28-year-old and his brother, who was wounded, were accosted setting off to UK at end of tourist holiday on Margarita island A Briton has died during a robbery while on holiday in Venezuela. Thomas Ossel, 28, from Bedfordshire, was shot in the head and killed, while his brother Jack, 21, was wounded in the attack. Jacqueline Baxter, a friend of the family, said: “At the moment their father has travelled to Venezuela, and obviously their mum is not able to make a statement.” The attack took place on Monday on Margarita island, one of Venezuela’s most popular tourist destinations. A regional police official told the Venezuelan radio station Union Radio the brothers were shot as they were leaving an upmarket inn to return to the UK. He said investigators believe that gunmen attempted to rob the men, and fired when they resisted. The Foreign Office has confirmed the death and said officials were “providing consular assistance to the family”. Friends paid tribute to Ossel on Twitter. One said: “Sad and shocking news … RIP Tom Ossel … u will be missed … love and thoughts go out to ur family and friends
xxx” Another wrote: “Woah. Just heard some genuinely shocking news. Old classmate shot and killed in Venezuela. RIP Tom.” The country has one of the highest murder rates in Latin America, 48 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Travel advice from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office warns that street crime is high, and that armed robbery, and what it calls “express kidnappings” – short-term abductions to extort money – also take place, and that tourists have been among those targeted; resistance to robbers had resulted in people being shot dead, it added. Before Monday’s attack, the FCO revised its advice to tourists, alerting them to an increase in crime on Margarita island. Venezuela South America Crime guardian.co.uk
All-party home affairs committee report into phone hacking to be published in time for David Cameron’s statement Rupert Murdoch’s News International company has been found by a parliamentary committee to have “deliberately” tried to block a Scotland Yard criminal investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World. The report from MPs on the all-party home affairs committee will be released on Wednesday morning and its publication has been moved forward in time for today’s statement by prime minister David Cameron on the scandal. The report’s central finding comes a day after Rupert and James Murdoch testified before the culture, media and sport committee. The home affairs committee report marks an official damning judgment on News International’s actions. It finds the company “deliberately” tried to “thwart” the 2005-6 Metropolitan police investigation into phone hacking carried out by the News of the World. The police investigation came at a time when Andy Coulson was editor. Coulson went in to be chosen by Cameron to be his director of communications, before resigning. The full report will be published Wednesday morning. Among its findings are: • Police failed to examine a vast amount of material that could have identified others involved in the phone hacking conspiracy and victims. • John Yates made a “serious misjudgement” in deciding in July 2009 that the Met’s criminal investigation should not be reopened. He resigned on Monday. • The new phone hacking investigation should receive more money, from government if necessary, so it can contact potential victims more speedily. A fraction have been contacted so far. • The Information Commissioner should be given new powers to deal with phone hacking and blagging. The central conclusion about NI’s hampering of the police investigation comes after the home affairs committee heard evidence from senior Met officers who were involved in the case that News International obstructed justice. Last week the man who oversaw the first Metropolitan police investigation into phone hacking, Peter Clarke, damned News International: “If at any time News International had offered some meaningful co-operation instead of prevarication and what we now know to be lies, we would not be here today.” The first police inquiry led to the conviction in January 2007 of one journalist, Clive Goodman, and the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire. But subsequent developments, and the handing over of documents by News International, are alleged to show the practice of phone hacking was much more widespread than the company ever admitted. NI claimed for years it was the work of one rogue reporter, a defence the company has now abandoned, at least in part because of a Guardian investigation, which eventually led to the Met to reopen their inquiry. The committee heard on Tuesday that “blindingly obvious” evidence of corrupt payments to police officers was found by the former director of public prosecutions, Lord Macdonald, when he inspected News of the World emails. Lord Macdonald said that when he inspected the messages from NI, it took him between “three to five minutes” to decide that the material had to be passed to police. The emails and other material has been in the possession of NI or their lawyers for years. MacDonald said: “The material I saw was so blindingly obvious that trying to argue that it should not be given to the police would have been a hard task. It was evidence of serious criminal offences.” Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron’s chief of staff, was also dragged into the phone-hacking scandal on Tuesday when two of the country’s most senior police officers revealed he had urged them not to brief the prime minister on developments. Llewellyn sought to stop information about the scandal being passed on to the prime minister in September, just days after the New York Times ran an article which claimed Coulson had been aware of the use of the illegal practice when he edited the News of the World. Former Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson – who resigned on Sunday – and former assistant commissioner John Yates – who followed on Monday – told the House of Commons home affairs select committee that they believed Llewellyn was keen to avoid “compromising” the prime minister. Yates told the committee he was offering to discuss only police protocol – not operational matters. Committee Chair Right Hon Keith Vaz MP said: “There has been a catalogue of failures by the Metropolitan Police, and deliberate attempts by News International to thwart the various investigations. Police and prosecutors have been arguing over the interpretation of the law. “The new inquiry requires additional resources and if these are not forthcoming, it will take years to inform all the potential victims. The victims of hacking should have come first and I am shocked that this has not happened.” Phone hacking News International Rupert Murdoch Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers House of Commons Police Metropolitan police Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Click here to view this media As a general media rule, if you have to assure viewers that you’re not a pedophile then you’ve already lost the debate. But this is exactly what happened when Fox News contributor Dr. Keith Ablow appeared on Fox & Friends Tuesday to object to a baby doll that helps children learn about breastfeeding. “It’s beyond ridiculous,” Ablow told Fox News’ Alisyn Camerota. “It’s destructive. Little girls aren’t even aware how their secondary sexual characteristics will develop, let alone imitating how they’ll be used after childbirth. This is another way of turning little girls into adults. It blurs the boundary between children and adults in society. It contributes to the sexualization of children and it makes them targets of assailants, frankly, because it blurs that boundary. It’s a terrible, terrible idea.” “I’m going to have to respectfully disagree,” parenting expert Jessica Gottlieb told Ablow. “I’m not sure that if you see a little girl as her breasts being sexual that that doesn’t reflect more on you than on what breasts are.” “I assure you I’m not a pedophile at all,” Ablow objected. “Dr. Ablow, I think she raises a great point,” Camerota noted. “Why is it sexual? Why isn’t it just natural?” “She doesn’t raise a good point at all. How about this? How about we have little girls three and four have an OB/GYN suite where they deliver their babies? That’s a good idea. That way we can further blur the boundaries so that everybody out there no longer thinks there’s any particular difference between a little child and an adult woman. The fact is that little girls don’t have breasts that can breastfeed,” Ablow explained. This month alone, Ablow has proclaimed that President Barack Obama pursues a “communist manifesto” and offered and psychological profile of Media Matters’ David Brock.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media As a general media rule, if you have to assure viewers that you’re not a pedophile then you’ve already lost the debate. But this is exactly what happened when Fox News contributor Dr. Keith Ablow appeared on Fox & Friends Tuesday to object to a baby doll that helps children learn about breastfeeding. “It’s beyond ridiculous,” Ablow told Fox News’ Alisyn Camerota. “It’s destructive. Little girls aren’t even aware how their secondary sexual characteristics will develop, let alone imitating how they’ll be used after childbirth. This is another way of turning little girls into adults. It blurs the boundary between children and adults in society. It contributes to the sexualization of children and it makes them targets of assailants, frankly, because it blurs that boundary. It’s a terrible, terrible idea.” “I’m going to have to respectfully disagree,” parenting expert Jessica Gottlieb told Ablow. “I’m not sure that if you see a little girl as her breasts being sexual that that doesn’t reflect more on you than on what breasts are.” “I assure you I’m not a pedophile at all,” Ablow objected. “Dr. Ablow, I think she raises a great point,” Camerota noted. “Why is it sexual? Why isn’t it just natural?” “She doesn’t raise a good point at all. How about this? How about we have little girls three and four have an OB/GYN suite where they deliver their babies? That’s a good idea. That way we can further blur the boundaries so that everybody out there no longer thinks there’s any particular difference between a little child and an adult woman. The fact is that little girls don’t have breasts that can breastfeed,” Ablow explained. This month alone, Ablow has proclaimed that President Barack Obama pursues a “communist manifesto” and offered and psychological profile of Media Matters’ David Brock.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media As a general media rule, if you have to assure viewers that you’re not a pedophile then you’ve already lost the debate. But this is exactly what happened when Fox News contributor Dr. Keith Ablow appeared on Fox & Friends Tuesday to object to a baby doll that helps children learn about breastfeeding. “It’s beyond ridiculous,” Ablow told Fox News’ Alisyn Camerota. “It’s destructive. Little girls aren’t even aware how their secondary sexual characteristics will develop, let alone imitating how they’ll be used after childbirth. This is another way of turning little girls into adults. It blurs the boundary between children and adults in society. It contributes to the sexualization of children and it makes them targets of assailants, frankly, because it blurs that boundary. It’s a terrible, terrible idea.” “I’m going to have to respectfully disagree,” parenting expert Jessica Gottlieb told Ablow. “I’m not sure that if you see a little girl as her breasts being sexual that that doesn’t reflect more on you than on what breasts are.” “I assure you I’m not a pedophile at all,” Ablow objected. “Dr. Ablow, I think she raises a great point,” Camerota noted. “Why is it sexual? Why isn’t it just natural?” “She doesn’t raise a good point at all. How about this? How about we have little girls three and four have an OB/GYN suite where they deliver their babies? That’s a good idea. That way we can further blur the boundaries so that everybody out there no longer thinks there’s any particular difference between a little child and an adult woman. The fact is that little girls don’t have breasts that can breastfeed,” Ablow explained. This month alone, Ablow has proclaimed that President Barack Obama pursues a “communist manifesto” and offered and psychological profile of Media Matters’ David Brock.
Continue reading …Tycoon expresses regret for News Corporation’s involvement in scandal but insists he was kept in dark Rupert Murdoch defiantly insisted on Tuesday he was not responsible for what he called “sickening and horrible invasions” of privacy committed by his company, claiming he had been betrayed by disgraceful unidentified colleagues, and had known nothing of the cover-up of phone hacking. During a three-hour grilling at the culture select committee, disrupted by a protester throwing a plate of shaving foam, the once all-powerful News Corp chairman and chief executive told MPs: “I am not responsible.” In a halting performance, at times pausing, mumbling and mishearing, Murdoch said those culpable were “the people I hired and trusted, and perhaps then people who they hired and trusted”. But he denied the accusation he had been “willfully blind” about the scandal. Flanked by his son James, the chairman of News International, Murdoch said he and his company had been betrayed in a disgraceful way, but argued he was still the best person to clean up the company, adding in a rehearsed soundbite that his day in front of the committee represented “the most humble day of my life “. In a Westminster hearing screened worldwide, he repeatedly tried to avoid identifying the specific culprits in his company, often blaming earlier legal counsel for inadequate advice or leaving his son to explain his behaviour. But in separate testimony to the home affairs select committee, Lord Macdonald, the former head of the DPP, now on contract with News International, revealed it had taken him three to five minutes to examine documents kept by the company’s solicitors showing widespread criminality at the company. Macdonald said in his view the criminality revealed was “completely unequivocal”, adding when he reported his findings to the News International board recently there was surprise and shock. He said: “I cannot imagine anyone looking at the file would not say there was criminality,” including payments to police. The file was kept at the solicitors Harbottle & Lewis, and the police investigation is now centring on which executives tried to conceal its contents. In May 2007 Harbottle & Lewis sent a two-paragraph letter to News International executives claiming their examination of the documents showed there was no evidence any senior executives knew of illegal activities by the reporter Clive Goodman, or of any other illegal activities. The physical assault on Murdoch came near the end of the evidence session, prompting gasps as his wife Wendi Deng leaped up to hit the assailant, Jonathan May-Bowles, a participant in UK Uncut events. May-Bowles was detained by police as James Murdoch angrily asked officers why they had not protected his father. The Commons Speaker John Bercow called for an inquiry. The culture and home affairs select committee between them took more than eight hours of evidence about the phone-hacking scandal. Under the cover of the drama of the hearings, the Conservatives revealed that Neil Wallis, a former News of the World deputy editor, had given “informal unpaid advice” to Andy Coulson when he was director of communications at the Conservative party. In a statement the party said: “It has been drawn to our attention that he may have provided Andy Coulson with some informal advice on a voluntary basis before the election. We are currently finding out the exact nature of any advice.” Wallis was arrested last week on suspicion of phone hacking, and the furore surrounding his hiring by the Metropolitan police between October 2008 and September 2009 has led to the resignation of Sir Paul Stephenson, the Metropolitan police commissioner, and the Met’s assistant commissioner John Yates, who both gave evidence on Tuesday. Separately emails were released by Downing Street showing David Cameron’s chief of staff, Ed Llewellyn, had on 20 September 2010 turned down the opportunity of a briefing by the Metropolitan police on the phone hacking. Labour claimed it showed an extraordinary dereliction of his duty to find out the scale of the wrong-doing, and the potential involvement of Coulson, the former No 10 director of communications. Cameron will be pressed on the issue when he makes a statement to MPs on how he is handling the crisis. He has been summoned to a 1922 backbench committee meeting to justify his response, including his decision to hire Coulson. The bulk of the cross-examination of the Murdochs was largely designed to locate how high the apparent cover-up of systematic law breaking went. James Murdoch was forced to admit, after much wriggling, that his company was still paying the legal costs of Glenn Mulcaire, one of the private detectives on the payroll of News of the World found guilty of hacking phones. James Murdoch said he was shocked and surprised to learn the payments were continuing, and denied it had been done to buy silence. Pressed by the Labour MP Paul Farrelly, Rupert Murdoch said he would stop the payments if he was contractually free to do so. James Murdoch denied the large out-of-court settlements to the PFA chief executive, Gordon Taylor, (£700,000) and publicist Max Clifford (£1m including legal costs), authorised by him in 2008, had not been pitched so high to buy their silence. He insisted the settlement level was based on legal advice, or in the case of Clifford due to the ending of a wider contract. James Murdoch also revealed he had authorised the settlements but had not told his father until 2009 after the case became public, saying the payments were too small to be reported to a higher board. He refused a request from MP Tom Watson to release Taylor from his confidentiality agreement. Both James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International who gave evidence later to the committee, said they had acted as soon as evidence emerged in civil cases at the end of 2010 that phone hacking had not been confined to Mulcaire and Goodman. James Murdoch apologised for the scandal and told MPs: “These actions do not live up to the standards our company aspires to.” The trio came under pressure over a letter in May 2007 prepared by Harbottle & Lewis on the instruction of Jon Chapman, the former director of legal affairs, and Daniel Cloak, the head of human resources, suggesting phone hacking had not been widespread. The files on which the Harbottle & Lewis letter is based were re-examined in April by senior News International executives including Will Lewis and Lord Macdonald. In tense opening exchanges Murdoch revealed he had mounted no investigation when Brooks told parliament seven years ago that the News of the World had paid police officers for information. He said: “I didn’t know of it.” He also admitted he had never heard of the fact that his senior reporter at the News of the World, Neville Thurlbeck, had been found by a judge to be guilty of blackmail. Watson interrupted to prevent Rupert Murdoch’s son answering the questions saying “Your father is responsible for corporate governance, and serious wrongdoing has been brought about in the company. It is revealing in itself what he does not know and what executives chose not to tell him.” Rupert Murdoch denied he was ignorant of his company, banging the table and saying News of the World “is less than 1 %” of News Corp. . He was asked about his connections to the Conservative party and revealed it had been on the advice of the prime minister’s staff that he had gone through the back door to have a cup of tea with David Cameron after the election to receive Cameron’s personal thanks for supporting his party in the election. “I was asked if I would please come through the back door,” Murdoch told the committee. Rupert Murdoch denied that the closure of the News of the World was motivated by financial considerations, saying he shut it because of the criminal allegations. In one flash of anger he complained his competitors had “caught us with dirty hands and created hysteria”. Aware that he must prevent the scandal spreading across the Atlantic, he insisted he had seen no evidence that victims of the 9/11 terror attack and their relatives were targeted by any of his papers. Rupert Murdoch Phone hacking News International News Corporation News of the World National newspapers Newspapers & magazines Media business Newspapers Police David Cameron House of Commons Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tycoon expresses regret for News Corporation’s involvement in scandal but insists he was kept in dark Rupert Murdoch defiantly insisted on Tuesday he was not responsible for what he called “sickening and horrible invasions” of privacy committed by his company, claiming he had been betrayed by disgraceful unidentified colleagues, and had known nothing of the cover-up of phone hacking. During a three-hour grilling at the culture select committee, disrupted by a protester throwing a plate of shaving foam, the once all-powerful News Corp chairman and chief executive told MPs: “I am not responsible.” In a halting performance, at times pausing, mumbling and mishearing, Murdoch said those culpable were “the people I hired and trusted, and perhaps then people who they hired and trusted”. But he denied the accusation he had been “willfully blind” about the scandal. Flanked by his son James, the chairman of News International, Murdoch said he and his company had been betrayed in a disgraceful way, but argued he was still the best person to clean up the company, adding in a rehearsed soundbite that his day in front of the committee represented “the most humble day of my life “. In a Westminster hearing screened worldwide, he repeatedly tried to avoid identifying the specific culprits in his company, often blaming earlier legal counsel for inadequate advice or leaving his son to explain his behaviour. But in separate testimony to the home affairs select committee, Lord Macdonald, the former head of the DPP, now on contract with News International, revealed it had taken him three to five minutes to examine documents kept by the company’s solicitors showing widespread criminality at the company. Macdonald said in his view the criminality revealed was “completely unequivocal”, adding when he reported his findings to the News International board recently there was surprise and shock. He said: “I cannot imagine anyone looking at the file would not say there was criminality,” including payments to police. The file was kept at the solicitors Harbottle & Lewis, and the police investigation is now centring on which executives tried to conceal its contents. In May 2007 Harbottle & Lewis sent a two-paragraph letter to News International executives claiming their examination of the documents showed there was no evidence any senior executives knew of illegal activities by the reporter Clive Goodman, or of any other illegal activities. The physical assault on Murdoch came near the end of the evidence session, prompting gasps as his wife Wendi Deng leaped up to hit the assailant, Jonathan May-Bowles, a participant in UK Uncut events. May-Bowles was detained by police as James Murdoch angrily asked officers why they had not protected his father. The Commons Speaker John Bercow called for an inquiry. The culture and home affairs select committee between them took more than eight hours of evidence about the phone-hacking scandal. Under the cover of the drama of the hearings, the Conservatives revealed that Neil Wallis, a former News of the World deputy editor, had given “informal unpaid advice” to Andy Coulson when he was director of communications at the Conservative party. In a statement the party said: “It has been drawn to our attention that he may have provided Andy Coulson with some informal advice on a voluntary basis before the election. We are currently finding out the exact nature of any advice.” Wallis was arrested last week on suspicion of phone hacking, and the furore surrounding his hiring by the Metropolitan police between October 2008 and September 2009 has led to the resignation of Sir Paul Stephenson, the Metropolitan police commissioner, and the Met’s assistant commissioner John Yates, who both gave evidence on Tuesday. Separately emails were released by Downing Street showing David Cameron’s chief of staff, Ed Llewellyn, had on 20 September 2010 turned down the opportunity of a briefing by the Metropolitan police on the phone hacking. Labour claimed it showed an extraordinary dereliction of his duty to find out the scale of the wrong-doing, and the potential involvement of Coulson, the former No 10 director of communications. Cameron will be pressed on the issue when he makes a statement to MPs on how he is handling the crisis. He has been summoned to a 1922 backbench committee meeting to justify his response, including his decision to hire Coulson. The bulk of the cross-examination of the Murdochs was largely designed to locate how high the apparent cover-up of systematic law breaking went. James Murdoch was forced to admit, after much wriggling, that his company was still paying the legal costs of Glenn Mulcaire, one of the private detectives on the payroll of News of the World found guilty of hacking phones. James Murdoch said he was shocked and surprised to learn the payments were continuing, and denied it had been done to buy silence. Pressed by the Labour MP Paul Farrelly, Rupert Murdoch said he would stop the payments if he was contractually free to do so. James Murdoch denied the large out-of-court settlements to the PFA chief executive, Gordon Taylor, (£700,000) and publicist Max Clifford (£1m including legal costs), authorised by him in 2008, had not been pitched so high to buy their silence. He insisted the settlement level was based on legal advice, or in the case of Clifford due to the ending of a wider contract. James Murdoch also revealed he had authorised the settlements but had not told his father until 2009 after the case became public, saying the payments were too small to be reported to a higher board. He refused a request from MP Tom Watson to release Taylor from his confidentiality agreement. Both James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International who gave evidence later to the committee, said they had acted as soon as evidence emerged in civil cases at the end of 2010 that phone hacking had not been confined to Mulcaire and Goodman. James Murdoch apologised for the scandal and told MPs: “These actions do not live up to the standards our company aspires to.” The trio came under pressure over a letter in May 2007 prepared by Harbottle & Lewis on the instruction of Jon Chapman, the former director of legal affairs, and Daniel Cloak, the head of human resources, suggesting phone hacking had not been widespread. The files on which the Harbottle & Lewis letter is based were re-examined in April by senior News International executives including Will Lewis and Lord Macdonald. In tense opening exchanges Murdoch revealed he had mounted no investigation when Brooks told parliament seven years ago that the News of the World had paid police officers for information. He said: “I didn’t know of it.” He also admitted he had never heard of the fact that his senior reporter at the News of the World, Neville Thurlbeck, had been found by a judge to be guilty of blackmail. Watson interrupted to prevent Rupert Murdoch’s son answering the questions saying “Your father is responsible for corporate governance, and serious wrongdoing has been brought about in the company. It is revealing in itself what he does not know and what executives chose not to tell him.” Rupert Murdoch denied he was ignorant of his company, banging the table and saying News of the World “is less than 1 %” of News Corp. . He was asked about his connections to the Conservative party and revealed it had been on the advice of the prime minister’s staff that he had gone through the back door to have a cup of tea with David Cameron after the election to receive Cameron’s personal thanks for supporting his party in the election. “I was asked if I would please come through the back door,” Murdoch told the committee. Rupert Murdoch denied that the closure of the News of the World was motivated by financial considerations, saying he shut it because of the criminal allegations. In one flash of anger he complained his competitors had “caught us with dirty hands and created hysteria”. Aware that he must prevent the scandal spreading across the Atlantic, he insisted he had seen no evidence that victims of the 9/11 terror attack and their relatives were targeted by any of his papers. Rupert Murdoch Phone hacking News International News Corporation News of the World National newspapers Newspapers & magazines Media business Newspapers Police David Cameron House of Commons Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tycoon expresses regret for News Corporation’s involvement in scandal but insists he was kept in dark Rupert Murdoch defiantly insisted on Tuesday he was not responsible for what he called “sickening and horrible invasions” of privacy committed by his company, claiming he had been betrayed by disgraceful unidentified colleagues, and had known nothing of the cover-up of phone hacking. During a three-hour grilling at the culture select committee, disrupted by a protester throwing a plate of shaving foam, the once all-powerful News Corp chairman and chief executive told MPs: “I am not responsible.” In a halting performance, at times pausing, mumbling and mishearing, Murdoch said those culpable were “the people I hired and trusted, and perhaps then people who they hired and trusted”. But he denied the accusation he had been “willfully blind” about the scandal. Flanked by his son James, the chairman of News International, Murdoch said he and his company had been betrayed in a disgraceful way, but argued he was still the best person to clean up the company, adding in a rehearsed soundbite that his day in front of the committee represented “the most humble day of my life “. In a Westminster hearing screened worldwide, he repeatedly tried to avoid identifying the specific culprits in his company, often blaming earlier legal counsel for inadequate advice or leaving his son to explain his behaviour. But in separate testimony to the home affairs select committee, Lord Macdonald, the former head of the DPP, now on contract with News International, revealed it had taken him three to five minutes to examine documents kept by the company’s solicitors showing widespread criminality at the company. Macdonald said in his view the criminality revealed was “completely unequivocal”, adding when he reported his findings to the News International board recently there was surprise and shock. He said: “I cannot imagine anyone looking at the file would not say there was criminality,” including payments to police. The file was kept at the solicitors Harbottle & Lewis, and the police investigation is now centring on which executives tried to conceal its contents. In May 2007 Harbottle & Lewis sent a two-paragraph letter to News International executives claiming their examination of the documents showed there was no evidence any senior executives knew of illegal activities by the reporter Clive Goodman, or of any other illegal activities. The physical assault on Murdoch came near the end of the evidence session, prompting gasps as his wife Wendi Deng leaped up to hit the assailant, Jonathan May-Bowles, a participant in UK Uncut events. May-Bowles was detained by police as James Murdoch angrily asked officers why they had not protected his father. The Commons Speaker John Bercow called for an inquiry. The culture and home affairs select committee between them took more than eight hours of evidence about the phone-hacking scandal. Under the cover of the drama of the hearings, the Conservatives revealed that Neil Wallis, a former News of the World deputy editor, had given “informal unpaid advice” to Andy Coulson when he was director of communications at the Conservative party. In a statement the party said: “It has been drawn to our attention that he may have provided Andy Coulson with some informal advice on a voluntary basis before the election. We are currently finding out the exact nature of any advice.” Wallis was arrested last week on suspicion of phone hacking, and the furore surrounding his hiring by the Metropolitan police between October 2008 and September 2009 has led to the resignation of Sir Paul Stephenson, the Metropolitan police commissioner, and the Met’s assistant commissioner John Yates, who both gave evidence on Tuesday. Separately emails were released by Downing Street showing David Cameron’s chief of staff, Ed Llewellyn, had on 20 September 2010 turned down the opportunity of a briefing by the Metropolitan police on the phone hacking. Labour claimed it showed an extraordinary dereliction of his duty to find out the scale of the wrong-doing, and the potential involvement of Coulson, the former No 10 director of communications. Cameron will be pressed on the issue when he makes a statement to MPs on how he is handling the crisis. He has been summoned to a 1922 backbench committee meeting to justify his response, including his decision to hire Coulson. The bulk of the cross-examination of the Murdochs was largely designed to locate how high the apparent cover-up of systematic law breaking went. James Murdoch was forced to admit, after much wriggling, that his company was still paying the legal costs of Glenn Mulcaire, one of the private detectives on the payroll of News of the World found guilty of hacking phones. James Murdoch said he was shocked and surprised to learn the payments were continuing, and denied it had been done to buy silence. Pressed by the Labour MP Paul Farrelly, Rupert Murdoch said he would stop the payments if he was contractually free to do so. James Murdoch denied the large out-of-court settlements to the PFA chief executive, Gordon Taylor, (£700,000) and publicist Max Clifford (£1m including legal costs), authorised by him in 2008, had not been pitched so high to buy their silence. He insisted the settlement level was based on legal advice, or in the case of Clifford due to the ending of a wider contract. James Murdoch also revealed he had authorised the settlements but had not told his father until 2009 after the case became public, saying the payments were too small to be reported to a higher board. He refused a request from MP Tom Watson to release Taylor from his confidentiality agreement. Both James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International who gave evidence later to the committee, said they had acted as soon as evidence emerged in civil cases at the end of 2010 that phone hacking had not been confined to Mulcaire and Goodman. James Murdoch apologised for the scandal and told MPs: “These actions do not live up to the standards our company aspires to.” The trio came under pressure over a letter in May 2007 prepared by Harbottle & Lewis on the instruction of Jon Chapman, the former director of legal affairs, and Daniel Cloak, the head of human resources, suggesting phone hacking had not been widespread. The files on which the Harbottle & Lewis letter is based were re-examined in April by senior News International executives including Will Lewis and Lord Macdonald. In tense opening exchanges Murdoch revealed he had mounted no investigation when Brooks told parliament seven years ago that the News of the World had paid police officers for information. He said: “I didn’t know of it.” He also admitted he had never heard of the fact that his senior reporter at the News of the World, Neville Thurlbeck, had been found by a judge to be guilty of blackmail. Watson interrupted to prevent Rupert Murdoch’s son answering the questions saying “Your father is responsible for corporate governance, and serious wrongdoing has been brought about in the company. It is revealing in itself what he does not know and what executives chose not to tell him.” Rupert Murdoch denied he was ignorant of his company, banging the table and saying News of the World “is less than 1 %” of News Corp. . He was asked about his connections to the Conservative party and revealed it had been on the advice of the prime minister’s staff that he had gone through the back door to have a cup of tea with David Cameron after the election to receive Cameron’s personal thanks for supporting his party in the election. “I was asked if I would please come through the back door,” Murdoch told the committee. Rupert Murdoch denied that the closure of the News of the World was motivated by financial considerations, saying he shut it because of the criminal allegations. In one flash of anger he complained his competitors had “caught us with dirty hands and created hysteria”. Aware that he must prevent the scandal spreading across the Atlantic, he insisted he had seen no evidence that victims of the 9/11 terror attack and their relatives were targeted by any of his papers. Rupert Murdoch Phone hacking News International News Corporation News of the World National newspapers Newspapers & magazines Media business Newspapers Police David Cameron House of Commons Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …A protester splattered Rupert Murdoch with white foam on Tuesday, interrupting a dramatic hearing in which the media baron told British lawmakers he was not responsible for a phone hacking scandal that has rocked his global empire. (July 19)
Continue reading …