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

[Jon-of-arc]

7 million - that's money to do time, surely?

 

[stavros]

yardbird, see the link in my previous post.

 

[paolo]

Dear Rebekah,
Good luck at the trial
LOL, David

This is good, and it's going to get better. It's like Leveson sequels are already planned. I'm assuming the collective billionty who've been arrested/charged can't all go to court in one case, so it's going to be EPIC.

Interesting seeing Cameron revising his language. There's now pretty much zero support from him, towards his previous chummy tabloid mates / 'key strategists' (lol). If nothing else, it suggests he can see that one or both of the duo could get convicted. Either will do me. Both is champers time.

 

[stavros]

If nothing else, it suggests he can see that one or both of the duo could get convicted. Either will do me. Both is champers time.

Even better, they do a collective plea bargain and implicate both Digger Senior and Junior who do time instead.

This is obviously just a dream - if nothing else I think both are US citizens, and there's no extradition process heading east to the UK.

 

[DexterTCN]

America has that foreign corrupt practices law. Not going to happen though.

 

[elbows]

Gove was mocking Leveson at the Spectator awards.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/nov/21/michael-gove-mocks-leveson-spectator-awards

 

[killer b]

He's not much of a wag is he?

 

[teqniq]

Damage limitation perchance?

 

[laptop]

there's no extradition process heading east to the UK.

Just for the record: there is, but it has stricter criteria (does the phrase "probable cause" appear?); and US courts are more sceptical about sending people to furrin courts, them being the best in the world and superior to all furriners in their own eyes.

 

[ViolentPanda]

He's not much of a wag is he?

He'll never be funnier than having pus drip out of the end of your cock, unless he tops himself in front of an audience.

 

[teqniq]

You have a way with words VP

 

[Treacle Toes]

Martin Hickman ‏@martin_hickman
Can be tricky to keep count of phone hacking charges and arrests. I've listed them here: http://www.phonescandal.com/#/arrests/4570515447 …

 

[agricola]

A Tory MP writes:

Following speculation that the government might be about to offer the press, “one last chance” to make self regulation actually work, I thought colleagues might be interested in the history of previous “last chances” over the past 65 years. Parliament has not always been good at learning from its mistakes, so has condemned journalism to suffer crisis after crisis. Here is the record:

1. 1953. Four years after a Royal Commission told the press to start regulating itself, nothing had been done. Only the threat of legislation forced them to create the General Council of the Press. Withdrawing his Private Member’s Bill, C.J. Simmons MP told the Commons: ‘I give warning here and now that if it fails, some of us again will have to come forward with a measure similar to this bill.’

2. 1962. A second Royal Commission told the press to make self-regulation effective: ‘We think that the Press should be given another opportunity itself voluntarily to establish an authoritative General Council . . . We recommend, however, that the government should specify a time limit after which legislation would be introduced.’


3. 1977. The third Royal Commission on the Press urged radical changes to the Press Council and said that if nothing was done parliament should act. The report said: ‘We recommend that the press should be given one final chance to prove that voluntary self-regulation can be made to work.’

4. 1990. Parliament backed the Calcutt Committee recommendations for radical improvements to self-regulation, including the establishment of an effective Press Complaints Commission. Papers were given a ‘year of grace’ to make this work and the Home Secretary, David Waddingston, told the Commons: ‘This is positively the last chance for the industry to establish an effective non-statutory system of regulation.’

5. 1993. The Calcutt Review concluded that the PCC was ‘not . . . an effective regulator of the press’. It recommended a Press Complaints Tribunal backed by statute. A Major government with a slender majority failed to implement this.

6. 2011. Amid public outrage over the revelation that Milly Dowler’s phone had been hacked, David Cameron told the Commons: ‘I accept we can’t say it is the last chance saloon all over again. We’ve done that.’

If you are interested in doing your bit to try to break this cycle of failure but would like further information or want to discuss the issue more fully, please do not hesitate to make contact.
George Eustice MP
Member of Parliament for Camborne, Redruth and Hayle
House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA

 

[stavros]

Sorry for the big picture, but it looks like Dacre, amongst others, is trying to discredit the report before anyone's seen it;

i.e. "You'd better, Davey-boy, otherwise I will double cunt you."

 

[laptop]

Sorry for the big picture, but it looks like Dacre, amongst others, is trying to discredit the report before anyone's seen it;



i.e. "You'd better, Davey-boy, otherwise I will double cunt you."

like++

 

[stavros]

I'm not sure the Mail ever liked Cameron, with his left-wing socialist tendancies.

 

[elbows]

‏@johnprescott
David Blunkett has done more money deals with Murdoch newspapers than any other politician. He still appears to be doing their bidding

 

[elbows]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/27/leveson-inquiry-press-watchdog-law

David Cameron is facing a public backlash if he fails to act to rein in the press when Lord Justice Leveson reports on Thursday, according to a poll which finds that 79% are in favour of an independent press regulator established by law.
Some 60% believe the prime minister should implement Leveson's recommendations, and while 79% favour legislation to create an independent press regulator, only 9% are opposed. Just over 80% said national newspapers should be obliged to sign up to the new system by law.
Support for the creation of an independent body established by law is uniform across the voting spectrum, including 81% support from readers of the Daily Mail, one of the papers most vociferous in its opposition to any state interference.

 

[teqniq]

Concerning the Mail, above:

...Support for the creation of an independent body established by law is uniform across the voting spectrum, including 81% support from readers of the Daily Mail, one of the papers most vociferous in its opposition to any state interference....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/27/leveson-inquiry-press-watchdog-law

 

[DexterTCN]

Graham Linehan ‏@Glinner
The Daily Mail fears Leveson because he directly threatens their quasi-pornographic business model.http://www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2012/11/23/the-dead-tree-press-doth-protest-too-much-methinks/…

Collapse

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

 

[teqniq]

Rupert will not be best pleased:

News International must pay Andy Coulson legal fees, appeals court rules

Andy Coulson has won his legal battle to force News International to continue paying his legal fees relating to criminal investigations into alleged illegal activity at the News of the World while he was editor.

The former editor, who was subsequently David Cameron's director of communications, won his appeal against an earlier high court ruling over his legal bills arising out of police investigations into phone hacking and payments to public officials.

Three senior court of appeal judges ruled: "I am satisfied that clause 4.6 does cover Mr Coulson's costs and expenses of defending the criminal allegations."...

 

[stavros]

It's not just Murdoch, Dacre, Desmond, etc, but I've noticed the Graun and the Indie have been doing editorials on how terrible any kind of state-sanctioned watchdog would be too.

Are they all out of sync with public opinion?

 

[teqniq]

Massively I suspect.

 

[smokedout]

which is a shame because there are potentially very damaging things to come out of this. state regulated newspapers are not a good thing.

 

[teqniq]

What do you suggest? I'm not really into state regulation either but the cosy arrangement that is the newspapers, politicians and the OB all in each other's pockets that has imo played a large part in the whole sorry mess, stinks.

And as for the PCC in it's current incarnation - ha ha ha.

 

[two sheds]

Would independent regulator be bad? Will be appointed by government no doubt, but has to be better than self regulation.

Just being as assiduous at banging editors up for insider dealing, bribing police and public officials and similar crimes as they are at locking people up for stealing bottles of water would be nice.

 

[smokedout]

What do you suggest? I'm not really into state regulation either but the cosy arrangement that is the newspapers, politicians and the OB all in each other's pockets that has imo played a large part in the whole sorry mess, stinks.

And as for the PCC in it's current incarnation - ha ha ha.

where laws have been broken they should throw the lot of em in jail. that's not what this has become about though. i couldnt give a flying fuck about celebrities like nazi mosley, one solution to stop the shit that happened to the dowlers etc is legal support and legal aid for libel and investigations into other breaches of the law. as for cosy relationships between MPs the filth and the press, state regulation is likely to increase that not diminish it

 

[smokedout]

Would independent regulator be bad? Will be appointed by government no doubt, but has to be better than self regulation.

the question is who gets regulated, and how - if it applies to all national newspapers would that mean things like Freedom, Class War etc where are the boundaries likely to be set, what about the net, bloggers etc

admittedly i havent followed whats been proposed by the various parties as much as id like, but i havent seen any clear answers to exactly what state regulation would look like in practice

 

[elbows]

The devil is in the detail really. Press freedom is good in so many ways but we mustn't forget that the press we have is soiled by the nature of who owns it and works in it.

And yes it came up repeatedly at Leveson that some of this stuff is slightly absurd to come to a head now because of the changes underway via the internet. And when it comes to this stuff I'm concerned that regardless of lower barriers to entry, the old media entities still have the upper hand in many ways on the net, they have the size, the staff, the ability to work with the advertising model, promotion model, etc. And this in turn raises issues such as how publications that do a fairer job of serving the great unwashed can function online, which includes problems trying to engage the audience in a sustainable and compelling way. I'm underwhelmed with what has been achieved so far, there is still potential, but just like with politics we are a bit stuffed by where peoples heads are at in the modern world.

 

[Treacle Toes]

It's #Leveson day and all you need is here: the Guardian's live blog is up and running: http://gu.com/p/3c6mt/tw