Rupert Murdoch and the Corruption of the British Media

[John Simkin]

The former legal manager of the News of the World (NOTW), Tom Crone and the paper's former editor, Colin Myler, today face questioning from the Commons committee investigating phone hacking, after Scotland Yard confirmed no formal charges were imminent in their own criminal investigation into the scandal.

You can watch these people being interviewed here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/sep/06/phone-hacking-levseon-inquiry-live

[Douglas Caddy]

James Murdoch back in the crosshairs as Crone and Myler reload

Colin Myler and Tom Crone's evidence leave News Corp heir apparent with the same questions to answer about that phone hacking email

By Dan Sabbagh

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 6 September 2011 16.29 BST

A parliamentary recall of James Murdoch looks more than likely after this morning's parliamentary evidence from Colin Myler, the former editor of the News of the World, and Tom Crone, the paper's chief lawyer. The duo wasted no time in repeating to MPs their version of events regarding the much-scrutinised 15-minute 2008 meeting which agreed to make a confidential six-figure payout to former football boss Gordon Taylor.

Murdoch knew what he was signing up to, they said. Myler and Crone briefed him on the existence of the critical "for Neville" email at that meeting, with Crone saying: "It was the reason we had to settle the case and in order to settle the case, we had to explain the case to Mr Murdoch and get his authority to settle, so clearly it was discussed."

Murdoch has said he has "no recollection" of that email, which was a note, obtained from the police by Gordon Taylor's lawyers, that appeared to show a transcript of hacked phone messages taken by then junior reporter Ross Hindley about Taylor "for Neville". "Neville" is alleged to be the News of the World's chief reporter, Neville Thurlbeck. Its significance is that it was the first evidence that knowledge of phone hacking undertaken by Glenn Mulcaire went beyond a single reporter, Clive Goodman.

What was less clear was what they thought James Murdoch understood by the email, or even the meeting. Myler and Crone agreed that that James Murdoch gave them authority to settle the case at what ever price they thought reasonable. Myler later said that "everybody [Crone, Murdoch and I] understood the significance of what were discussing" – although if that was the case it was also significant that nobody had much of an inquiry about the "for Neville" email afterwards.

Crone did say he asked Thurlbeck about the new evidence, but his conclusion was that "Neville's name is on it, but he doesn't accept he knows anything about it". It appears that the internal inquiry amounted to asking one journalist a few questions about phone hacking, a few questions that were successfully rebuffed.

So not only is there the question that Murdoch was not accurate in his previous evidence to the select committee – but there is also the question as to why News International performed such a cursory investigation into the renewed hacking allegations. Why was Murdoch so incurious about the underlying hacking issue that was raised by the "for Neville" email – it would be interesting if he said it was because Myler and Crone had not told him about it, or told him in such a vague way that he could not have possibly understood the significance of it.

There were a few other titbits on the way. Crone embarrassed Andy Coulson with the revelation that that former News of the World editor and No 10 spinner wanted to rehire Clive Goodman, once the former royal editor had served his time in prison for phone hacking. Coulson, in Crone's recollection, seemed to think the paper had a "duty of care" to Goodman – which echoes in spirit the decision made by Les Hinton, the former NI chairman, to award a payoff amounting to nearly £240,000 as discussed in the previous hearing.

That may say a lot about the character of at least some News International executives, but there was no sign any omerta between Myler, Crone and Murdoch. While Myler and Crone stuck to their guns, Murdoch chose to respond a few hours later.

Murdoch too was clear about what he knew: that there was evidence to link the hacking of Taylor with the News of the World. But he was also clear what he did not know: "They did not show me the email, nor did they refer to Neville Thurlbeck. Neither Mr Myler nor Mr Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr Goodman or Mr Mulcaire."

We shall see how Crone and Myler respond to that. James Murdoch wants to emphasise the similarities between his account and his two former employees. All agree, for example, that no documents were produced at this key meeting. Not seeing the "for Neville" email or its link to Thurlbeck may also explain why James Murdoch did not order an inquiry into the emerging phone-hacking allegations three years ago.

Crone and Myler did not fird the fatal shot today, but the discrepancies between the accounts of the two men on one side and one man on the other have not yet been reconciled. And if James Murdoch has not properly explained why he was so incurious about the phone-hacking allegations that were swirling around his newspaper, not just in 2008, but in 2009 and 2010.

[Douglas Caddy]

Phone hacking: Rebekah Brooks to give evidence to Leveson inquiry

Publishers and more than 100 alleged phone-hacking victims, including Sienna Miller and Steve Coogan, also offer to testify

By Josh Halliday

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 6 September 2011 14.53 BST

Former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks is set to give evidence alongside several key victims of press intrusion as the first witnesses in the judicial inquiry into the phone-hacking scandal.

Lawyers acting for more than 100 alleged victims of phone hacking, including the actor Sienna Miller and Steve Coogan, said they have offered to give evidence before Lord Justice Leveson's public inquiry.

Brooks could appear alongside "some or many" current and former News International executives as so-called "core participants" in the inquiry, a lawyer for Rupert Murdoch's newspaper group told the hearing at the high court on Tuesday.

Core participants may have the right to be cross-examined by other witnesses in the judicial inquiry. Leveson said he would decide in the next few days who will be granted core participant status.

The private investigator William Rees, more commonly known as Jonathan Rees, may also give oral evidence on phone hacking in the early part of the inquiry.

Key victims of press intrusion, including the parents of Madeleine McCann and former Formula One boss Max Mosley, are likely to be the first people to give evidence in person to the inquiry. A second set of suspected victims of phone hacking, such as Jude Law and Hugh Grant, said they did not want to be core participants but would offer evidence before the court.

Leveson described the alleged victims as "central to what is being investigated" in the inquiry. The judge later added that the probe "wouldn't be looking at who did what to whom".

He is also expected to hear in person from John Yates, the former senior Metropolitan police officer, and lawyers for the Met police in the second stage of the inquiry.

Opening the inquiry at the high court, Leveson said "although I will be conducting this inquiry with a degree of formality, I won't be conducting it as a trial".

Express Newspapers, the publisher behind the Daily Star and Daily Express, has applied to be a core participant alongside Guardian News & Media, publisher of the Guardian and Observer, and News International, the publisher of the Sun, the Times and the now-defunct News of the World. Lawyers for the Daily Mail publisher, Associated Newspapers, said they would formally decide whether to apply when Paul Dacre, the editor-in-chief, returned from holiday on Wednesday.

Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), publisher of the Daily Mirror and its Sunday sister title, confirmed it would not apply for "core participant" status at this stage in the inquiry. A spokesman for MGN said that the group remains "fully committed to engaging with the inquiry" and could consider applying at a later date.

Telegraph Media Group, publisher of the Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph, also said it would not apply to be core participants at this stage.

All UK media outlets, including MGN and the BBC, have been sent a list of 20 questions for key members of staff to answer about ethics and working practices.

However, core participants in the inquiry have the right to cross-examine witnesses, make opening and closing statements, and have legal representation.

Leveson said: "It's clear that some of the applications are bound to success and others we will have to think about. It will take a few days to do so."

[Douglas Caddy]

Phone hacking: Legal firm tells MPs it did not carry out investigation at News International

Daily Telegraph

By Mark Hughes

6:00AM BST 06 Sep 20

The legal firm which News International claimed had carried out an investigation into phone hacking has written to MPs to say that their inquiry was not as thorough as was previously believed.

Law firm BCL Burton Copeland was hired by News International in 2006 following the arrests of Clive Goodman, the News of the World’s former royal reporter, and the private detective Glenn Mulcaire, who worked on behalf of the paper.

The newspaper’s former editor Andy Coulson, giving evidence to MPs in 2009, said that the firm had carried out an investigation whether hacking was more widespread.

Other News International executives gave evidence suggesting that Burton Copeland had carried out a robust investigation.

However the firm, which no longer works on behalf of News International, has now written to MPs to clarify that their role amounted to little more than acting as a conduit between the police and News International.

The Daily Telegraph understands that the contents of the letter, which are due to be published today, are similar those in a letter sent to the Commons culture and media select committee by Linklaters, a law firm now working on behalf of News International.

The Linklaters letter states that Burton Copeland did not conduct an investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World and their role was “only about helping the police”.

This is thought to have largely consisted of compiling information about payments made to Glenn Mulcaire, the private detective who eavesdropped on phone messages on behalf of the tabloid.

It is understood that Burton Copeland did not interview any News of the World staff or study emails sent by executives and journalists.

The letter is in contrast to evidence previously given to the committee by Mr Coulson, the Prime Minister’s former director of communications.

Asked in 2009 whether, following the arrests of Goodman and Mulcaire, Mr Coulson, who was the newspaper’s editor at he time, commissioned an internal inquiry, he told MPs: “Obviously we wanted to know internally very quickly what the hell had gone on.

“Then I brought in Burton Copeland, an independent firm of solicitors to carry out an investigation. We opened up the files as much as we could. There was nothing that they asked for that they were not given.”

Tom Crone, the newspaper’s former head of legal affairs, also gave evidence to MPs about the firm’s role.

He said: My understanding of their remit was that they were brought in to go over everything and find out what had gone on…Burton Copeland came in; they were given absolutely free-range to ask whatever they wanted to ask.

“They did risk accounts and they have got four lever-arch files of payment records, everything to do with Mulcaire, and there is no evidence of anything going beyond in terms of knowledge into other activities.”

No one from Burton Copeland was available to comment on the letter.

Mr Crone will today give evidence to the committee again. Also giving evidence is Colin Myler, the paper’s former editor, Daniel Cloke, the former human resources director, and Jon Chapman, the former head of corporate and legal affairs.

The committee is likely to quiz the men about the Burton Copeland letter and about a letter sent by Clive Goodman to Mr Cloke in which he claims that Mr Coulson was aware of phone hacking by other staff at the newspaper.

Also yesterday News International announced it is to sell its Wapping site in London

[Douglas Caddy]

Did a Top Staffer for Senator Grassley Cover-up Evidence of News Corp Hacking in the U.S.?

By Lee Fang

www.thinkprogress.org

September 6, 2011

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/09/06/300323/exclusive-questions-surround-grassley-staffer-given-whistleblower-tip-regarding-news-corp-hacking-scandal/

A top investigator for the Senate Finance Committee, working under Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), may have had smoking gun evidence of News Corp’s hacking activity.

While News Corp’s British subsidiaries have received the most media attention for systematically hacking the cell phone and personal records of private citizens, the public still has heard little of allegations relating to similar conduct perpetrated by News Corp against its American competitors. ThinkProgress has learned that not only did a sensitive tip come to Grassley’s office about News Corp’s cyber attacks against other American companies, but authorities may have failed to look into the matter partially because a staffer named Nick Podsiadly allegedly never followed through on his promise to the whistleblower.

In December 2006, Robert Emmel, an account executive in News Corp’s profitable marketing division called News America Marketing, mailed Grassley’s office a 58-page document detailing News Corp’s unfair business practices. News America Marketing had won incredibly lucrative contracts away from a New Jersey-based firm called Floorgraphics not too long after Floorgraphics caught someone with a News Corp I.P. address illegally accessing password-protected information on the company’s computer system. As critics have pointed out, the alleged hacking attempts by News America Marketing seem to mirror information-stealing tactics used by News Corp’s British newspapers, including the now-defunct News of the World tabloid.

In 2006, Grassley was chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Emmel had gone to the committee looking for help. According to court filings, Grassley investigative staffer Nick Podsiadly had spoken with Emmel and told him that the committee would consider its own inquiry into the matter or he would refer the documents to the Justice Department. Podsiadly was Emmel’s best hope. After he submitted the sensitive information about his employer to the Senate Finance Committee, Emmel signed a non-disclosure agreement with News Corp, and was dismissed from the company the following month. News Corp unleashed a slew of lawyers against Emmel, which eventually forced the man into bankruptcy. As the New York Times has reported, News Corp more or less extinguished allegations of corporate espionage with $655 million in various settlements and buy-outs to competitors. (In-store marketing companies Valassis and Insignia claimed that News Corp had used similar tactics against them.)

Podsiadly, as it turned out, may have never opened an inquiry or passed along Emmel’s tip to the Department of Justice. A spokeswoman for Grassley explained to the Guardian that ongoing litigation prevented the committee from action:

A spokeswoman for the finance committee said nothing would be done with any documents sent by Emmel until the litigation over them had ended. Emmel today remains under a court-imposed injunction that forbids him from disclosing anything from these documents. “I cannot comment,” he said.

Phil Hilder, Emmel’s attorney, is not buying the committee’s excuse for not investigating the matter. “What litigation? I’m not sure at the time there was any litigation that they were referring to.” Hilder explained that to his knowledge the tip was never referred to the Department of Justice either. “I have no idea what if anything Mr. Podsiadly did with the information,” said Hilder, a former federal prosecutor.

Perhaps Grassley’s spokeswoman was hoping that the Guardian, a London-based paper, would be unaware of standard congressional procedures. Ongoing litigation, or even the threat of litigation, never prohibits a congressional committee from opening an investigation.

Mort Rosenberg, the author of Investigative Oversight and a number of manuals for conducting congressional inquiries, dismissed the Grassley excuse in an interview with ThinkProgress. “Congress has huge powers over what it decides to investigate,” Rosenberg explained. In some cases, when the Department of Justice is already looking into a criminal matter, Congress will avoid engaging in an investigation. But overall, Rosenberg said outside litigation never prevents a committee from opening an inquiry.

ThinkProgress spoke to Beth Levine, a spokeswoman for Grassley, who said the documents are not currently under Grassley’s purview because he is no longer the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee. Asked if Podsiadly ever referred the whistleblower documents to the Justice Department or began a congressional inquiry into the matter when he received them in 2006, Levine responded, “I don’t know the answer to that question.” Further requests to Podsiadly and Grassley staff for more information have gone unanswered.

In the United Kingdom, News Corp ducked prosecution for its systematic hacking for years by exploiting the company’s connections to prominent politicians and police authorities. In the United States, FBI agents, after reviewing the “excellent paper trail” left by News Corp while allegedly breaking into the computers of competitor Floorgraphics, contacted the the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey to consider a criminal investigation. At the time, the U.S. attorney was a Bush appointee named Chris Christie — a confidant of News Corporation executive and Fox News chief Roger Ailes and now the Republican governor of New Jersey. As reporter David Carr noted, the FBI case “died a slow death” in Christie’s office.

News Corp has quieted the alleged American victims of its corporate espionage by buying their silence with over half a billion worth of settlements. The public, however, deserves a fair hearing about the alleged criminal conduct. News Corp is no ordinary company; its vast newspaper and cable news holdings have a responsibility to serve the public interest, so a pattern of corrupt conduct across the company has wide implications. The question remains though why Grassley’s staffer, Podsiadly, may have dropped the ball and thrown News Corp’s whistleblower under the bus.

[Douglas Caddy]

Executives Dispute Account of Murdoch Son in Hacking Case

The New York Times

By JOHN F. BURNS and ALAN COWELL

September 6, 2011

LONDON — As the phone hacking scandal in Britain continues to gnaw at Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, a parliamentary panel opened new hearings on Tuesday, seeking to determine who knew about unauthorized voice mail intercepts ordered by the now defunct News of the World tabloid.

Two of four former executives called to testify said they had informed Mr. Murdoch’s son, James, at a 15-minute meeting in 2008 that the use of hacking went further than his company had publicly acknowledged at the time. But one of the executives, Tom Crone, the former legal manager at the tabloid, denied that there had been a cover-up.

Mr. Murdoch ordered The News of the World closed as the scandal crashed around it earlier this year following disclosures that it had hired a private detective to hack the voice mail of Milly Dowler, a 13-year-old girl who was murdered in 2002.

The hearings on Tuesday could revive the surge of revelations about the scandal that has shaken the British media, politics and police in recent months. They could also determine whether the panel recalls James Murdoch to give further evidence.

In July, James Murdoch, who runs the European and Asian operations of the News Corporation media giant, testified in Parliament that he had no knowledge of a wide pattern of hacking at the newspaper. Mr. Crone and Colin Myler, a onetime editor of The News of the World, challenged him, saying his testimony was “mistaken,” but Mr. Murdoch immediately denied their assertion.

Mr. Myler and Mr. Crone were called to testify again on Tuesday before Parliament’s select committee for culture, media and sport — the panel that questioned Rupert and James Murdoch in a dramatic hearing in July when a prankster slipped by security guards to throw a shaving cream pie at the elder Mr. Murdoch.

The panel also summoned Jonathan Chapman, the former director of legal affairs at News International, News Corporation’s British newspaper subsidiary, and Daniel Cloke, the group’s former director of human resources.

John Whittingdale, the chairman of the committee, said the latest round of questioning was an attempt to uncover the truth in the “continuing difference in the accounts of James Murdoch and Tom Crone and Colin Myler about whether or not James Murdoch was aware of the so-called for Neville e-mail.” He was referring to a 2005 e-mail containing transcripts of hacked phone messages. It was headed “for Neville,” an apparent reference to the News of the World’s chief reporter, Neville Thurlbeck.

The e-mail came to light in April 2008 when the soccer union leader Gordon Taylor brought a lawsuit alleging voice mail interceptions. At that time, James Murdoch chose to make a record $1.4 million settlement, which also included a confidentiality clause. The company had long asserted that phone hacking was limited to a “lone rogue reporter” but, had the case proceeded, documentary evidence undermining that assertion would likely have emerged publicly.

James Murdoch testified in July that he had made the settlement because it made financial sense, and not because he wanted to disguise the truth.

Testifying on Tuesday, Mr. Crone, the former legal manager, said the contentious e-mail was “clear evidence that phone hacking was taking place beyond” Clive Goodman, the newspaper’s former royal reporter who was the only journalist who had been publicly identified at that time as having intercepted voice mails. Mr. Goodman and a private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, both served prison terms in 2007 for hacking the voice mails of members of Britain’s royal family.

“It was the reason we had to settle the case and in order to settle the case, we had to explain the case to Mr. Murdoch and get his authority to settle, so clearly it was discussed,” Mr. Crone told the parliamentary panel. “I can’t remember the conversation and there isn’t a note of it. The conversation lasted about 15 minutes. It was discussed, but exactly what was said I can’t remember.”

Mr. Myler, the former News of the World editor, also confirmed that account of the meeting with James Murdoch in 2008. “There was no ambiguity about the significance of that document and what options were there for the company to take,” he said, according to Britain’s Press Association news agency. “Mr. Murdoch was the chief executive of the company. He’s experienced. I am experienced in what I do. Mr. Crone is experienced as a legal manager. I think everybody perfectly understood the seriousness and the significance of what we were discussing."

Last month, the phone hacking inquiry released a potentially damning four-year-old letter from Mr. Goodman claiming that voice mail intercepts were routine and were “widely discussed” at the paper,

James Murdoch, in a statement on Tuesday, said he stood by his earlier testimony. “Neither Mr. Myler nor Mr. Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr. Goodman or Mr. Mulcaire,” he said. “As I said in my testimony, there was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary.”

In light of the scandal, James Murdoch has faced calls to step down as the chairman of British Sky Broadcasting, also known as BSkyB, a satellite television company of which the News Corporation owns 39 percent.

A $14 billion bid by the News Corporation to take full ownership of the broadcaster earlier this year became mired in political controversy as the phone hacking scandal broke, and was eventually withdrawn amid allegations that improper links between politicians and the Murdoch family had tainted the process.

The hacking scandal is also under investigation by British police, who last Friday arrested a 30-year-old man — the 15th person held since early this year.

An official at News International, the parent company of the now-shuttered News of the World, speaking on condition of anonymity, identified the man as Ross Hall, a former reporter with the newspaper. A spokeswoman for News International declined to comment.

John F. Burns reported from London, and Alan Cowell from Paris. Ravi Somaiya contributed reporting from London.

[Douglas Caddy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2011/sep/06/phone-hacking-myler-crone-video

[Douglas Caddy]

The strange case of the gun that didn't smoke

Tom Crone and Colin Myler can't remember exactly what was said at crucial meeting with Murdoch

By Esther Addley

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 6 September 2011 21.15 BST

It was their own fault, of course. Tom Crone, recently unemployed former top lawyer at News International, and Colin Myler, recently unemployed former editor of the News of the World, have already given evidence to the Commons culture select committee's inquiry into press standards, back in 2009. One cannot imagine they had any great desire to repeat the experience.

Rather a lot has happened since. Both used to have rather nice jobs, for a start. But most significantly, for current purposes, their former boss James Murdoch – who, confounding the expectations of many, still has a rather nice job – has himself insisted to the committee that yes, of course he agreed to pay a reported £700,000, on the basis of the briefest of meetings with the two men, to hacking victim Gordon Taylor, and no, at no point during that meeting had he asked to be shown the email that proved the News of the World had been hacking him, or told that hacking was more widespread at the paper than a single "rogue reporter".

By releasing a joint "clarifying" statement, immediately after Murdoch's evidence in July, to say he had been "mistaken" in asserting they hadn't told him about the email, the two men guaranteed their own recall, and held out the prospect of the juiciest of hearings. Would they call him out, explicitly, as a xxxx? Was Murdoch for it?

Before the red meat, though, the entree, and another former News International double act: Daniel Cloke, erstwhile head of HR, and Jonathan Chapman, one-time head of legal affairs. It wasn't an entirely satisfying dish.

They had examined 2,500 internal News International emails, after the News of the World's disgraced royal reporter Clive Goodman insisted hacking was widespread at the paper, without discovering any evidence of illegality? Yes, but "it's hard for me to recall … It was four and a half years ago" (Chapman). They had interviewed colleagues named by Goodman as having knowledge of hacking, and no one mentioned anyone else being involved? "Not that I can recall, but I don't have my notes with me." (Cloke). Neither of them had thought of having a criminal lawyer look at the emails? They paused, and spoke in chorus. "No, not that I can recall."

All right then, over to the other two and the "For Neville" email, so called because it was headed "For Neville". Neville Thurlbeck was the paper's chief reporter at the time.

Were Crone and Myler certain, asked the committee's chair, John Whittingdale, they had told James Murdoch in that meeting "about that email"? "I'm certain," said Crone. So that was that. Um, not quite. Had he shown him the email? He couldn't recall. So what exactly had happened? "I can't remember the conversation and there isn't a note of it. The conversation lasted about 15 minutes. It was discussed, but exactly what was said I can't remember."

The MPs did their damnedest to pin the pair down on what exactly had happened in the meeting, but the devastating clarity hinted at by their statement in July turned out to be frustratingly elusive.

Damian Collins went quite pink trying, and failing, to get a clear answer out of Myler. Tom Watson had a go. Had Crone talked to Murdoch about the possibility of a lower settlement to Taylor? He couldn't remember. What had Murdoch said? He couldn't recall. Crone couldn't comment on his evidence in 2009 without reading the sequence of questions put to him then. "It's there!" said Philip Davies helpfully, leaping forward with a transcript.

Crone insisted the "obvious inference" of the email, about which Murdoch had certainly been informed, was that "others or another" inside the NoW knew about or participated in hacking. It wasn't quite the promised smoking gun.

It fell, eventually, to Louise Mensch to say explicitly what everyone was thinking. Murdoch's evidence, to the effect that he had not seen any evidence that hacking went wider than a single rogue reporter, was "crystal clear". "I have to say, sir, that Your evidence has been as clear as mud. There appears to be no clarity whatsoever on the issue." James Murdoch, with apt symmetry, immediately released a statement of his own. The men's evidence was "unclear and contradictory"; he, on the other hand, stood by his own.

[Douglas Caddy]

Lawyer tells MPs: Murdoch lied to you

Former News International executives insist that chairman was told of incriminating hacking email

The Independent

By Oliver Wright, Cahal Milmo and James Cusick

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

James Murdoch's status as heir apparent to his father's News Corp empire was in the hands of 11 MPs last night after two of his most senior executives suggested he was lying over his knowledge of phone hacking at the News of the World.

The newspaper's former editor Colin Myler and its legal manager Tom Crone yesterday contradicted evidence given by Mr Murdoch to Parliament that he had been unaware that voicemail interception at the paper had gone beyond one rogue reporter.

Mr Murdoch said afterwards that he stood by his version of events and that he had been "absolutely clear and consistent".

It will now fall to MPs on the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee to decide which version of events to believe. If their eventual report concludes Mr Murdoch misled them, it would almost certainly make his position as successor to his father untenable in the light of US investigations into the scandal which has already cost News Corp one of its newspapers, two of its top executives and full ownership of BSkyB.

Last night, sources on the committee suggested they were likely to recall Mr Murdoch when they meet next Tuesday to respond to the allegations made by Mr Myler and Mr Crone before writing their report.

Among other revelations in another day of drama in Westminster, it emerged that:

* Mr Crone saw a dossier commissioned by a senior News International executive into the private lives of lawyers acting for the victims of phone hacking. The existence of the dossier was first revealed by The Independent last week.

* Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, tried to persuade executives to re-employ his paper's disgraced royal editor Clive Goodman after he had been jailed for phone hacking.

* News International failed to examine any internal emails related to phone hacking written before the arrest of Mr Goodman. This would also appear to contradict evidence given by Mr Murdoch to the committee.

But it is Mr Myler and Mr Crone's evidence to MPs about a crucial 15-minute meeting they held with Mr Murdoch in 2008 that will be central to the committee's deliberations.

Mr Crone told the committee that he had been passed details of an email which – for the first time – showed staff at the News of the World had been aware that the phone of the Professional Footballers' Association boss Gordon Taylor had been hacked. The email, later referred to as the "for Neville" email, was a transcript of an intercepted voicemail which had been written out by a junior reporter at the paper and later sent back to the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire who had hacked it.

It was passed to Mr Crone by Mr Taylor's lawyers as part of his civil action against the paper for phone hacking. Mr Crone yesterday told the committee he informed Mr Murdoch about the document at a meeting also attended by Mr Myler. At the meeting, he added, Mr Murdoch authorised him to reach a settlement with Mr Taylor, who was eventually paid £425,000 in damages.

Mr Crone said the email was documentary evidence that at least one other reporter was aware of phone hacking and that this was why they needed to settle out of court. "Up to then there was no evidence that News of the World were implicated. The first I saw of that was the 'for Neville' email which reached us in spring 2008. We went to see Mr Murdoch and it was explained to him what this document was and what it meant," said Mr Crone. "It was clear evidence that phone hacking was taking place beyond Clive Goodman. It was the reason we had to settle the case and in order to settle the case, we had to explain the case to Mr Murdoch and get his authority to settle, so clearly it was discussed."

Mr Myler agreed with Mr Crone's version of events. He said: "Mr Murdoch is the chief executive of the company. He is experienced. I am experienced. Mr Crone is experienced. I think everyone perfectly understood the seriousness and significance of what we were discussing. There was no ambiguity about the significance of that document."

But Mr Murdoch last night continued to insist that he was not informed that the email suggested phone hacking was more widespread than thought at the News of the World and that his previous evidence to the committee had been accurate. He said: "My recollection of the meeting regarding the Gordon Taylor settlement is absolutely clear and consistent. I stand by my testimony, which is an accurate account of events.

"I was told by Mr Crone and Mr Myler when we met, in that short meeting, that the civil litigation related to the interception of Mr Taylor's voicemails to which Mulcaire had pleaded guilty the previous year. I was informed, for the first time, that there was evidence that Mulcaire had carried out this interception on behalf of the News of the World. It was for this reason alone that Mr Crone and Mr Myler recommended settlement. It was in this context that the evidence was discussed. Neither Mr Myler nor Mr Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr Goodman or Mr Mulcaire.

"There was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary."

During his testimony Mr Crone also confirmed the fact, first reported by The Independent, that News International commissioned a dossier on the private lives of lawyers bringing civil damages claims for phone hacking against the News of the World.

At the very end of the evidence, Mr Crone said he knew the name of the NI employee who had commissioned the dossier but did not want to make it public because of the ongoing police investigation into illegal newsgathering at News of the World.

Selected evidence: What they said – and what it means for the investigation

Jonathan Chapman (former director of legal affairs at News International): "Clive Goodman specified in his letter [to News International] that he would like to see emails between certain individuals from about six months prior to his conviction [and after his arrest]. So they were the parameters of the search."

Significance The 2,500 emails examined by News International and the law firm Harbottle & Lewis were written after the period when phone hacking was rife at the News of the World. After Goodman's arrest it is highly unlikely that executives would have committed anything incriminating to writing. James Murdoch told the committee in July: "Outside counsel was brought in [Harbottle & Lewis]. From then, the opinion was clear that as to their review, there was no additional illegality in respect of phone hacking in that file." Mr Chapman's evidence shows that Mr Murdoch was relying on a report which only looked at very limited documentation, from a time when phone hacking had already been exposed. The committee may want to ask Mr Murdoch why the company took such solace from the Harbottle & Lewis report.

Daniel Cloke (former human resources director at News International): "What we appeared to have at the time was someone [Goodman] who was on a fishing expedition and requesting a huge amount of documentation. In actual fact the essential process that I was looking at was whether his conduct [constituted] gross misconduct and whether the company was within its rights to dismiss him. In terms of the other aspects we decided to look at those as well but it was not a forensic or wide-ranging investigation – it was in the context of an employment dispute."

Significance Again, if this was not a forensic or wide-ranging investigation, why did James Murdoch place such reliance on it? Either Mr Murdoch was very badly briefed on the extent of the Harbottle & Lewis investigation, or he was misled, or he himself intentionally misled the committee. MPs will want to try to establish which.

Tom Crone (former legal manager at News International): "Mr Coulson had conversations with me on at least three occasions where he said that if Clive was guilty and sentenced and served his sentence then he, Mr Coulson, was hoping to persuade the company that Mr Goodman could come back – not in a reporting capacity but perhaps as a sub-editor. When I spoke to Clive I relayed thatto him."

Significance At face value this is extraordinary: Goodman had reason to expect he would not lose his job despite being sent to prison for phone hacking. Why, if Mr Coulson was so shocked by phone hacking and had no idea it was happening under his watch, did he want to keep on the person who had been responsible for it?

Tom Crone "I conveyed to the meeting that a transcript of Gordon Taylor voicemails had passed through [the News of the World] office and back to Glenn Mulcaire. That is what was relayed to Mr Murdoch. The difference this document made was that it implicated the News of the World in Gordon Taylor without any doubt at all, because it passed through our office. It proved that it had gone through the computer system of a junior reporter. The obvious inference we could draw from that is that others knew about it, because the junior reporter didn't do it off his own bat."

Colin Myler (former editor of the News of the World): "Mr Murdoch is the chief executive of the company. He is experienced. I am experienced, Mr Crone is experienced. I think everyone perfectly understood the seriousness and significance of what we were discussing. There was no ambiguity about the significance of that document."

Significance This goes to the heart of what James Murdoch knew and when. In written evidence to the committee he said: "Neither Mr Myler not Mr Crone told me that wrong-doing extended beyond Mr Goodman or Mr Mulcaire. There was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary." Yesterday Mr Murdoch stuck to that position. But Mr Myler and Mr Crone's evidence does appear to contradict it. At the end of the day it will be up to the committee and eventually Lord Justice Leveson to decide whom they believe.

[Douglas Caddy]

Cahal Milmo: The Wapping 'family' was breaking up before our eyes

The Independent

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

At times yesterday the only sound coming out of the Thatcher Room in the Palace of Westminster was the thunk of the buck being passed between senior figures who once ran Rupert Murdoch's British newspaper empire.

It will ultimately fall to Scotland Yard's huge Operation Weeting investigation and prosecutors to decide whether there is enough evidence of criminal actions to bring a case against those arrested (15 and counting) since April. But there is another, parallel battle going on here which is about the reputation of Murdoch lieutenants who are unlikely to face questions under police caution, but nonetheless find their deeds under close scrutiny and, crucially, the standing of the media mogul's global empire and that of his son, James.

None of the four men appearing yesterday – former News of the World chief lawyer Tom Crone, its former editor Colin Myler, former head of legal affairs for NI, Jonathan Chapman, and NI's former head of HR, Daniel Cloke – have been arrested. But, with the exception of Mr Myler, they had front row seats for how NI responded to the arrest and conviction of disgraced royal editor Clive Goodman and all of them were working in Fortress Wapping while the company persisted with its "one rogue reporter" defence and sought to keep a lid on the hacking affair.

Subsequently, what can be reasonably assumed to have been the crystal clear lines of managerial responsibility at NI and considerable powers of recall of its most formidable minds have become somewhat ... hazy.

The most high-profile of these battles of memory is the clash between the "certainty" of Mr Crone and Mr Myler that they left James Murdoch in no doubt about the existence of the "For Neville" email and its implications, and the one-time heir's blunt denial that they did anything of the sort.

But there were other disparities, including the insistence of Mr Cloke that Mr Myler had known all about a decision to pay Goodman £240,000 despite his summary dismissal from the company. The former editor, who was brought in to steady the NOTW ship and ended up presiding over its demise, insisted he had known nothing about it, describing Goodman's appeal against dismissal as "surreal".

It is perhaps unsurprising that one of the most oft-repeated phrases of the day was: "Not that I can recall, no." Similarly, Mr Myler could not recall ordering a search of invoices relating to Goodman's work with private detective Glenn Mulcaire, referred to by Mr Cloke, while Mr Crone made it clear it was not him but Les Hinton, Rupert Murdoch's closest confidant and former NI chairman, who would have rubber-stamped the former royal editor's sizeable payoff.

In the midst of these shifting sands, Mr Chapman observed that there was a sense of "family" when Wapping comes to dealing with its journalists. On the basis of yesterday's performance, the break-up of that family is likely to get even messier than it is already.

[Steve Knight]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8746321/Phone-hacking-Operation-Weeting-officers-arrest-16th-suspect-in-scandal.html

By Andrew Hough

10:00AM BST 07 Sep 2011

The 35 year-old, who has not been named, became the 16th suspect to be held by police investigating the illegal practice at the now-defunct Sunday tabloid .

Scotland Yard said the man was held by officers from Scotland Yard's Operation Weeting at 5.55am on Wednesday during the swoop on his home. No other details were released about the suspect or where he was arrested.

He is the latest to be arrested on suspicion of phone hacking since the fresh investigation into the illegal interception of voicemails was launched in January. It was the second in a week.

He was taken to a north London police station for questioning on suspicion of conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages. Previous arrests have been been made by prior appointment making Wednesday's raid unusual.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "Officers from Operation Weeting have this morning (7 September) arrested a man at his home address in connection with conspiring to intercept communications.

"At 05.55 hrs officers arrested the man on suspicion of conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages, contrary to Section1 (1) Criminal Law Act 1977.

"The man [35 ys] is now in custody at a north London police station."

A series of high-profile figures have been held for questioning, including former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks and former Downing Street communications chief Andy Coulson.

None of the suspects has been charged and one has been cleared.

The scandal has already led to the closure of the News of the World after 168 years and the resignation of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and Assistant Commissioner John Yates.

The latest arrest came hours after James Murdoch, the News International chairman came out fighting after two of his former executives accused him of misleading MPs about his knowledge of the scandal that brought down the News of the World.

Colin Myler, the newspaper’s last editor, and Tom Crone, its former legal chief, told the culture, media and sport select committee they had informed him three years ago of a “devastating” email proving phone hacking was not confined to a single “rogue reporter”.

Their evidence is at odds with Mr Murdoch’s claims in July that he was “not aware” of the email until recently, but Mr Murdoch is standing by his version of events.

[Douglas Caddy]

Guardian journalist in hacking quiz

The Independent

By Tom Morgan and Sam Marsden

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

A Guardian journalist leading coverage of the phone-hacking scandal has been questioned over alleged leaks from police.

The newspaper confirmed its special investigations correspondent Amelia Hill was speaking to officers as Scotland Yard carried out its 16th arrest of the fresh investigation.

Ms Hill, who has broken a string of exclusives surrounding the investigation, was contacted by police after a 51-year-old detective was arrested by his own force last month.

A Guardian News and Media spokeswoman said: "We can confirm Amelia Hill has been questioned in connection with an investigation into alleged leaks.

"On a broader point, journalists would no doubt be concerned if the police sought to criminalise conversations between off-record sources and reporters."

Ms Hill was questioned under caution several days ago, the paper said.

Confirmation of her contact with police came after detectives investigating illegal phone interceptions at the News of the World swooped on a 35-year-old man's home before dawn.

He was taken to a north London police station for questioning on suspicion of conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages.

The man, who has not been named, was held by police at 5.55am today.

A series of high-profile figures have been held for questioning, including former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks and ex-Downing Street communications chief Andy Coulson.

The scandal has already led to the closure of the News of the World after 168 years and the resignation of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and Assistant Commissioner John Yates.

PA

[Douglas Caddy]

Poster's note: Please take notice of the paragraph in this article in which the committee members say that they received an anonymous email that quoted a former key Murdoch employee declaring, “a global empire could be blown apart” by the scandal.

-----------------------------------------------

Murdoch Son’s Testimony on Hacking Is Challenged by 2 Former Executives

The New York Times

By JOHN F. BURNS and ALAN COWELL

September 7, 2011

LONDON — After a month’s lull, the phone hacking scandal that has rocked Rupert Murdoch’s media empire resumed with fresh intensity on Tuesday. Mr. Murdoch’s son James clashed publicly with two former senior news executives over a meeting that parliamentary investigators have identified as a critical milestone in attempts by some of his father’s trusted lieutenants to contain the scandal.

The two former executives said at a parliamentary hearing that they had informed James Murdoch, chief of News Corporation’s European and Asian operations, at a 15-minute meeting in London in 2008 that the hacking of voice mail as a reporting tool went beyond the work by a lone “rogue” reporter and a private investigator that the company had acknowledged at the time. The men said they had conveyed that message as part of a plan to win Mr. Murdoch’s backing for a record $1.4 million settlement that bound a hacking victim to silence about his case.

The former executives — Tom Crone, former legal manager for the Murdoch-owned newspapers in Britain, and Colin Myler, former editor of the now-defunct News of the World — said the settlement had been intended to avoid millions in legal costs, but several members of Parliament suggested that it was part of a cover-up intended to buy the hacking victim’s silence and prevent the scandal from spreading.

The committee on culture, media and sport, which had summoned Rupert and James Murdoch to a hearing in July, said it would meet again to decide whether to call James Murdoch back for additional questioning. Committee members have said that they will focus on determining whether he testified truthfully in July when he said that there was no indication at the 2008 meeting of a pattern of wrongdoing at The News of the World, which was closed as a result of the scandal.

James Murdoch, who has denied that he was told that the hacking involved more than a single case that resulted in two men’s going to jail in 2007, almost immediately disputed the former executives’ testimony to the committee on Tuesday. In a statement, he rejected the assertions by Mr. Crone and Mr. Myler that they had told him of an internal e-mail from the tabloid’s archive — one showing that the phone hacking had been more widespread and posed a far more serious threat financially and legally — that justified a payout that would serve to contain the damage.

The meeting in 2008 has emerged as a turning point in the saga that has embroiled Britain’s news media, politicians and the police. Months of disclosures have damaged Prime Minister David Cameron, who hired a former News of the World editor as his communications chief, only to see him resign and undergo questioning as one of 15 editors, reporters and private investigators arrested in the case. The scandal prompted the resignation of the Scotland Yard commander who was Britain’s top police officer, after disclosures about his ties to the Murdoch hierarchy; and forced Rupert Murdoch to shut down The News of the World after 168 years of publication.

For Rupert Murdoch, 81, who presides over one of the world’s most powerful news organizations, the scandal has posed a more personal threat. James Murdoch, 38, has been fighting for his corporate survival, in the face of deep unease among powerful News Corporation investors. Whether James Murdoch, long considered his father’s corporate heir, can survive may depend on what the parliamentary and police inquiries reveal in the months ahead about his stewardship of the British papers as the phone hacking scandal grew.

The dimensions of the affair were captured in a closing exchange at the parliamentary hearing, when one of the lawmakers quoted from an e-mail he said had been sent anonymously to committee members by somebody who had once worked at a senior level in News International in which the writer spoke of the possibility that “a global empire could be blown apart” by the scandal. As matters stand, whether James Murdoch can withstand the mounting pressures appears to hinge, more than anything, on the differing accounts of the 2008 meeting, and what it reveals of his willingness to confront the scope of the illegal practices.

The conflicting accounts of the meeting center on two issues: whether Mr. Murdoch was shown an e-mail in which a junior reporter quoted from transcripts of three hacked voice mail messages, indicating a broader pattern of illegal intercepts; and whether Mr. Murdoch’s approval of the record $1.4 million settlement with Gordon Taylor, chief of an organization representing Britain’s professional soccer players, was motivated by a desire to save millions in legal costs for News International, the Murdoch newspaper subsidiary, or was, as several members of Parliament suggested, an effort to buy Mr. Taylor’s silence and prevent the scandal from spreading.

Mr. Crone and Mr. Myler testified that the meeting had centered on the e-mail, which they said they had cited in support of their argument that a settlement should be made with Mr. Taylor. Mr. Crone said he was “absolutely certain” he had shown the e-mail to Mr. Murdoch, and had pushed to settle the case because there were four other targets of News of the World phone-hacking who were “waiting in the wings” to begin civil damages lawsuits of their own that would draw heavily on evidence in the Taylor case if it were not ended by a financial settlement with a binding confidentiality clause.

Mr. Myler testified that all three men at the meeting “perfectly understood the seriousness and significance of what we were discussing,” in terms of more civil suits if the Taylor case was not settled and the e-mail was introduced in evidence. James Murdoch said in his statement, however, that his testimony in July was “an accurate account of events” and that Mr. Crone and Mr. Myler “did not show me the e-mail.”

“As I said in my testimony, there was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary,” he said.

But the testimony of Mr. Myler and Mr. Crone, as well as two other News International executives who testified on Tuesday, presented a version of the payouts that dovetailed with James Murdoch’s. In July, Mr. Murdoch testified that he had approved the payment to Mr. Taylor not to buy his silence but to limit News International’s legal costs if the case went to trial. On Tuesday, Mr. Crone said that defending the Taylor suit, and others that might have followed, could have cost more than $3 million each in legal fees.

But Tom Watson, the committee’s most outspoken member, spoke of the settlement — more than 10 times the previous record for an award in an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit — as a “cover-up” and a move intended to buy Mr. Taylor’s silence. “You were desperate to see that nobody knew that phone hacking was standard practice at The News of the World,” Mr. Watson said.

John F. Burns reported from London, and Alan Cowell from Paris. Ravi Somaiya contributed reporting from London.

[John Dolva]

This is more like it. : therefore one must see ALL events as involving the Emipre and therefore they have a meaning understood by understanding this very point: this is about an OLD history that if known would indeed blow them out of the water. so, this must not happen and Rupert is a very skilled squirrel at the helm. Things do not/will not happen without a reason.

[Douglas Caddy]

Andy Coulson refuses to reappear at MPs' phone-hacking inquiry

Former News of the World editor cites concern about 'parallel inquiries' and 'publicity'

By Lisa O'Carroll

guardian.co.uk,

Wednesday 7 September 2011 18.06 BST

Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World and the prime minister's former personal communications director, is reportedly refusing to appear before the Commons select committee that is investigating phone-hacking.

His solicitors have written to the culture, media and sport committee declining an invitation to appear citing "concerns" about "parallel inquiries and investigations and the publicity generated by them".

Coulson resigned from the News International paper in 2007 after its former royal editor Clive Goodman was jailed on phone-hacking offences.

He has consistently denied knowing that phone hacking took place but last month a previously unseen letter from Goodman emerged that claimed phone hacking was "widely discussed" at editorial conferences until Coulson banned mentions of it. Goodman's letter also claimed that Coulson had offered to let him keep his job if he agreed not to implicate the paper in hacking when it came to court.

The chairman of select committee, John Whittingdale, wrote to Coulson the day this letter was released into the public domain, inviting him to consider whether his previous denials of knowledge of phone hacking should be amended.

Coulson's solicitors at law firm DLA Piper reportedly said in their reply to Whittingdale: "We have expressed our concerns to you previously about the effects of the parallel inquiries and investigations and the publicity generated by them. Given those concerns … our client does not wish to make any additional comments on the evidence he gave to the committee."

DLA Piper refused to comment.