's mobile number and pin number from schoolfriends and listed the voice messages the paper's chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck had recorded, Caplan said.
"From that moment, the Surrey Police were fully on notice that the News of the World was in possession of recordings of messages from Milly Dowler's voicemail. That was Saturday, 13 April 2002.
"Nine years after that, in August 2011, Mr Kuttner was lifted literally out of retirement when the Met Police called at his home and arrested him.
"He had been retired for two years, he had two heart attacks and had suffered a severe brain-stem stroke.
"What had happened to prod police into action all those years later?" Caplan asked. "Could it be that someone had finally picked up Mr Kuttner's call to the assistant chief constable nine years before?"
Caplan told the jury that the current trial began last October, 11 years after Kuttner called Surrey police, and seven years after the arrests of Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who was on a £100,000 contract with the paper.
"One asks, perhaps rhetorically, did the News of the World and phone hacking suddenly become a political hot potato?
"Were the police anxious that they might be perceived to have slipped, or have been slip-shod?. "Did the crown prosecution think the dust should be blown off Mulcaire notebooks seized in 2006 and there should be other grounds for prosecution?"
"Whoever turned up the heat on this particular potato, I only mention that because this case now cries out for some sense of proportion."
Caplan told the eight women and three men on the jury that the trial was unusual for a number of reasons, pointing out that the glass wall that separates the defendants from the rest of the court was there to stop them "jumping the dock" and attacking the judge.
The Old Bailey, he said, is the country's central criminal court and more accustomed to trying terrorists, murderers and bombers.
"In this case there are no dangerous people in that dock … no one has been killed and no physical bombs have been detonated," said Caplan.
He went on to tell the jury that the prosecution's case was "all about inference" and that it had made seven erroneous assumptions in its case against Kuttner.
Caplan said Kuttner did not "cook the books", he did not have knowledge of hacking, he did not know who Mulcaire was until his arrest in 2006, nor did he know a second contract signed in 2005 for an extra £500 a week for someone called Alexander was, in fact, for Mulcaire.
Why would he have wanted to "slash" his pay if he had conspired with him on hacking? "Surely if you have a golden goose, you allow the goose to lay the golden eggs," said Caplan.
Jurors were told that the evidence against Kuttner was that he only knew of one intercepted voicemail and that was of Dowler's and he had alerted police to it.
Former News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck told the police that schoolfriends had given him her mobile number and he had repeated that in his own conversation with the police. If there had been anything "sinister" going on, why would Kuttner have volunteered this to the police? Caplan asked.
He told jurors that Kuttner didn't approve of the Dowler hack, didn't agree to it and once he was informed of it, immediately went to the police.
"Some people in a lifetime would never have a crisis of conscience, some wouldn't know they had one if it hit them with a force of a 10-ton bus. Mr Kuttner knew that he had a crisis of conscience … and wanted to tell police about this in case it could assist in the investigation."
Kuttner said he couldn't recall who had told him about the hack, but he knows he was not told it was Mulcaire.
Caplan reminded jurors that two establishment figures and Sara Payne, mother of the murdered school girl Sarah, had come to testify for Kuttner.
"If there was a firm called rent-a-witness, you would want this trio as your witnesses – archbishop, a peer of the realm who had been on the Press Complaints Commission and Sara Payne – a woman who had gone through the most appalling circumstances, and no doubt tremendous press intrusion, still came and spoke up for Mr Kuttner," he said.
Turning to Kuttner's police interview in 2011, Caplan said the prosecution claimed that Kuttner began to "prevaricate and bluster" when confronted with an email he had written to a Surrey police press officer regarding Dowler.
This, he said, was "imprecise and unfair" as it was reasonable that Mr Kuttner did not have a recollection about an email sent nine years earlier. Caplan said the police were "not keen" that Kuttner consult with anyone, even though he had retired two years before his detention, and was without any records of his years at News International.
Caplan also said it was wrong of the prosecution to suggest there was any significance in the removal of a reference to Dowler's voicemail in a story on 14 April 2014 between the first and third editions.
He said "the cat was already out of the bag"; Kuttner had already told the police about the voicemail, so why would the paper want to conceal its possession of the message?
The "real" reason why the reference was removed was because the police had told the paper that the message could have been left by a professional hoaxer. The story was "legalled and they would not have wanted to have inaccurate material and we say it was nothing more than that," said Caplan.
Caplan said the prosecution was also accusing his client of participating in a cover-up but that it was another situation in which the crown had "zero" evidence. The fact is "10 or even 20 times zero still equals zero".
All seven defendants deny all charges against them.
Kuttner is facing a single charge that he conspired with others to intercept voicemails.
The trial continues.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/30/phone-hacking-news-of-the-world-police
Phone-hacking allegations 'blown out of all proportion', court hears
Ex-News of the World managing editor's counsel says trial driven by police anxiety over botched inquiry into hacking in 2006
Lisa O'Carroll
theguardian.com, Friday 30 May 2014 09.30 EDT
Jonathan Caplan QC, for the paper's former managing editor Stuart Kuttner, told jurors the trial was driven by the police's anxiety over the first botched investigation into hacking in 2006, when the paper's then royal editor Clive Goodman, also a defendant in the trial, was arrested.
He started his closing speech by reading a transcript of a call Kuttner made to police in 2002 alerting them to a voicemail recording the paper had which might assist them in their hunt for the missing Surrey school girl Milly Dowler.
Kuttner had even told the police the paper had confirmed Dowler's mobile number and pin number from schoolfriends and listed the voice messages the paper's chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck had recorded, Caplan said.
"From that moment, the Surrey Police were fully on notice that the News of the World was in possession of recordings of messages from Milly Dowler's voicemail. That was Saturday, 13 April 2002.
"Nine years after that, in August 2011, Mr Kuttner was lifted literally out of retirement when the Met Police called at his home and arrested him.
"He had been retired for two years, he had two heart attacks and had suffered a severe brain-stem stroke.
"What had happened to prod police into action all those years later?" Caplan asked. "Could it be that someone had finally picked up Mr Kuttner's call to the assistant chief constable nine years before?"
Caplan told the jury that the current trial began last October, 11 years after Kuttner called Surrey police, and seven years after the arrests of Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who was on a £100,000 contract with the paper.
"One asks, perhaps rhetorically, did the News of the World and phone hacking suddenly become a political hot potato?
"Were the police anxious that they might be perceived to have slipped, or have been slip-shod?. "Did the crown prosecution think the dust should be blown off Mulcaire notebooks seized in 2006 and there should be other grounds for prosecution?"
"Whoever turned up the heat on this particular potato, I only mention that because this case now cries out for some sense of proportion."
Caplan told the eight women and three men on the jury that the trial was unusual for a number of reasons, pointing out that the glass wall that separates the defendants from the rest of the court was there to stop them "jumping the dock" and attacking the judge.
The Old Bailey, he said, is the country's central criminal court and more accustomed to trying terrorists, murderers and bombers.
"In this case there are no dangerous people in that dock … no one has been killed and no physical bombs have been detonated," said Caplan.
He went on to tell the jury that the prosecution's case was "all about inference" and that it had made seven erroneous assumptions in its case against Kuttner.
Caplan said Kuttner did not "cook the books", he did not have knowledge of hacking, he did not know who Mulcaire was until his arrest in 2006, nor did he know a second contract signed in 2005 for an extra £500 a week for someone called Alexander was, in fact, for Mulcaire.
Why would he have wanted to "slash" his pay if he had conspired with him on hacking? "Surely if you have a golden goose, you allow the goose to lay the golden eggs," said Caplan.
Jurors were told that the evidence against Kuttner was that he only knew of one intercepted voicemail and that was of Dowler's and he had alerted police to it.
Former News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck told the police that schoolfriends had given him her mobile number and he had repeated that in his own conversation with the police. If there had been anything "sinister" going on, why would Kuttner have volunteered this to the police? Caplan asked.
He told jurors that Kuttner didn't approve of the Dowler hack, didn't agree to it and once he was informed of it, immediately went to the police.
"Some people in a lifetime would never have a crisis of conscience, some wouldn't know they had one if it hit them with a force of a 10-ton bus. Mr Kuttner knew that he had a crisis of conscience … and wanted to tell police about this in case it could assist in the investigation."
Kuttner said he couldn't recall who had told him about the hack, but he knows he was not told it was Mulcaire.
Caplan reminded jurors that two establishment figures and Sara Payne, mother of the murdered school girl Sarah, had come to testify for Kuttner.
"If there was a firm called rent-a-witness, you would want this trio as your witnesses – archbishop, a peer of the realm who had been on the Press Complaints Commission and Sara Payne – a woman who had gone through the most appalling circumstances, and no doubt tremendous press intrusion, still came and spoke up for Mr Kuttner," he said.
Turning to Kuttner's police interview in 2011, Caplan said the prosecution claimed that Kuttner began to "prevaricate and bluster" when confronted with an email he had written to a Surrey police press officer regarding Dowler.
This, he said, was "imprecise and unfair" as it was reasonable that Mr Kuttner did not have a recollection about an email sent nine years earlier. Caplan said the police were "not keen" that Kuttner consult with anyone, even though he had retired two years before his detention, and was without any records of his years at News International.
Caplan also said it was wrong of the prosecution to suggest there was any significance in the removal of a reference to Dowler's voicemail in a story on 14 April 2014 between the first and third editions.
He said "the cat was already out of the bag"; Kuttner had already told the police about the voicemail, so why would the paper want to conceal its possession of the message?
The "real" reason why the reference was removed was because the police had told the paper that the message could have been left by a professional hoaxer. The story was "legalled and they would not have wanted to have inaccurate material and we say it was nothing more than that," said Caplan.
Caplan said the prosecution was also accusing his client of participating in a cover-up but that it was another situation in which the crown had "zero" evidence. The fact is "10 or even 20 times zero still equals zero".
All seven defendants deny all charges against them.
Kuttner is facing a single charge that he conspired with others to intercept voicemails.
The trial continues.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/30/phone-hacking-news-of-the-world-police
Re bullying, I have been thinking how one feature of bullying someone is to call them a name, especially a name they hate, one that is demeaning, and that serves to objectify them and treat them as an object not a human being. This happens a lot with celebs--but the "W . . . J. . . " name was just awful because it was based in racism as well as bullying. There have been many children's stories told since early 1900's of a character called J . . . Monkey, and there were cartoons about this character too--very popular. J . . . Monkey dolls were sold up to 1950's in UK and you can find them on Ebay, etc. So they had to know it was a racist term in the 1st place, on top of the bullying.
The same type of name-calling also goes for other celebs but of course it was not as bad as happened to MJ, but names like "Brangelina" and "TomKat" (when Tom Cruise was married to Katy Holmes) are also demeaning name-calling/bullying IMO.
I found this article interesting re how Tom Cruise was attacked/vilified in the internet media and how his career was damaged by the 'viral video' of him 'jumping' on Oprah's couch. The writer claims the viral video is misleading and it made me think of the whole "baby dangling" thing, which was another example of how editing and slowing down the speed made it look worse than it was and helped spur criticism. She also talks about celebs being fair game for the people like Perez Hilton who were bloggers who wanted to make a name for themselves by stalking and demeaning celebs.
People who want to make a name for themselves--like DD and Bashit et al??
http://www.laweekly.com/2014-05-22/news/the-last-movie-star
The same type of name-calling also goes for other celebs but of course it was not as bad as happened to MJ, but names like "Brangelina" and "TomKat" (when Tom Cruise was married to Katy Holmes) are also demeaning name-calling/bullying IMO.
I found this article interesting re how Tom Cruise was attacked/vilified in the internet media and how his career was damaged by the 'viral video' of him 'jumping' on Oprah's couch. The writer claims the viral video is misleading and it made me think of the whole "baby dangling" thing, which was another example of how editing and slowing down the speed made it look worse than it was and helped spur criticism. She also talks about celebs being fair game for the people like Perez Hilton who were bloggers who wanted to make a name for themselves by stalking and demeaning celebs.
People who want to make a name for themselves--like DD and Bashit et al??
http://www.laweekly.com/2014-05-22/news/the-last-movie-star
elusive moonwalker
Guests
Brookes cleared coulsen guilty. jury still debating further counts against coulsen