DOCSLIB.ORG

Fp181 Free Press Template Changed Fonts.Qxd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fp181 Free Press Template Changed Fonts.Qxd fp181_Free Press template changed fonts.qxd 26/04/2011 10:19 Page 1 FREE No 181 March-April 2011 £1 Journal ofPress the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom THE COVER-UP FALLS APART HE MURDOCH press is pitching inquiry which Lord Fowler is calling Britain’s national newspapers into for.” their biggest political crisis for 20 It’s looking like a repeat of the crisis of Wanna make years, as the cover-up of the News 1990 when an inquiry conducted by of the World phone-hacking scan- David Calcutt QC recommended statuto- dalT engineered by News International, ry regulation. The industry escaped by something of the Metropolitan Police and the Press setting up the PCC, a trick it would be Complaints Commission is ripped apart. difficult to carry off again. Government minister Lord Wallace of Opposition leader Ed Miliband has it? MPs might Saltaire said in April the government become the first party leader to back the would be prepared to commission an idea of an inquiry. He said it was “in the TO MAKE matters worse for News inquiry into the regulation of the press interests of protecting the reputation of International, police are now that might lead to statutory controls. the British press that these matters investigating whether its journalists He told peers: “I will take the strength should not simply be left to rest. have been paying police officers for of feeling in this house back to ministers. “The press itself will want to look at stories. There are many aspects of concern.” how self-regulation can be made to work It was eight years ago that Rebekah The inquiry proposal had come from better because it clearly did not work Wade (now Brooks), editor of the Sun Lord Fowler, chairman of the Lords very well in relation to these issues here. who had recently been promoted from communications select committee. I don’t think the Press Complaints editing the News of the World, blurted to Asked whether it should consider Commission has covered itself in glory.” the Commons culture committee that the replacement of the PCC with a The PCC, chaired by Tory peer Lady they had. statutory body, Lord Wallace replied: Buscombe, has tried to hold the News Chris Bryant MP, now one of the MPs “That is very much one of the larger International line that editors were leading the Labour backbench charge issues which I think it would be unaware of the phone-hacking and the against the Murdoch press, asked her appropriate for the sort of general Turn to page 2 whether police were ever paid for information. She replied: “We have paid the police for information in the past.” (What of it?) GREEN LIGHT FOR MURDOCH Chris Bryant asked: “And will you do BSkyB bid set to go through PAGE 2 it in the future?” Rebekah Brooks began to reply: “It depends ...” when Andy AT LAST, LIBEL REFORM Coulson, her successor at the NoW, sitting alongside her (what happened to Law might even help the media PAGE 3 him?), cut in smartly (shut yer mouth slag) to point out: “We have always IT’S BACK TO THE 1980s operated within the law.” Footage of the exchange stirs The biased reporting of protest PAGES 4-5 nationwide jollity every time it is shown. But, though some eyebrows STRIKE THAT MADE THE MEDIA were raised at the time, nothing came of it. Everyone shut their eyes and Exhibition tells Wapping workers’ story PAGES 6-7 pretended it never happened. In March, with a new police team THE UNKNOWN SWITCHOVER probing the NoW and MPs with the Radio to follow TV. Did you know? PAGE 8 scent of Murdoch blood, the Commons Turn to page 2 fp181_Free Press template changed fonts.qxd 26/04/2011 10:19 Page 2 Murdoch COVER-UP COLLAPSES From page 1 practice had been stamped out. GUY SMALLMAN In April the Guardian reported that Gordon Brown, when Prime Minister, had wanted to set up a judicial inquiry but had been talked out of it by Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell, on the grounds that it would be too sensitive before last year’s general election. The political moves followed the humiliating admission by News International that the allegations against the NoW have been true all along. It issued an “unreserved” apology to eight of the long line of public figures bringing legal action and published the apology in the paper itself. Preliminary hearings for the cases were held in the High Court in April. Mr CPBF and NUJ members Justice Vos said he would take four sam- at the DCMS on March 3 ple cases. So far 24 individuals have launched High Court privacy actions against the paper, and as more and more material seized but ignored by the Met comes to light the list can only get longer. Three senior NoW journalists have Buyout of BSkyB been arrested, following the dismissal of two and the suspension of another over phone-hacking allegations. Chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck, former assis- tant editor (news) Ian Edmondson and to get green light veteran reporter James Weatherup were interviewed by police conducting the Met’s new investigation. UPERT MURDOCH’S buyout of ommendation to refer the matter to the Another former NoW executive, Alex BSkyB was expected to be cleared Competition Commission (last issue). Marunchak, who headed the Dublin Rby Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt The CPBF was planning a similar office, has been accused by a BBC in late April despite a rising tide of event, together with the NUJ, on the day Panorama programme of hiring a com- opposition. Jeremy Hunt was to announce he was puter hacker to access the emails of a for- Former Deputy Prime Minister Lord giving the takeover the green light after mer British Army intelligence officer. Prescott joined the chorus of campaign- the Easter recess. At the PCC, Lady Buscombe has ers demanding that the matter be set declared that phone-hacking is “a aside until police completed their deplorable practice, and an unjustifi- inquiry into the phone-hacking scandal. SON AND HEIR able intrusion into an individual’s pri- Lord Prescott, who believes he was a vacy. The commission has always said victim of the scam, said it was “totally that it is a breach of the Editors’ Code” unacceptable for a company like this RUPERT MURDOCH’S current favourite – though it has never taken any action that is actively involved at all levels in son and heir apparent James, News over it. criminal acts to be given control of Corp’s European chief executive, is BSkyB.” moving to New York to become Jeremy Hunt responded that he was number three in the News Corp MPs consider action prevented by law from taking the scan- empire. dal into account. It might have formed As deputy chief operating officer From page 1 part of a “suitability of persons” test and chairman of the group’s home affairs committee asked under the Enterprise Act into whether international division he will be below Metropolitan Police Assistant News Corporation bosses were appro- only his father, the chairman, and Commissioner Cressida Dick, heading priate individuals to own BSkyB but Chase Carey, chief operating officer. the team, for information about lawyers had advised him it was no research into the “historic claims”. longer possible. Cressida Dick wrote that police were The Act allows referral on only one investigating Rebekah Brooks’s set of grounds, and the takeover had comment, to establish whether there been referred on grounds of media plu- were grounds for a criminal rality. It was not possible to consider investigation. both. The committee wrote to ask Rebekah Meanwhile the campaign went on. Brooks how many police officers The CPBF and NUJ held a demonstra- received money from the Sun, which she tion (above) outside Jeremy Hunt’s edited until 2009, and when the office in central London the day he practice ceased. Rebekah Brooks announced that he was accepting a con- replied that she had “no knowledge of voluted formula for the independence any specific cases”. Just like … what’s of Sky News in a Murdoch-owned that geezer’s name again? BSkyB and was ignoring Ofcom’s rec- 2 March-April 2011 FREE Press fp181_Free Press template changed fonts.qxd 26/04/2011 10:19 Page 3 Law WHAT’S IN THE BILL Substantial harm Stronger test for damage to reputation will make it Defence in the easier for judges to throw out trivial or vexatious cases Public interest defence Protection for investigative journalism which is responsibly carried out. Statutory defence of truth Will replace the common law defence of “justification”. public interest Statutory defence of honest opinion Replaces the nebulous common law defence of “fair comment”. Privilege Extends absolute privilege to reports of court proceedings ONG-AWAITED reforms to reduce costs anyway and he is tackling outside the UK, and qualified privilege Britain’s archaic and unfair libel CFAs through different regulations. to reports of scientific or academic laws and to no-win-no-fee The reforms are the result of years conferences and material published by Larrangements that force publish- of campaigning by the CPBF and them. ers to settle questionable claims other free press groups, and while Single publication Applies the present were announced by Justice secretary they have welcomed them they still one-year limit for print to online Ken Clarke in March. say they do not go far enough. articles. Most important is the proposal for The Libel Reform Campaign led by Libel tourism Courts will only hear a “public interest” defence that will English PEN, Index on Censorship cases in which England and Wales is clear journalists who have made and Sense About Science, welcomed the most appropriate place.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unauthorised Tapping Into Or Hacking of Mobile Communications
    House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications Thirteenth Report of Session 2010–12 1. This report is strictly embargoed and is not for broadcast or publication, in any form, before 05.00hrs, Wednesday 20 July 2011. 2. This report is issued under the condition that it should not be forwarded or copied to anyone else. 3. Under no circumstances should you distribute copies to anyone else or speak to the media before the publication time about the content of this report. 4. The report is subject to parliamentary copyright and you are not permitted to distribute, replicate, or publish further copies either in hard copy or on the internet either before or after publication. 5. If these instructions are unclear in any way please contact Alex Paterson on 020 7219 1589 or email [email protected] HC 907 Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications 3 House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications Thirteenth Report of Session 2010–12 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 19 July 2011 HC 907 Published on 20 July 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Murdoch Takeover: New Evidence Indicating the Need for a Further “Fit and Proper” Review
    Before the Murdoch takeover: new evidence indicating the need for a further “Fit and Proper” review AVAAZ, 8th March 2017. Submission for Karen Bradley, Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport Introduction An acquisition of Sky Plc. by 21st Century Fox (21CF) would result in a major expansion of the influence of the Murdoch Family Trust (MFT) over Sky. In 2012 Ofcom was highly critical of the role of James Murdoch who was CEO and Chairman of News International during the period of criminal and other reprehensible conduct at that organisation. This submission details a long list of wrongdoings and criminal misgovernance that has emerged since Ofcom reviewed the licenses held by BSkyB in 2012. It also draws attention to an unfolding sexual harassment epidemic being unearthed at Fox News in the US. The Secretary of State notes in her 6th March 2017 letter1 to 21CF and Sky that 21CF’s record of compliance with the broadcasting code might reflect on the culture or corporate governance at 21CF. The “huge failings of corporate governance” at News Corporation, the precursor company to 21CF were noted in the Culture, Media and Sport Committee on News International and Phone Hacking and the Secretary of State herself acknowledges that James Murdoch’s actions during this time was a “failure of corporate governance.” The shocking scale of corporate misgovernance and criminal conduct make it incumbent upon the Secretary of State to exercise her powers under Section 58(3) of the Communications Act 2003, to refer the Sky bid on broader public interest grounds than those she currently says she is minded to exercise.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer 2011 Bulletinprimary.Indd
    A PUBLICATION OF THE SILHA CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF MEDIA ETHICS AND LAW | SUMMER 2011 Not Just a ‘Rogue Reporter’: ‘Phone Hacking’ Scandal Spreads Far and Wide The so-called “phone hacking” scandal has led to more than Murdoch Closes News of the World and a dozen arrests, resignations by top News Corp. executives Speaks to Parliament while Public and British police, the launching of several new investigations Outrage Grows over Tabloid Crime, into News Corp. business practices, and pressured Murdoch to retreat from a business deal to purchase the remaining Collusion, and Corruption portion of BSkyB that he did not own. The U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) massive ethical and legal scandal enveloped the are reportedly conducting preliminary investigations into the Rupert Murdoch-owned British tabloid News of possibility of international law violations. The FBI is reportedly the World in the summer of 2011, leading to its investigating allegations that Murdoch journalists hacked into sudden closure. New allegations arose almost the phones of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks daily that reporters and private investigators or their families. British police have teamed up with Scottish Aillegally accessed the voice mail messages of politicians, authorities to continue investigating claims of phone hacking. celebrities, and private citizens. The revelations sparked Parliament launched a formal inquiry into the scandal and has worldwide public outcry and led to sweeping law enforcement questioned top News Corp. offi cials including Rupert Murdoch investigations directed at top editors of the paper, executives and his son, James Murdoch.
    [Show full text]
  • Former Aide to British PM Criminally Charged in Murdoch Phone-Hacking Scandal
    World Socialist Web Site wsws.org Former aide to British PM criminally charged in Murdoch phone-hacking scandal By Robert Stevens 25 July 2012 Former editors Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson He was forced to resign in January last year as further are among eight people facing criminal prosecution for details of his alleged involvement in phone hacking by their involvement in the News of the World phone News International continued to emerge. hacking scandal. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) The Labour Party is likewise in crisis over the phone announced yesterday that they are to appear in court hacking scandal. All the illegal acts attributed to the after being charged with 19 offences. eight defendants were allegedly carried out during the TheNews of the World was published by Rupert period 1997-2010, when the Labour governments of Murdoch’s News International, the British subsidiary Tony Blair and Gordon Brown maintained intimate of News Corp. The others charged are former contact with Murdoch’s publishing empire. Brooks is a managing editor Stuart Kuttner, former news editor friend of leading figures in the Labour Party, including Greg Miskiw, former assistant editor Ian Edmondson, former Prime Minister Blair and his wife Cherie. former chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck, former Blair’s successor, Gordon Brown, attended her 2009 assistant editor James Weatherup and private wedding to Charlie Brooks, alongside Cameron. investigator Glenn Mulcaire. They are all due to appear In a statement, Brooks denied the charges against her at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 16 August. and claimed she “did not authorise, nor was I aware of, The charging of Brooks and Coulson is a major phone-hacking under my editorship.” Coulson said he political crisis for the Conservative-led government of would fight the charges.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Strikes Down Stolen Valor
    A PUBLICATION OF THE SILHA CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF MEDIA ETHICS AND LAW | SUMMER 2012 Supreme Court Strikes Down Stolen Valor Act In an 18-page opinion joined by Chief Justice John Roberts Congress already working on new bills to and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, Kennedy wrote that because the Stolen Valor Act restricted outlaw lying about military medals speech based on its content, it was “presumed invalid” and therefore the government bore the burden of proving its n a June 28, 2012 ruling that struck down a federal law constitutionality. Content-based restrictions on speech have known as the “Stolen Valor Act,” U.S. Supreme Court historically only been permitted when they fall into a few Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that “the remedy categories, including that which advocates and is likely to for speech that is false is speech that is true,” not incite “imminent lawless action,” obscenity, libel, “fi ghting government suppression, even when the speech “can words,” fraud, “true threats,” and “speech presenting some Idisparage, or attempt to steal, honor that belongs to those who grave and imminent threat the government has the power fought for this nation in battle.” to prevent,” Kennedy explained. “Absent from those few United States v. Alvarez was a case challenging 18 U.S.C. categories,” Kennedy wrote, “is any general exception to §§704 (b)(c), a federal statute passed in 2006 which made the First Amendment for false statements.” United States v. lying about receiving military awards or medals, especially the Alvarez, 132 S. Ct. 2537 (June 28, 2012) Congressional Medal of Honor, a crime punishable by a fi ne and In defense of the statute, the government cited several up to a year in jail.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision Notice
    Reference: FS50574924 Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice Date: 2 November 2015 Public Authority: Government Legal Department Address: 1 Kemble Street London WC2B 4TS Decision (including any steps ordered) 1. The complainant has requested information generated by a high profile criminal trial. Where it holds requested information, the Government Legal Department (GLD) relies on sections 42 (legal professional privilege) and 32 (court records) to withhold it from the complainant. 2. The Commissioner’s decision is that GLD’s reliance on the aforesaid sections was correct. Background 3. The Treasury Solicitor’s Department (TSol) was a non-ministerial government department that provided legal services to the majority of central government departments and often represented government departments and other publicly funded bodies in England and Wales. 4. On 1 April 2015, TSol became the Government Legal Department (GLD). For ease of reference, the Commissioner will refer to the public authority as ‘GLD’ throughout this notice. 5. R v Coulson, Brooks and others was a criminal trial at the Old Bailey arising from events colloquially known as the “News International phone hacking scandal”. 6. At the end of the trial, various defendants made an application for their costs to be met from Central Funds. 1 Reference: FS50574924 7. Mr Justice Saunders (the trial judge) asked the Attorney General to appoint an Advocate to the Court in respect of a number of issues arising during the trial on which he wished to have assistance, including the issue of whether Ms Brooks should be awarded her costs from Central Funds following her acquittal.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Was Hacked? an Investigation Into Phone Hacking and Its Victims Part I: News of the World
    Who was hacked? An investigation into phone hacking and its victims Part I: News of the World March 2015 Martin Moore Cover photo courtesy of tommyslawyer.co.uk Report first published March 2015 Written by Martin Moore Additional research by Felix Tomlinson For comments and corrections please contact the author at [email protected] This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.0 International License. CONTENTS Summary 3 Introduction 4 1. Methodology 6 6 7 Phone hacking - available evidence 8 Phone hacking victims –limitations of the evidence The Mulcaire Papers Mulcaire – one of many engaged in hacking phones 11 2. NumberPhone ofhacking Victims – one of many methods 1613 Total number 16 3. Types of Victim 21 Identifying the victims 18 Identifying types of hacking victims 21 Non-Public Figures 26 Partners & ex-partners Families Friends Professional connections Victims of crime/tragedy Police Journalists Agents Lawyers Random targets Public Figures 34 Entertainment & Music Sports Politics Unions Home Office & Metropolitan Police Royalty and Royal Household Conclusion Witness Protection Programme 43 Appendix 45 Who Was Hacked? An investigation into phone hacking and its victims (Part 1) 2 SUMMARY News of the World Police estimate that 5,500 people were ‘likely’ or ‘potential’ victims of phone hacking. This figure may rise as new evidence comes to light. Due to the incomplete,News of the inconclusive World and sometimes incoherent nature of the evidence, we will never know exactly how many people were hacked by the . Phone hacking was one of a range of methods of gathering personal information, and was often one of the less directly intrusive.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking News
    BREAKING NEWS First published in Great Britain in 2018 by Canongate Books Ltd, 14 High Street, Edinburgh EH1 1TE canongate.co.uk This digital edition first published in 2018 by Canongate Books Copyright © Alan Rusbridger, 2018 The moral right of the author has been asserted British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available on request from the British Library ISBN 978 1 78689 093 1 Export ISBN 978 1 78689 094 8 eISBN 978 1 78689 095 5 To Lindsay and Georgina who, between them, shared most of this journey Contents Introduction 1. Not Bowling Alone 2. More Than a Business 3. The New World 4. Editor 5. Shedding Power 6. Guardian . Unlimited 7. The Conversation 8. Global 9. Format Wars 10. Dog, Meet Dog 11. The Future Is Mutual 12. The Money Question 13. Bee Information 14. Creaking at the Seams 15. Crash 16. Phone Hacking 17. Let Us Pay? 18. Open and Shut 19. The Gatekeepers 20. Members? 21. The Trophy Newspaper 22. Do You Love Your Country? 23. Whirlwinds of Change Epilogue Timeline Bibliography Acknowledgements Also by Alan Rusbridger Notes Index Introduction By early 2017 the world had woken up to a problem that, with a mixture of impotence, incomprehension and dread, journalists had seen coming for some time. News – the thing that helped people understand their world; that oiled the wheels of society; that pollinated communities; that kept the powerful honest – news was broken. The problem had many different names and diagnoses. Some thought we were drowning in too much news; others feared we were in danger of becoming newsless.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Facts and Grounds ______
    Claim No. HQ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT BETWEEN: THE QUEEN On the application of (1) JACQUELINE HAMES (2) BYLINE MEDIA HOLDINGS LTD (3) HJK Claimants -and- (1) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (2) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT Defendants __________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS __________________________________________ I Introduction and summary 1. This claim concerns the lawfulness of the current consultation exercise (“the Consultation”), running from 1 November 2016 to 10 January 2017, by which the Defendants seek views from the public on “the different options for commencement of section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013” and “whether proceeding with Part 2 of the [Leveson] Inquiry is still appropriate, proportionate and in the public interest”. 2. After the conclusion of Part 1 of the Leveson Inquiry (“the Inquiry”) in November 2012, the Government made clear and repeated promises to implement recommendations for press regulation that Lord Justice Leveson had made in his report on Part 1 (“the Leveson Report”), including incentives for press organisations to join an independent regulator. Those incentives are contained principally in section 1 40 of the Crime and Court Act 2013 (“CCA”). Section 40 CCA comes into force on such day as the Second Defendant may appoint. The Second Defendant has not brought section 40 into force. The Government also made clear and repeated promises to continue with Part 2 of the Inquiry, concerning unlawful or improper conduct of News International, the police and others. Part 2 of the Inquiry has not commenced.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum Submitted by Amberhawk Training Ltd
    Memorandum submitted by Amberhawk Training Ltd Recommendation: The Committee (possibly with the assistance of the Interception of Communications Commissioner) needs to explore the consequences of the MPS legal advice (as mentioned in Q5 of Mr Yates' comments) in relation to a review of the protection afforded to individuals by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). If the arguments underpinning the MPS legal advice, then a change to RIPA might need to be urgently recommended. When Parliament provided public authorities with intercepting powers in 1999, Parliament had in mind the protection of all messages – not just the content of the unread ones. Argument I refer to the evidence given by Assistant Commissioner John Yates of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). Mr Yates’ answer to Q5 reveals that the MPS have obtained legal advice from a leading QC which, if applied in practice, has some strange consequences. For example, it could mean that unread spam messages receive a high level of privacy protection under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) whereas read private email messages of immense confidentiality do not receive any privacy protection from RIPA. In relation to the incidence of “voice mail hacking”, Mr Yates said the following (at Q5 - see references): Mr Yates: “.... hacking is defined in a very prescriptive way by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and it’s very, very prescriptive and it’s very difficult to prove.... There are very few offences that we are able to actually prove that have been hacked. That is, intercepting the voicemail prior to the owner of that voicemail intercepting it him or herself”.
    [Show full text]
  • Edmondson Judgment
    Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWCA Crim 1026 Case No: 2013/02883 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM SOUTHWARK CROWN COURT The Hon Mr Justice Saunders T2012/7351 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 28/06/2013 Before : THE RT. HON. LORD JUDGE, LORD CHIEF JUSTICE LORD JUSTICE LLOYD JONES and MR. JUSTICE OPENSHAW - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : Ian Edmondson Appellants James Weatherup Rebekah Brooks Andrew Coulson Stuart Kuttner - v - Regina Respondent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Clare Montgomery QC & Alison Macdonald for the Appellants Andrew Edis QC, Daniel Beard QC, Rebecca Chalkley and Ligia Osepciu for the Crown Hearing date: Friday 14th June, 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. Edmondson and Others - v - R Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice: This is the judgment of the Court. The major responsibility for its preparation was undertaken by Lloyd Jones LJ. 1. Ian Edmondson, James Weatherup, Rebekah Brooks, Andrew Coulson and Stuart Kuttner appeal against a ruling on a point of law made by Fulford L.J. during a preparatory hearing on 28 May 2013. That ruling was endorsed by Saunders J. on 3 June 2013 on which occasion he also granted leave to appeal. 2. The appellants are charged with conspiring unlawfully to intercept communications in the course of their transmission without lawful authority contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977. Under section 1(1)(b) Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”), it is an offence intentionally to intercept, without lawful authority, any communication in the course of its transmission by means of a public telecommunications system.
    [Show full text]
  • UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT of ORAL EVIDENCE to Be Published As HC 903-Ii
    UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 903-ii HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT PHONE HACKING TUESDAY 19 JULY 2011 RUPERT MURDOCH and JAMES MURDOCH REBEKAH BROOKS Evidence heard in Public Questions 151 - 580 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 on Tuesday 19 July 2011 Members present: Mr John Whittingdale (Chair) Dr Thérèse Coffey Damian Collins Philip Davies Paul Farrelly Cathy Jamieson Alan Keen Louise Mensch Mr Adrian Sanders Jim Sheridan Mr Tom Watson Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, News Corporation, and James Murdoch, Chairman, News International, gave evidence. James Murdoch: Mr Chairman, I have a procedural question, if it pleases you. Our understanding was that we would be afforded the opportunity to make an opening statement, and we prepared on that basis.
    [Show full text]