Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"

[agricola]

and now according to them, it definitely ISNT her:

At 12.37pm we suggested Jenny Watson, head of the Electoral Commission, might have been the official Nick Raynsford referred to earlier. We now understand it was not Watson.

I was bimbling around town on my bike when that happened. Did Labour really dare to criticise the Tories for anonymous hostile briefing against a civil servant?

 

[DaveCinzano]

According to Gaby Hinscliff:

ok: as i understand, Raynsford Q involves a senior public official who believes his phone hacked & bins rifled during big row within govt...

...& doesnt believe this was done by the media. it's an unproven allegation & i know it all sounds crazy, but Raysnford is a serious man.

it sounds like loony conspiracy theory, but then so does this whole story

 

[gabi]

1.50pm: Cameron says: "As someone once said, I'm enjoying this." Famously, it was Margaret Thatcher - in the no confidence debate on the day she resigned.

lol

 

[Streathamite]

FOI request anyone?

Yes! That would be a brilliant next move, and widen the request to all correspondence concerning Coulson's appointment to a No 10 job

 

[editor]

He did say that he would reply in writing (albeit when asked whether the company was a Tory donor) in the end.

He's clearly hiding something here and knows that the 'written answer' cop out will take the heat out of it.

 

[two sheds]

Going back to the enquiry and NI and Max Clifford. It seems he was paid between £500k and £1m which seems a lot, and was probably much more than anyone else. I know he is a PR person who could produce a lot of bad press for NI, but could there be any other reason why he was compensated so much?

I *thought* that when Wade was pressed yesterday about whether any of the agreements included confidentiality clauses that talked about illegal actions by NI she specifically said 'no'. If that is so, then presumably could Clifford publish anything he has on NI.

 

[MellySingsDoom]

Yes! That would be a brilliant next move, and widen the request to all correspondence concerning Coulson's appointment to a No 10 job

If you do go for an FOI request - keep chasing it up - I've got a current FOI request w/the Home Office that they conveniently keep "forgetting" about.

 

[two sheds]

You. Because you are unable to admit to making a mistake. How cretinously childish is that?

Sorry to bring this up again but again.

There really ought to be a Self Awareness Prize for three comments like this in a single thread. Go Belboid

 

[not-bono-ever]

is there no end to the hacking scandal ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14212922

Taliban complain that their phones have been hacked as well.

 

[agricola]

He's clearly hiding something here and knows that the 'written answer' cop out will take the heat out of it.

Indeed, but perhaps the language used can point to who it might be. Cameron specifically said company (which rules out the Cabinet Office vetting system), and given Coulsons history (working at News International papers since 1988, apart from 9 weeks at the Mail) whichever company that carried it out would have to have mainly dealt with NI. Given what we now know, the company either didnt ask the right questions, or were lied to by News International, or were News International themselves (or working on their behalf).

IMHO its the third that is most likely - it is a massive coincidence that just before Coulson was appointed (July 2007) one of the solicitors at Harbottle and Lewis wrote to an exec at NI claiming (from this BBC piece):

In this letter, dated 29 May 2007, and sent to Jon Chapman of News International, Lawrence Abramson of Harbottle & Lewis wrote that it had "reviewed e-mails to which you have provided access from the accounts of Andy Coulson, Stuart Kuttner, Ian Edmondson, Clive Goodman, Neil Wallis, Jules Stenson".

Mr Abramson confirmed to Mr Chapman that it "did not find anything in those e-mails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman's illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of Andy Coulson, the editor, and Neil Wallis, the deputy editor, and/or that Ian Edmondson, the news editor, and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures".

Those emails (which were hidden away for four years afterwards, dont forget) instead appear to contain clear evidence to the contrary. Harbottle + Lewis appear to have no reason to deliberately lie to NI (indeed they are squirming under client privilege at the moment), but nor did they give them an accurate account of what was in the emails (which would suggest that it wasnt NI lying to a private vetting company - if they had, the H+B letter would have contained accurate information). Surely the only plausible theory that remains is that NI were getting paperwork together to tell Cameron that Coulson was ok, that he wasnt involved in wider malpractice, and that there was no reason not to hire him.

 

[belboid]

Sorry to bring this up again but again.

There really ought to be a Self Awareness Prize for three comments like this in a single thread. Go Belboid

you should learn to read the whole thread then, dear boy (ok, bit of a tall order at this point). But that's your problem, I freely admitted my mistake, shame others cant do the same.

 

[Santino]

Miliband acting a bit cocky in the debate now. Bit of swagger about him.

 

[two sheds]

you should learn to read the whole thread then, dear boy (ok, bit of a tall order at this point). But that's your problem, I freely admitted my mistake, shame others cant do the same.

I have actually while I should actually have been doing other things

You've admitted *one* mistake, you made others particularly the one along the lines of 'you clearly don't understand what libel is' ("There's a lecture at 21:00 hours on 'Keats'. Now I want you all to attend because I'm sure you don't all know what a keat is"). I made the same mistake just after you, so I sort of noticed it.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Miliband acting a bit cocky in the debate now. Bit of swagger about him.

I was just going to say, seems a bit affected though, doesn't it? Dropping in all those little 'asides' seems a little forced.

 

[belboid]

I have actually while I should actually have been doing other things

maybe you should concentrate on one thing at a time then

 

[belboid]

Comrade Marbles justifies his action.

Not particularly well tho

 

[Voley]

Comrade Marbles justifies his action.

Not particularly well tho

As I languished predictably in a prison cell later that evening, I contemplated whether people would understand why I'd done it.

We understand. You're still a fucking twat.

 

[invisibleplanet]

He's not my comrade. That doesn't justify his actions. I stand by my original comment (made at 10:48am today) on him.

I think the pie was misguided and showed a lack of awareness of the spin that the media can put on solo-stuntist actions. (Think Blair & Purple Powder furore from Fathers4Justice). But it was an act you'd expect from a habitual narcissistic rebel, who thrives on self-publicity provided by his own 'comedic' situationist stunts. His action wasn't anything to do with UKUncut as a group, and nor do I take any insinuations that it was seriously.

He just screwed himself as an activist against the cuts by that act and by implication he's done damage to UKUncut at a time when cuts are biting deep. However, it just looks like just another ambiguous, ill-thought out stunt that the media love to hold up as representative of the anti-cuts groups in general. Scapegoats they might be, but their actions are often spun and receive far more coverage than the other campaigners do.

And that's my main concern - his actions might well be spun to demean other groups' communal yet legitimate actions against cuts. There are other groups opposing the cuts who don't receive enough media coverage already and I resent the excessive coverage of UKUncut at the expense of the other, longer standing, larger groups. The groups that contain GPs, Surgeons, Nurses, and Concerned Citizens.

At the very least, he deserves the 'Chris Knight award for failure to acknowledge that lamposts aren't load-bearing'. At most, he'll go down for assault.

And this is my second concern. He interrupted the committee meeting, and gave an opening to sympathy for Murdy, which was instantly exploited to Murdy's benefit.

He's no comrade. Just a self-seeking ****

 

[Streathamite]

FOI request anyone?

on the Grauniad live coverage thread, one of their reader-contributors has now done that!

 

[DrRingDing]

I'd sooner see him take a mallet to Murdoch's head than a pie.

 

[DotCommunist]

no doubt he doesn't believe in proper violence.

 

[belboid]

he's a fucking Labour Party member, what do you expect?

 

[frogwoman]

the marbles guy?

 

[belboid]

indeed. Now a suspended member

 

[Lord Camomile]

*snigger*

 

[gosub]

He's not my comrade. That doesn't justify his actions. I stand by my original comment (made at 10:48am today) on him.

I think the pie was misguided and showed a lack of awareness of the spin that the media can put on solo-stuntist actions. (Think Blair & Purple Powder furore from Fathers4Justice). But it was an act you'd expect from a habitual narcissistic rebel, who thrives on self-publicity provided by his own 'comedic' situationist stunts. His action wasn't anything to do with UKUncut as a group, and nor do I take any insinuations that it was seriously.

He just screwed himself as an activist against the cuts by that act and by implication he's done damage to UKUncut at a time when cuts are biting deep. However, it just looks like just another ambiguous, ill-thought out stunt that the media love to hold up as representative of the anti-cuts groups in general. Scapegoats they might be, but their actions are often spun and receive far more coverage than the other campaigners do.

And that's my main concern - his actions might well be spun to demean other groups' communal yet legitimate actions against cuts. There are other groups opposing the cuts who don't receive enough media coverage already and I resent the excessive coverage of UKUncut at the expense of the other, longer standing, larger groups. The groups that contain GPs, Surgeons, Nurses, and Concerned Citizens.

At the very least, he deserves the 'Chris Knight award for failure to acknowledge that lamposts aren't load-bearing'. At most, he'll go down for assault.

And this is my second concern. He interrupted the committee meeting, and gave an opening to sympathy for Murdy, which was instantly exploited to Murdy's benefit.

He's no comrade. Just a self-seeking ****

don't think it was a lone flan flinger : http://adloyada.typepad.com/adloyada/2011/07/my-day-alongside-murdochs-pie-chucker.html

 

[Lord Camomile]

Fuck me, even Alec Baldwin is throwing in:

Cameron should resign. England is FILLED with people who could do a better job.

 

[gabi]

Twitter war raging between Piers and Mensch now

not often piers can claim the moral high ground

 

[1%er]

Re: Harbottle & Lewis

was there not a change in the law a few years ago in the Uk that made it a criminal offence for a lawyer to withhold information about a client involved in illegal activerty and put a duty on them to report such actions or face legal action themselves?

 

[invisibleplanet]

''Yeah, I punched him'' - Jeremy Clarkson, 2007