Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

'are you a believer in human rights?'

'not particularly, no'

:D

Everything I've read about Brookes does scream sociopath. But the internet is not the place for cod diaygnosis of mental conditions.

Wait, what I am talking about..
 
Did Mr Cameron indirectly say keep your head up?
"Along those lines, I don't think they were the exact words."
Is the gist right?
"Yes. It was indirect. It wasn't a direct text message."
How the fuck do you "indirectly" tell someone to keep their head up :confused:
 
Rebekah has seriously high-maintenance hair. I'm not sure where Jay is going here though, this seems like a confessional rather than an inquisition
 
How the fuck do you "indirectly" tell someone to keep their head up :confused:

You get "friends" to send the text.

Possibly actual "friends of the Prime Minister", rather than the Prime Minister speaking unattributably.

Or - note to briefs and the conspiracy-minded - send it from pseudonymous phone? :)
 
What's the legal situation regarding 'being under oath' vs 'im not revealing my sources'...?

There's no explicit journalist protection in English law (after a quick Google, so take this with the necessary pinch of salt) but there is a long standing tradition of source confidentiality. Most US states have legislated a "shield law", although the federal govt has no such measure. The UK judiciary seems to trend towards the protect the journalist angle, following both the US precedents and also that of the ECHR
 
There's no explicit journalist protection in English law (after a quick Google, so take this with the necessary pinch of salt) but there is a long standing tradition of source confidentiality. Most US states have legislated a "shield law", although the federal govt has no such measure. The UK judiciary seems to trend towards the protect the journalist angle, following both the US precedents and also that of the ECHR

Fair enough. I think this calls for a spot of waterboarding then.
 
He's always a bit more cunty after a recess and a chance to talk to his team. brooks is getting good reviews on twitter so im assuming he's been told to go a bit harder.
 
There's no explicit journalist protection in English law (after a quick Google, so take this with the necessary pinch of salt)

There is precisely one, though it's not relevant to this question about questioning.

Under PACE 1988 journalistic notes and images are "special procedure material" and may not be seized without following, er, a special procedure - warrant from a judge.

In the Leveson context, that would apply to any searches of homes or offices...
 
Will Maddy stuff reveal it?

If Mohan talked to the Home Sec. that's another nail on Theresa May innit? Undue pressure?
 
Leveson's judgment on this enquiry could be fascinating. Cameron's appearance will be great, Jay will mince him.
 
I wouldn't underestimate cameron. for all his faults he's a very smooth operator. altho he seems to have missed blair's old trick when it came to inquirys like this - 'choose the right judge'
 
It all seems a bit British and people not trying to offend each other.

"Well, I don't believe what you've said but you are a gentleman/lady and so I must not question what you've said"
 
In Parliament Cameron's method for handling tricky questions is to offer a bland statement about something vaguely related to the topic. Not sure how that'll go down with a lawyer.
 
Back
Top Bottom