Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Disgusting.

Why they are being allowed to acquire Sky is really quite beyond me.

Because money talks, and the Coalition (the Conservatives especially) believe that letting Murdoch take full control of Sky will buy the dynasty's loyalty, at least in terms of giving them an easy ride w/r/t, for example, the cuts.

Labour would have done exactly the same, of course, and for exactly the same reason.
 
this will have repercussions. how serious remains to be seen, but it isn't really something that can be hushed up or swept under the carpet is it?

brooks will be out in the next few days, i reckon. and there has to be criminal charges from this.

I strongly suspect that deals are already being made, and sacrificial lambs fattened for the slaughter.
 
Daily Mail comments pages giving the Daily Mail a hard time for not giving more prominence to this story.

seems 'middle england' is not amused...
 
Gets what though? She deserves a prison sentence. The way the press is going it seems there is no doubt about what they did. Utterly, utterly sick. Very worrying on many issues also.

She'll get away with it. She won't give a shit. Depressing shit really for so many reasons. I see no route to real justice, so I'm just going to ignore all media for a few weeks and wait for a day when I can actually spit in her eye and feed her LSD before torturing her slowly :)

That'll be justice.

Real justice would be stripping her of her wealth and housing her on a council estate, where she'd have to mix with the people her papers have spent decades reviling, no visitors allowed, no "red cross parcels", just life in poverty.
 
Id wager she either knew full well or asked not to be told on the grounds she might not like the answer.

Its quite likely its a situation that she inherited. I imagine this has been going on for years, possibly decades. There's going to be a lot more to come out yet. Rumours of other people they have hacked are circulating.
 
Quote in the office [slight paraphrasing] - "Disgusting isn't it, we get it [NOTW] on sundays, wonder how they'll try to excuse it this week"

Where's the brick wall smiley? :facepalm: just doesn't seem to cut it.
 
It's about the Dowlers first.. what do they think/want?
Then it's about the press in general.. it's not just the NOTW that are involved. Aren't teh Daily Mail the highest payers for this type of sourcing of 'stories'?
Then it's about their employees.

Do you think that knowledge of this stopped at the editor? If you do then it's about Mrs Grant Mitchell..

Murdoch has always been very clever about closing himself off from micro-management of his empire. That way, he can state that while he (or whoever is/was CEO) has executive control, operational control lays with the various editors, E-I-Cs and MDs of his various enterprises. Even if he knew, he's got plausible deniability on his side, given his corporate management practices.
 
If it can be proved that the hacking of Milly Dowler's mobile actually impeded the police investigation, then it's a very serious criminal matter and needs to be dealt with severely.
 
Real justice would be stripping her of her wealth and housing her on a council estate, where she'd have to mix with the people her papers have spent decades reviling, no visitors allowed, no "red cross parcels", just life in poverty.

OI! Why should she jump the housing queue?
 
Real justice would be stripping her of her wealth and housing her on a council estate, where she'd have to mix with the people her papers have spent decades reviling, no visitors allowed, no "red cross parcels", just life in poverty.

You would have to give her a job though - paediatrician, pedagogue, something like that.
 
If it can be proved that the hacking of Milly Dowler's mobile actually impeded the police investigation, then it's a very serious criminal matter and needs to be dealt with severely.

Nigh on impossible to prove. They'd have to prove that the deleted messages were important to the investigation, which they can't because they're y'know deleted.

It's probably why the Police didn't kick up a fuss about it when it was going on
 
Hugh Grant was great on 5Live just now, totally tore into some NotW ex-hack. He also proved that you can get away with saying "bollocks" on morning radio if you say it in a charming, foppish manner.
 
Nigh on impossible to prove. They'd have to prove that the deleted messages were important to the investigation, which they can't because they're y'know deleted.

It's probably why the Police didn't kick up a fuss about it when it was going on


IANAL but surely destroying evidence is a serious crime? We know that important data was destroyed and surely it would count as evidence? It has to be because once any evidence has been destroyed it cannot be exactly defined as it has been destroyed, e.g. someone burns some clothes of a murderer. The clothes are no longer available so cannot be used for the retrieval of DNA and other evidence, but the fact that the ashes were found and that the neighbours saw then being burned = destroying evidence.

As I said IANAL so maybe this is wrong? :confused:

Just thinking aloud
 
Nigh on impossible to prove. They'd have to prove that the deleted messages were important to the investigation, which they can't because they're y'know deleted.

It's probably why the Police didn't kick up a fuss about it when it was going on

Yes but the fact that messages had been deleted surely led the police to believe that Milly was still alive? So therefore the hacking definitely misled the investigation into her disappearance.
 
doubtless they'll try, but i don't think it's in their power any more. do you think the dowler family will let it go?

I'd certainly hope not, but Kemp/Wade/Brooks is likely to "know where the bodies are buried", so I'm not sanguine about the chances of HER paying for HER crimes, IYSWIM.
 
IANAL but surely destroying evidence is a serious crime? We know that important data was destroyed and surely it would count as evidence? It has to be because once any evidence has been destroyed it cannot be exactly defined as it has been destroyed, e.g. someone burns some clothes of a murderer. The clothes are no longer available so cannot be used for the retrieval of DNA and other evidence, but the fact that the ashes were found and that the neighbours saw then being burned = destroying evidence.

As I said IANAL so maybe this is wrong? :confused:

Just thinking aloud

I ANAL?
 
Anyone know where I can find a recording of Hugh Grant's bit on Victoria Derbyshire's show? I only caught the bit after it, and it sounded good listening.
 
Back
Top Bottom