DOCSLIB.ORG

Correspondence with Tom Crone 2014‐16

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Correspondence with Tom Crone 2014‐16 CORRESPONDENCE WITH TOM CRONE 2014‐16 Letter from the Acting Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 12/12/2014 Letter from Tom Crone to the Acting Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 3/01/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 20/01/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 28/01/2015 Letter from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 30/01/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 30/01/2015 Email from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 31/01/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 3/02/2015 Email from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 9/02/2015 Letter from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 10/02/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 12/02/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 19/02/2015 Email from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 5/03/2015 Email from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 06/03/2015 Letter from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 13/03/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 23/03/2015 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 24/02/2016 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 9/03/2016 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 16/03/2016 Letter from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 12/04/2016 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 22/04/2016 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 30/06/2016 Letter from Tom Crone to the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges, 15/07/2016 Letter from the Clerk of the Committee of Privileges to Tom Crone, 21/07/2016 Committee of Privileges Tel 020 7219 4432 Fax 020 7219 5952 Email [email protected] Website www.parliament.uk/privileges From Alda Barry, Acting Clerk of the Committee 12 December 2014 Mr Tom Crone The Committee of Privileges has decided to resume its inquiry into the allegations that the Culture Media and Sport Committee was misled, as set out in its Eleventh Report of 2010‐ 12. I enclose the evidence received so far in the Committee’s inquiry. The Committee will write to you shortly, setting out the key points from that evidence, the evidence given to the Culture Media and Sport Committee, and other evidence in the public domain, particularly that given to the Leveson inquiry, and will invite your comments thereon. The Committee will then, as set out in the previously published procedure, warn you of any criticisms it is minded to make, and give you a further opportunity to comment. After a preliminary review of the evidence, the Committee is of the view that it is likely to be content to consider the matter on the basis of written material. However, inquiry subjects have the right to request oral hearings if they wish, and the Committee has provisionally set aside the afternoon of Monday 26 January and the morning of Tuesday 27 January for such hearings. These dates will be confirmed in January. To assist us with planning, I would be grateful if you could indicate by 12pm on Monday 5 January 2015 whether or not you expect to take the opportunity to make oral submissions in January. Alda Barry Acting Clerk of the Committee of Privileges 3 January, 2015 I am replying to your letter of 12th December, 2014. In that letter you promised to write to me “shortly” setting out key points of evidence from various sources and requested me to indicate by 12pm on January 5th, 2015, whether or not I would “take the opportunity” to make oral submissions to the Committee on the days they have set aside for such hearings, i.e. January 26 and 27. Unfortunately, we are now 48 hours from the expiry of the January 5th deadIine the Committee has set me and I have seen no sign of the promised “key points” or the “other evidence” promised in your letter 23 days ago. This is despite the fact that, according to that letter, The Committee has obviously had possession of and “reviewed” the evidence well before December 12th. Clearly, I am completely unable make any sort of decision about oral hearings by January 5th and, since I will be out of the country from tomorrow until January 11, the oral hearing dates you have identified would be virtually impossible for me in these circumstances. I hope the Committee will now agree that, because of their delay in providing me with the case I am supposed to answer, the timetable they have set is hopelessly unworkable. I look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Tom Crone Committee of Privileges Tel 020 7219 3259 Email [email protected] Website www.parIia ment.uk/privileges From Eve Samson, Clerk of the Committee Mr Tom Crone 20 January 2015 ~ \{.-~ ) On 12 December 2014 the acting Clerk of the Committee of Privileges wrote to you, to inform you of the reopening of the Committee's inquiry arising from the Resolution of the House of Commons on 22 May 2012, which noted the conclusions set out in chapter 8 of the Eleventh Report from the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, Session 2010-12 ('the Committee'}, on News International and Phone-hacking, HC 903-1 {"the 2011 CMS Report"}and ordered that the matter be referred to the Committee on Standards and Privileges,. now the Committee of Privileges. Chapter 8 of the 2011 CMS Report made the following all~gations against you (split for the purposes of clarity}: (i} That you misled the Committee by giving a 'counter-impression' of the significance of confidentiality in the Gordon Taylor settlement. (ii) That you (and Colin Myler) misled the Committee by answering questions falsely about your knowledge of evidence that other News of the World employees had been involved in phone-hacking and other wrongdoing. {iii) That you sought to mislead the Committee about the commissioning of surveillance. 1. Misleading the Committee by g1vmg a 'counter-impression' of the significance of confidentiality in the Gordon Taylor settlement The basis for this conclusion is set out in paragraphs 108 to 119 of the 2011 CMS Report. These paragraphs refer in turn to the oral evidence given by you on 21 July 2009 and on 6 September 2011. On 21 July 2009 Mr Myler confirmed in your presence that a payment had been made to settle the action by Gordon Taylor and two others (Ev 306, Q1332). The Chairman of the Committee then asked; "Was the size of that payment greater in order that the proceedings should be kept secret? Mr Myler: Absolutely not as far as I am aware. Mr Crone: No." (Ev. 306, Q1333). You were then asked by the Chairman on what basis it was decided to keep the proceedings secret. You replied: Mr Crone: "Secret" is not the word I would use. This was an action against us for breach of confidence and privacy. We get quite a lot of those now since the privacy law has expanded somewhat in the last five years. Every single case against us for breach of privacy-unless the information is already out within the public domain­ results in a very strict term of confidentiality at the end of the case. When you think about it, there would be absolutely no point in anyone suing us to stop their privacy being revealed if they did not at the end of the case tack on an absolutely strict and binding confidentiality term, and that is what happened in this case. Q1335 Chairman: Was it at Gordon Taylor's request? Mr Crone: Actually I think he mentioned it first. Q1336 Chairman: He mentioned it first? Mr Crone: It was raised by him before it was raised by us, but we fell in with it. We always fall in with it, being privacy, because if the litigant goes in front of the judge the judge will order the injunction immediately-so certainly when we have accepted that there was a breach." On 2 September 2011 Farrer & Co (who were then instructed by News Group Newspapers Ltd in relation to the claim brought by Gordon Taylor) wrote to the Committee to inform it that, "as regards confidentiality [the firm's] recollection was that both parties were interested in confidentiality provisions .....An element of the sum paid to Mr Taylor would have reflected the agreement to keep the matter confidential but no precise figure was attributed to that element that we are aware of". (Ev 226) On 6 September 2011 you were asked about the terms of the Gordon Taylor settlement, in particular as to the reason for making an offer of £415,000 (or £425,000). The passage which appears relevant is as follows: Q785 Mr Watson: In this case it was the defendant, was it not, who required confidentiality? That is quite unusual. 2 Tom Crone: That is not my recollection, no. I think, as I said last time, that it was raised by the other side first. Q786 Mr Watson: Did you require confidentiality? Tom Crone: We were quite happy with it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hacking Affair Is Not Over – but What Would a Second Leveson Inquiry Achieve?
    7/10/2019 Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? Academic rigour, journalistic flair Hacking affair is not over – but what would a second Leveson inquiry achieve? July 25, 2014 3.57pm BST Author John Jewell Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, Cardiff University On we go. Ian Nicholson/PA In the latest episode in the long-running saga that is the phone hacking affair, Dan Evans, a former journalist at the News of the World and Sunday Mirror, has received a 10 month suspended sentence after being convicted of two counts of phone hacking, one of making illegal payments to officials, and one of perverting the course of justice. Coming so soon after the conviction of Andy Coulson and the acquittal of Rebekah Brooks and others, one could be forgiven for assuming that the whole phone hacking business is now done and dusted. Not a bit of it. As Julian Petley has written: “Eleven more trials are due to take place involving 20 current or former Sun and News of the World journalists, who are accused variously of making illegal payments to public officials, conspiring to intercept voicemail and accessing data on stolen mobile phones.” We also learned in June that Scotland Yard had officially told Rupert Murdoch of their intention to interview him as part of their inquiry into allegations of crime at his British newspapers. The Guardian revealed that Murdoch was first contacted in 2013, but the police ceded to his lawyers’ request that any interrogation should wait until the Coulson–Brooks trial had finished.
    [Show full text]
  • Actual Malice" Standard Really Necessary? a Comparative Perspective Russell L
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 53 | Number 4 March 1993 Is The ewN York Times "Actual Malice" Standard Really Necessary? A Comparative Perspective Russell L. Weaver Geoffrey Bennett Repository Citation Russell L. Weaver and Geoffrey Bennett, Is The New York Times "Actual Malice" Standard Really Necessary? A Comparative Perspective, 53 La. L. Rev. (1993) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol53/iss4/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Is The New York Times "Actual Malice" Standard Really Necessary? A Comparative Perspective Russell L. Weaver* Geoffrey Bennett** In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan,' the United States Supreme Court extended First Amendment guarantees to defamation actions.2 Many greeted the Court's decision with joy. Alexander Meiklejohn claimed that the decision was "an occasion for dancing in the streets. ' 3 He believed that the decision would have a major impact on defamation law, and he was right. After the decision, many years elapsed during which "there were virtually no recoveries by public officials in libel 4 actions." The most important component of the New York Times decision was its "actual malice" standard. This standard provided that, in order to recover against a media defendant, a public official must demonstrate that the defendant acted with "malice.' In other words, the official must show that the defendant knew that the defamatory statement was © Copyright 1993, by LoUIsIANA LAW REVIEW.
    [Show full text]
  • New Hybrid Connectivity Based Approaches
    Appendix C: Hamiltonian Paths with Double Pheromone Ant Colony System Optimisation This appendix contains the full list of topics of the hamiltonian path identified by the algorithm presented on the PhD thesis of David M.S. Rodrigues Reading the news through their structure: new hybrid connectivity based approaches. This appendix is available in digital format at http://www.davidrodrigues.org/pdfs/phd/ and on the accompanying CD delivered with the printed copy of the thesis. As news follow a hamiltonian path the first news in the following list is connected to the last news of the list to complete the path. • Eurozone debt crisis live: Italian senate passes austerity law | Business | guardian.co.uk • Greek leaders agree to unity government as future hangs in balance | World news | guardian.co.uk • Lucas Papademos to lead Greece’s interim coalition government | World news | guardian.co.uk • The euro will survive – and Britain will join, says Michael Heseltine | World news | guardian.co.uk • Eurozone bailout fund falls short of e1 trillion target | Business | The Guardian • Euro debt crisis: Greek PM George Papandreou to resign | World news | guardian.co.uk • Chaos in Greece amid battle to form a ’government of national salvation’ | World news | The Observer • Eurozone debt crisis: EU members line up to demand ECB intervention | Business | The Guardian 1 • Italy passes austerity measures – clearing way for Berlusconi to quit | Business | guardian.co.uk • European debt crisis live: pressure mounts as finance ministers meet | Business | guardian.co.uk
    [Show full text]
  • Privacy, Probity and Public Interest Whittle and Cooper Cover Image © Reuters © Image Cover , –7 the Independent
    Whittle and Cooper cover C:Layout 1 01/07/2009 15:43 Page 1 RISJ REUTERS REUTERS CHALLENGES INSTITUTE for the STUDY of INSTITUTE for the JOURNALISM CHALLENGES STUDY of JOURNALISM | Privacy, probity and public interest probity Privacy, “'Privacy, Probity and Public Interest' shows how privacy has come Privacy, probity and to be both better protected by the courts and more widely ignored: big questions, riveting examples and sharp analysis.” Baroness Onora O'Neill, President of the British Academy and public interest Professor of Philosophy, Cambridge University “is report is from the frontline. Although it contains an admirable survey of the law and the stance of the regulators, it does much more. It gives interested parties a voice. e authors provide their own thoughtful commentary; they do not shirk the difficult questions. Stephen Whittle and Glenda Cooper Everyone should be interested in this debate, and I wholeheartedly commend this report to anyone who is.” Andrew Caldecott, QC, Specialist in Media Law “An erudite and compelling exposition of one of the most important ethical dilemmas facing British Journalism in the internet era. e authors identify a route towards a new journalism that can respect privacy without compromising its democratic obligation to hold power to account.” Tim Luckhurst Professor of Journalism, University of Kent Stephen Whittle is a journalist and was the BBC's Controller of Editorial Policy (2001–2006). As Controller, he was involved in some of the most high profile BBC investigations such as The Secret Policeman, Licence To Kill, and Panoramas on the Olympics and care of the elderly.
    [Show full text]
  • UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT of ORAL EVIDENCE to Be Published As HC 903-Vi
    UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 903-vi HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT COMMITTEE PHONE HACKING THURSDAY 10 NOVEMBER 2011 JAMES MURDOCH Evidence heard in Public Questions 1460 - 1719 USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is an uncorrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others. 2. Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings. 3. Members who receive this for the purpose of correcting questions addressed by them to witnesses are asked to send corrections to the Committee Assistant. 4. Prospective witnesses may receive this in preparation for any written or oral evidence they may in due course give to the Committee. 1 Oral Evidence Taken before the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on Thursday 10 November 2011 Members present: Mr John Whittingdale (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey Damian Collins Philip Davies Paul Farrelly Louise Mensch Steve Rotheram Mr Adrian Sanders Jim Sheridan Mr Tom Watson Examination of Witness Witness: James Murdoch, Deputy Chief Operating Officer and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (International), News Corporation. Q1460 Chair: Good morning. This is a further special session of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s inquiry. We are examining the previous evidence given to us when we were investigating phone hacking and whether or not the Committee was misled at that time.
    [Show full text]
  • Formal Minutes
    House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee Formal Minutes Session 2010–12 The Culture, Media and Sport Committee The Culture, Media and Sport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon) (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey MP (Conservative, Suffolk Coastal) Damian Collins MP (Conservative, Folkestone and Hythe) Mr Philip Davies MP (Conservative, Shipley) Paul Farrelly MP (Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme) Mrs Louise Mensch MP (Conservative, Corby) Steve Rotheram MP (Labour, Liverpool, Walton) Mr Adrian Sanders MP (Liberal Democrat, Torbay) Jim Sheridan MP (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North) Mr Gerry Sutcliffe MP (Labour, Bradford South) Mr Tom Watson MP (Labour, West Bromwich East) The following were also members of the committee during the Parliament: David Cairns MP (Labour, Inverclyde) Cathy Jamieson MP (Labour, Kilmarnock and Loudoun) Alan Keen MP (Labour, Feltham and Heston) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/cmscom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Elizabeth Flood (Clerk), Sarah Heath (Second Clerk), Victoria Butt (Senior Committee Assistant), Keely Bishop (Committee Assistant), Alison Pratt (Committee Assistant) and Jessica Bridges-Palmer (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • As Judith Miller Sat in a Virginia Jail Cell After Her Failed Attempts to Keep
    JOURNAL OF MEDIA LAW & ETHICS Editor ERIC B. EASTON, PROFESSOR OF LAW University of Baltimore School of Law EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS BENJAMIN BENNETT-CARPENTER, Special Lecturer, Oakland University (Michigan) WALTER M. BRASCH, Professor of Mass Comm., Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania L. SUSAN CARTER, Professor, Michigan State University LOUIS A. DAY, Alumni Professor, Louisiana State University ANTHONY FARGO, Associate Professor, Indiana University AMY GAJDA, Assistant Professor, University of Illinois STEVEN MICHAEL HALLOCK, Assistant Professor, Point Park University MARTIN E. HALSTUK, Associate Professor, Pennsylvania State University CHRISTOPHER HANSON, Associate Professor, University of Maryland ELLIOT KING, Professor, Loyola University Maryland JANE KIRTLEY, Silha Professor of Media Ethics & Law, University of Minnesota NORMAN P. LEWIS, Assistant Professor, University of Florida PAUL S. LIEBER, Assistant Professor, University of South Carolina KAREN M. MARKIN, Director of Research Development, University of Rhode Island KIRSTEN MOGENSEN, Associate Professor, Roskilde University (Denmark) KATHLEEN K. OLSON, Associate Professor, Lehigh University RICHARD J. PELTZ, Professor of Law, University of Arkansas-Little Rock School of Law KEVIN WALL SAUNDERS, Professor of Law, Michigan State University College of Law JAMES LYNN STEWART, Associate Professor, Nicholls State University DOREEN WEISENHAUS, Associate Professor, University of Hong Kong KYU HO YOUM, Jonathan Marshall First Amendment Chair Professor, Univ. of Oregon Copyright © 2010. The authors of each of the articles published in this issue own the copyrights to their works. For permission to reprint, please contact them (see title page for contact information). Journal of Media Law & Ethics (ISSN 1940-9370 print; 1940-9389 online) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that seeks theoretical and empirical manuscripts and book reviews that advance an understanding of media law and ethics and diversity in society.
    [Show full text]
  • Documents Disclosed by the Crown Prosecution Service
    DOCUMENTS DISCLOSED BY THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson, 04/01/07 [22. D18726] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson, 09/01/07 [23. D26464] Email Tom Crone to Clive Goodman’s lawyer re: reading case papers, 03/11/06 [2. D19068] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson relaying what Rebekah Brooks was told by the Police, 15/09/06 [7. D18737] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson re: Tom Crone seeing defence papers, 03/11/06 [8. D18758] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson re: Tom Crone not to attend Clive Goodman’s legal conference, 22/11/06 [10. D18759] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson containing line “tilt Mulcaire”, 25/11/06 [11. D30636] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson containing comment about Clive Goodman straying off the preferred line, 02/12/06 20. [D18757] Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson with draft briefing note ‐ the December 2006 Memo, 30/12/06 [21. D18768] Colin Myler witness statement and handwritten contemporaneous note Email Tom Crone and Andy Coulson saying whose names are included in the case papers, 10/11/06 Email Andy Coulson and Tom Crone re: ok for Tom Crone to send the December 2006 memo, 03/01/07 Pages 4‐7 AC Jury bundle regarding the December 2006 memo 2005 Agreement with Nine Consultancy (Glenn Mulcaire) containing an exclusivity clause. Signed for NOTW/NI by Neville Thurlbeck Expenses form for Rebekah Brooks’ lunch with Clive Goodman Various agreements for News of the World and Glenn Mulcaire – main contracts signed by Greg Miskiw and one by Neville Thurlbeck.
    [Show full text]
  • The Murdoch Media Empire and the Spectacle of Scandal.Pdf
    International Journal of Communication 6 (2012), Feature 1169–1200 1932–8036/2012FEA1169 The Murdoch Media Empire and the Spectacle of Scandal 1 DOUGLAS KELLNER University of California, Los Angeles The press, designed for freedom's best defence, And learning, morals, wisdom to dispense, Perverted, poisoned, lost to honor's rules, Is made the sport of knaves, to govern fools. ~ Philadelphia Public Ledger, 1839 In July 2011, dramatic revelations concerning misdeeds by Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World (NOTW), one of the most successful tabloid newspapers in history, erupted, creating a vast media spectacle that was compared to Watergate and that threatened the existence of Murdoch’s global media empire (Bernstein, 2011). Richard Nixon’s Watergate crisis implicated the president in a series of scandals that led to the famous Senate Watergate Hearings, a major media spectacle of 1973, followed by his resignation from office, a first for a U.S. president. The cascading scandals in Rupert Murdoch’s media empire were thus referred to in some circles as “Murdochgate” (see Bernstein, 2011), a series of outrages and crimes that are continuing to undermine his media power and empire in 2012 and the foreseeable future. For years, there had been accusations that employees of Murdoch’s various tabloid newspapers had hacked telephones to gain information and pay police and other informers for news stories. In 2007, a News of the World reporter, Clive Goodman, and a convicted hacker, Glenn Mulcaire, were sent to jail for hacking the cell phones of members of the Royal Family, and reports surfaced in subsequent years that celebrities like Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller, and Jude Law were also hacked, as well as figures connected to sports, always an important domain of the spectacle.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit a in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware
    EXHIBIT A IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE In re NEWS CORPORATION ) Consolidated SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ) C.A. No. 6285-VCN LITIGATION ) VERIFIED SECOND AMENDED CONSOLIDATED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE AND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Co-Lead Plaintiffs The Amalgamated Bank, as Trustee for the LongView LargeCap 500 Index Fund, LongView LargeCap 500 Index VEBA Fund, LongView Quantitative LargeCap Fund, and LongView Quantitative LargeCap VEBA Fund (“Amalgamated Bank”) and Central Laborers Pension Fund (“Central Laborers”), and plaintiff New Orleans Employees’ Retirement System (“NOERS”) (“Plaintiffs”), by and through their undersigned counsel, assert this action derivatively on behalf of News Corporation (“News Corp” or the “Company”) and directly on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated public shareholders of News Corp against defendants Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch, Chase Carey, David F. DeVoe, Joel Klein, Arthur M. Siskind, Roderick Eddington, Andrew S.B. Knight, Thomas J. Perkins, Peter Barnes, José María Aznar, Natalie Bancroft, Kenneth E. Cowley, Viet Dinh, and John L. Thornton (the “Individual Defendants,” “Defendants” or the “Board”). Plaintiffs make the following allegations upon knowledge as to themselves and upon information and belief (including the investigation of counsel and review of publicly available information) as to all other matters, and allege as follows. SUMMARY OF THE ACTION 1. This case arises because the Board News Corp has disregarded its fiduciary duties by allowing the Company’s founder, CEO, Chairman and controlling shareholder, Rupert Murdoch, to use News Corp as his own personal fiefdom. The Board has not lifted a finger to engage in any oversight of Murdoch’s rule, even when it was provided with clear and unmistakable warnings that News Corp’s business practices were not only unethical, but also illegal.
    [Show full text]
  • News International and Phone-Hacking
    House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee News International and Phone-hacking Eleventh Report of Session 2010-12 Volume I HC 903-I House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee News International and Phone-hacking Eleventh Report Volume I Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes Volume II: Oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 30 April 2012 HC 903-I Published on 1 May 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Culture, Media and Sport Committee The Culture, Media and Sport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mr John Whittingdale MP (Conservative, Maldon) (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey MP (Conservative, Suffolk Coastal) Damian Collins MP (Conservative, Folkestone and Hythe) Philip Davies MP (Conservative, Shipley) Paul Farrelly MP (Labour, Newcastle-under-Lyme) Louise Mensch MP (Conservative, Corby) Steve Rotheram MP (Labour, Liverpool, Walton) Mr Adrian Sanders MP (Liberal Democrat, Torbay) Jim Sheridan MP (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North) Mr Gerry Sutcliffe MP (Labour, Bradford South) Mr Tom Watson MP (Labour, West Bromwich East) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis Wilder , Et Al. V. News Corporation, Et Al. 11-CV-04947
    Case 1:11-cvM4947PGG Document 71 Filed 04/30/14 Page 1 of 115 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x LEWIS WILDER, as Trustee for the Lewis Civil Action No. 1:1 ]-cv-04947-PGG Wilder Revocable Trust, 12/10/20 10, and IRON WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO, 17 CLASS ACTION PENSION FUND, ECE Case Plaintiffs, CONSOLIDATED SECOND AMENDED auD CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL AVON PENSION FUND, Administered by SECURITIES LAWS Bath & North East Somerset Council, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Lead Plaintiff, vs. JURY DEMANDED NEWS CORPORATION, NI GROUP LTD., K RU PERT MIJRDOCH JAMES MURDOCH, LES HINTON and REBEKAH BROOKS, Defendants, x 9369711 Case 1:11-cv-04947-PGG Document 71 Filed 04/30/14 Page 2 of 115 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ........................................................................................10 III. PARTIES ...........................................................................................................................10 IV. DEFENDANTS' CONTROL OVER NEWSCORP AND EACH OTHER ...................... iS A. NewsCorp Dominated and Controlled News Int'l, NGN and the U.K. Papers.....................................................................................................................iS B. The Murdochs Dominated and Controlled All Aspects of NewsCorp's Operations, Including Its Operations in the
    [Show full text]