Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 29 Jan

Wednesday 29 January 2014

Summary
	The Prosecution Case Continues
		Counsel for Andy Coulson begins his cross examination of Dan Evans
		Civil Proceedings against Dan Evans for the Hacking of Kelly Hoppen
		Dan Evans Agrees to Cooperate with Police
		Evans seeks Immunity
		Evans changes Solicitor
		Mr Justice Saunders gives notice of Video Link with Sienna Miller on Friday
		Evans Cross-examined on Hacking Daniel Craig
		Evans questioned on joining News of the World
		Counsel for Andy Coulson questions Evans on Hacking

The Prosecution Case Continues
	Counsel for Andy Coulson begins his cross examination of Dan Evans
		Back at #hackingtrial after technical issues. Langdale cross examines Dan Evans on Coulson’s alleged ‘Brilliant’ expression over Miller
		Langdale for Coulson points out to Dan Evans that none of his previous statements had used ‘brilliant’
		Dan Evans says it was a true and accurate reflection of the general sense of appreciation there and then.
		Langdale “the account you’re giving now of phone hacking is not the account you’re giving now… you lied did you not?”
		Dan Evans: “Yes I lied…. I was part of a conspiracy.” Langdale goes back to the civil proceedings over hacking of Kelly Hoppen in 2009
		“You decided to deny the truth…” says Langdale. “I’m ashamed to say I did,’ replies Evans. “We’ll see how ashamed you are,’ says Langdale
		Langdale produces a bundle for Dan Evans
		Dan Evans agrees he’s waived his legal privilege “in the interests of transparency.” Langdale: “You waived to get immunity…”
	Civil Proceedings against Dan Evans for the Hacking of Kelly Hoppen
		Langdale produces documents about the civil proceedings over the hacking of Kelly Hoppen
		23/04/10 Dan Evans statement “not going to take you through all that witness statement,” Langdale over initial account of Hoppen hacking
		Dan Evans admits he gave an untrue account about hacking Kelly Hoppen through “sticky keys”.
		Evans”This was a document drawn up by News International… there was an enormous conspiracy I was drawn up in… i was toeing company line”
		Justice Saunders asks about the “sticky keys” excuse: Evans says he mentioned problems with phone to Bill Akass, appeared in witness stmt
		BREAKING: Dan Evans alleges his false statement about sticky keys and hacking Kelly Hoppen was first inserted by News Int lawyers
		Dan Evans confirms he continued with untrue story throughout 2011: “a matter of great regret”
	Dan Evans Agrees to Cooperate with Police
		Evans instructed another firm of Michael Okaine (sp) at Peters and Peters, who wrote to police indicating cooperation in April 2011
		Evans agreed he offered to make himself available to interview. Then Operation Weeting arrests in July 2011 – 6 other NOTW journalists
		19/08/11 Dan Evans is arrested: “I was waiting for them to call… it was a foregone conclusion” No comment interview under caution
		In August 2011 a prepared statement by Evans was “cobblers…” he says. “It was maintaining the lie about Kelly Hoppen.
		“I loosely repeated the Farrar’s prepared defence” says Evans of “bogus sticky keys defence”: entirely my own decision he says
		19/08/11 Langdale says Evans got a hint that the “police might be interested in what you has to say? DC Mahoney “a very aggressive interviewer
		“I think he gave that to my lawyer,” of DC’s suggestion. By November 2011, Evans admits he was interested in helping the police.
	Evans seeks Immunity
		Langdale refers to a letter from Amanda Ching to Evans’ lawyer Mr O’Kane about “the prospect of seeking immunity”
		Evan was seeking a complete immunity from prosecution in December in 2011: “In an ideal world…” Evans agrees it was his target
		Dan Evans was applying for complete immunity under section 71 of SOCPA
		“It was a quite a long period of time,” says Evans of discussions with police about immunity and co-operation.
		Langdale refers to a handwritten note of meeting with lawyers 02/12/11
		David Owen was at all these meetings – he’s former father in law who “was holding my hand in a very scary situation” says Dan Evans
		“He was telling me to listen to people sat around him,” says Dan Evans of his father in law David Owen’s presence at these meetings.
		“I’ve waived in general,” says Evans of his legal privilege: “as part of this process of transparency.”
		Memo cites discussions with DC O’Mahoney about Dan Evans co-operation with police.
		“I asked ‘what have they got on me'”? says Evans. “Yes,” says Langdale. “Probably,” agrees Evans
		Langdale refers to a journalist at NOT: Evans asks “Nick Davies”? Laughter.
		“Every journalist in News in the World was mucking around with phone tapping…” Evans had alleged. He clarifies about inquiry agents.
		Edis asks Evans to clarify the Nick Davies comment.
		More notes of the Evans discussions of ‘immunity’ cited from 2011. His lawyer O’Kane explains the legal position to Evans in a note
		Because of the false statements in the Kelly Hoppen litigation meant, alleges Langdale, meant there was a problem with getting immunity
		“That remained a big problem for you,” says Langdale. “The whole thing was a big problem… I was very frightened man…”
		“Caught between the prime minister and the tabloids, caught between high paid lawyers,” Dan Evans explains why he was frightened in 2011
		There was a discussion back in 2011 about Evan’s PC: he didn’t think there was anything on it: “I’d willingly given up my database of nos”
		“I didn’t make this note,” says Evan of legal records. He doesn’t remember saying anything about his PC.
		Langdale cites another document re a meeting between QC Jonathan Turner and Evan’s lawyer Michael O’Kane.
		Note sets out matters discussed between O’Kane and counsel Turner: which included “no guarantee of…. sufficient immunity”
		Langdale: “Immunity would only come… with information about the involvement of others” Evans: “I hadn’t been open about the conspiracy..”
		Evans agrees that the immunity at the highest level required him to expose others.
		Langdale makes a last reference to document about meeting between his solicitor and counsel:
		Evans agrees that his solicitor’s view was he should only agree to co-operate with police if he was given “comprehensive immunity”
		16/02/12 DC O’Mahoney had two conversations with Evan’s legal team.
		Langdale says of early 2012: view being expressed was “if the police had very strong case” they wouldn’t be offering immunity to Dan Evans
		Evans said “phone hacking discussed at daily editorial conferences… everyone implicated in conspiracy,” he claimed
		Langdale asks how, if he wasn’t present, how Dan Evans could know phone hacking was discussed at daily editorial conferences.
		Evans refers to previous to statements about information relayed back to him by other NOTW journalists.
		“Were you relying on one incident,” asks Langdale: Evan: “Yes”. “You’re prone to making sweeping generalisations based on one fact.” “No,”
		Evans then told his legal advisors that his “instinct was to put the prosecution to proof” in early 2012
		More discussions about getting full immunity are cited by Anthon Langdale, QC, Counsel for Coulson at the #hackingtrial
		“You’d only be a candidate for immunity if you’d involve others… at senior levels,” asks Langdale. “That is correct.”
		Langdale now refers to three days of meetings between Dan Evans and his lawyer O’Kane in February 2012.
		Those Dan Evans discussions with his lawyers related to his Sunday Mirror people “at senior levels involved in phone hacking” say Langdale
		Langdale cites a Dan Evans note about a meeting with Andy Coulson “alluding to phone hacking”
		O’Kane’s advice to Evans in 2012 then was to seek immunity to ‘police investigation’ through police co-operation
		Justice Saunders stops Evans amplification: says he’ll be given chance to say whatever he wants to say later “within the context of the case
		“I explained the scope of my evidence and what I knew” says Evans of this legal meeting when he told of Sunday Mirror and NOTW experiences
		It’s during these statements to his lawyers in Feb 2012, that Dan Evans first spoke of hacking the Sienna Miller message on Craig’s phone
		“That was something you used to involve Mr Coulson specifically,” says Langdale of Daniel Craig hack.
		Langdale says Evans account of Coulson and the ‘Craig hack’ meeting is untrue. Dan Evans says it is true.
		Langdale goes back to Aldwych recruitment meeting with Coulson: “It was very obvious to me” says Evans of phone hacking subtext.
		“The phrase phone hacking didn’t exist at the time, there wasn’t an easy way to describe it,” reiterates Evans of discussions with Coulson
		“My ultimate goal,” says Evans in 2012 notes “was immunity.” “I was very frightened,” says Evans of the process.
		14/05/12 a meeting with Evans’ solicitors and two police officers from SOCPA immunity team.
		DI Moore the lead officer of SOCPA team, Langdale says, “had expressed a view of what was necessary… for them to be considering immunity”
		DI Moore was explaining to Evans’ lawyers “what does your client have to say, does it concern his own business… or the bigger picture?”
		“Can he speak of what other people did, drivers, ethos,” then DI Moore from immunity team would be interested claims legal note from 2012
		Evans’ first legal team expressed the view “immunity for everything” was “indivisible” throughout 2012
		In 04/07/12 CPS document talks about ‘scoping and debriefing process’ for Evans: Langdale agrees could be police document
		“It was clear police and CPS were after… a full account of everything you’d done,” says Langdale of immunity discussions in 2012
		10/07/11 Dan Evans had admitted his previous statements on Kelly Hoppen was a lie, and admitted attempting to hack her voicemail
		Evans admitted to his lawyers attempting to hack the voice mails of Cilla Black and Jensen Button in early July 2012.
		Lengthy interviews over three days followed with the SOCPA immunity in July 2012, concerned Evans’ activities at Sunday Mirror and NOTW.
		Langdale refers to the lengthy documents on the interview: Evans is handed a large white ring binder
		Langdale wants to know what Evans was told “at the beginning of this process” on 11/07/12
		“OK this is voluntary process..” Langdale reads out police opening to Evans: “At any stage you can say enough’s enough….”
		Police interview to provide information for the CPS for their SOCPA process. Evans is not under caution, but warned of false statement
		Police officer, read out in transcript by Langdale, explains the difference between a section 71, 72 and 73 immunity deal.
		Section 71 is full immunity. Section 73 is “a potential reduction of sentence in return for information to police”: Langdale explains SOCPA
		“We’re not offering you a contract under any of those sections,” said police officer to Evans: “What we really want is the truth today”
		Evans statement talks of his career “I’ve always tried to uphold the ethics and morals associated with power of journalist”
		“I can pinpoint the moment I took the wrong path…. I want to be able to look my kids in the eyes and tell them I was honest.” says Evans
		“I want to roll back to that moment when I deviated and take the right path,” said Evans to police in 2012
		“You knew none of what you said could be used to prosecute you for any offence” ask Langdale. “As it was not under caution,’ agrees Evans
		Evans agrees they could use his information to “make further inquiries” but could not be “directly” used against him.
		“To be fair, I didn’t really understand the ramifications of all this,” says Evans. Langdale says “I’ll discuss later.” Evans “Can’t wait”
		Evans shown lengthy 30 page letter from his lawyers in 08/08/12 after the three day interview with SOCPA immunity team.
		The Peters and Peters letter from 2012 sets out why Evans should be entitled to full immunity under section 71 of SOCPA
		Break for fifteen minutes
		Back at the #hackingtrial after the break: continuing with cross examination of Dan Evans by Timothy Langdale QC, counsel for Coulson
		Langdale goes back to the “desirability” of full immunity for Evans in 2012. But the police came back that August wanting to know more
		Police wanted another day of interview “to clarify some points” after Evans’ first interview read by CPS lawyers
		Police wanted more “scoping” before CPS would agree to a “contract”. They wanted legal privilege waived, and Evans would give evidence
		“You were willing to do about anything to get your section 71 immunity,” says Langdale. “Yes, I wanted to move on,” says Evans
		There are emails cited between DI Moore of immunity team, and Evan’s lawyers then at Peters and Peters. “I don’t have a problem,” said Evans
		Langdale goes to a note of meeting between Evans and his lawyer O’Kane who said “they must be considering section 71”
		“Full immunity is the only thing I’m after,” Dan Evans told his lawyers in summer 2012.
		Peters and Peters solicitors wrote back to DI Moore confirming waiver of privilege. Moore set out the further info they wanted in general
		September 2012 Evans had a further lengthy interview with police about phone hacking
		“Then your prospects of getting section 71 immunity began to darken, didn’t they?” says Langdale to Evans, who agrees.
		December 2012 talk moves onto a section 73 partial reduction of sentence for pleading guilty. Evan’s solicitors “weren’t interested in 73”
		Police couldn’t use ‘scoping’ evidence: Evans explained there “wouldn’t be much difference” between sentences under 73
		“Mr O’Kane saying ‘it wasn’t necessary worth it’ pursuing a section 73” Langdale reads. Dan Evans said “I agree ” in 2012
		“One more try,” is how Langdale ‘paraphrases’ O’Kane’s last approach to CPS. “So it doesn’t say one more approach,” quips Evans
		“That attempt having failed… 11th December,” says Langdale, Dan Evans had one more conference with lawyers and father in law
		Legal advice from O’Kane to Evans at time says police “may make a strategic decision not to prosecute…. low level.” Evans wasn’t there.
		“Did you express the view… ‘no point in writing to them, really pisses me off'” asks Langdale. “Sounds like the kind of thing I’d say”
		21/12/12 Final attempt from Peters and Peters to get Greg McGill at CPS to “revisit” offer of section 73 rather than full immunity 73
		O’Kane complains the police had done more than a scoping exercise, and that it had been a full interview in December 2012
		A statement from McGill at CPS says the section 71 full immunity is not on offer as it used “only in the most exceptional cases” 04/01/13
		“He would be extremely vulnerable to the charge that he had made up evidence,’ if offered a section 71 full immunity wrote CPS in Jan 2013
		08/01/13 “Our client’s position remains the same… section 73 not acceptable” writes Dan Evans lawyers to CPS.
		“What had happened to your desire to start a clean slate, and look your children in the eye?” asks Langdale of Evans’ position in Jan 2013
		“You’re taking advice from the lawyers, who say section 73 only desirable outcome… “
		“To be frank I’d had enough of being used by all the people in this particular game… Recalcitrance got the better of me…” says Evans
		“I didn’t want to know anymore” Evans explains of withdrawing from cooperation with police. But he was further arrested on false statements
		“Out of the frying pan and into the fire,” says Langdale. Evans agrees. His SOCPA interviews now available for civil proceedings March 13
	Evans changes Solicitor
		At this point Evans changed solicitors: Mr Colin Nott: “I received new guidance” says Evans. Advised to go for a section 73 agreement
		Attendance note shown by Langdale between Colin Nott and DCI McDonald about Dan Evans after further interviews under caution
		Police officer said they CPS wouldn’t consider reapplication for 73, except that the ‘had been an misunderstanding’:
		“Had there been a misunderstanding,” asks Langdale about CPS deal. “I believe there had,” says Dan Evans at #hackingtrial
		“He was in uncharted territory… the terms of SOCPA were alien to him… told to consider nothing but immunity” writes Evans new lawyer
		New solicitor approaches CPS to renew the section 73 deal on the basis he’s already been open and available, and just took advice
		“If there are questions appropriate to this letter, they ought to be asked,” says Justice Saunders to Langdale.
		Evans confirms to Langdale he was aware this letter had been sent
		“Plain as a pikestaff… other options do not appear to be discussed by P&P… dissatisfaction and concern about the advice” writes NOTT
		Langdale says to Evans that letter was wrong – he had discussions about options about 73. He had a choice.
		“You decided not to take it fully informed,” says Langdale. Dan Evans says section 73 offer “never shown details of” relayed to me verbally
		“Clearly there was an alternative… but there wasn’t an acceptable alternative given the advice I’d been given,” says Evans of section 71
		Langdale shows Evans two emails: from O’Kane to him Dec 13 with attachment of document from CPS not offering section 71
		“I disagree with most the judgements in… particularly that immunity would make you a worthless witness,” writes O’Kane to Evans Dec 12
		18 mins later Evans replies to O’Kane: “We should waste no more time with this, since there’s no stomach to take the investigation forward.
		“I was in a situation where… I was keen to help, and this felt like a rebuttal. It didn’t feel like an alternative,” says Evans of O’Kane
		“Kind of indicative of you blaming others for the circumstances on others.” says Langdale.
		Evans disagrees. It was only later made clear to him section 73 immunity only given when lives are at stake or national security
		Evans says: “I was never given an opportunity to see it…” of section 73 offer. “Step back” says Langdale. Mr Edis intervenes.
		Edis says there’s no evidence the CPS document was attached.
		Langdale says second page of document shows CPS attachment.
		“You’re right. I did reject the offer. I was taking the advice given to me in this letter.” says Evans.
		“Having said it was section 71 or nothing I felt I had no other choice.. I chose to follow his advice consistently given to me” says Evans.
		Evans is given another large ring binder of evidence by Timothy Langdale, QC, counsel for Coulson
		“Agreement with co-operating defendant” section 73 agreement to be signed b Alison Leavitt is shown to Dan Evans, dated 29/08/13
		Langdale reads out the agreement which covers operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta, and the ‘debriefing’ process under SOCPA caution
		The SOCPA deal with Evans outlines a guilty plea and admission under caution for false statements over Kelly Hoppen
		As a result of that SOCPA deal Dan Evans made three statements to the police. Dan Evans is now shown a plan of NOTW
		The locations of editor and deputy editor, back bench, middle bench, news, pictures and features dept at NOTW in 2003-06 pointed out
		Langdale points out where Dan Evans worked and the small glass features office – a more general space.
		Justice Saunders asks Dan Evans to mark out the office plan. Break for lunch.
		Back at the #hackingtrial continuing with the cross examination of Dan Evans, former NOTW journalist, by Langdale for Coulson
	Mr Justice Saunders gives notice of Video Link with Sienna Miller on Friday
		Saunders explains there’s a video link with Sienna Miller on Friday which means court will last to 5pm
		Edis has checked the relevant outbox of Peters and Peters email box, the email from Jan 13 it did attach 04/01/13 CPS letter
	Evans Cross-examined on Hacking Daniel Craig
		Langdale asks Evans about events leading up to an including the Sienna Miller message left on Daniel Craig‘s phone
		Evans says Sunday or Monday was the occasion of the hacking. The message was left on Craig’s phone on the Saturday.
		That Friday Evans had claimed he received a bullying email telling him to get better stories. Went to work on the Tuesday with Miller story
		Langdale goes over evidence Evans played tape to Coulson and other NOTW employees on that Tuesday.
		Langdale goes through timeline: doorstepped Craig on 30th. No NOTW story on 2nd of October. Appeared 9th of October.
		Evans concedes he must have told Coulson of Miller voicemail on Tuesday 27th September 2005
		The jury is shown some emails (not involving him) from other NOTW staff on “strong sources” on Jude Law story otherwise “actionable”
		These emails are from February 2005 – lots of coverage of Jude Law and Sienna Miller before Daniel Craig involved in September.
		More emails read out by Langdale: subject “Sienna” by other NOTW journalists, and ‘on the face of it” talking with Miller.
		“It may look from the outside,” says Evans of Miller quote about loving Law. “Hostage to fortune for when cheating starts” a journo emails
		Langdale cites NOTW article quoting Sienna Miller saying how Jude Law has been through hell “but I still love him.”
	Evans questioned on joining News of the World
		Langdale asks Dan Evans “why it was you left the Sunday Mirror?” at the #hackingtrial
		Langdale goes back to one of Dan Evans’ earlier witness statements for the jury to follow as he reads out.
		“I’d cut my teeth there as an undercover reporter, and was no longer able to pursue public interest stories,” said Evans
		Evan’s statements talks about the ‘dark arts’ and how he “was drinking too much, using drugs, conflicted inside, and generally unhappy”
		“I got a few extra thousand a year at the S Mirror…. but was feeling compromised personally and professionally,” said Evans in statement
		Evans After NOTW meeting: “Things didn’t improve at S Mirror… I was still tasked with hacking…. instructions I increasingly resented”
		Evans said the drugs and drinks continued at NOTW, and says he was using cocaine every couple of weeks.
		Evans on self medicating: “When people are unhappy and depressed… for me it was initial drink after work, and then during afternoon.”
		“Having an enormous secret and delving illegally into the lives of people who didn’t deserve it made me unhappy,” says Evans of drugs
		Of moving to NOTW, Evans said the undercover offer was attractive to him, the phone hacking attractive to NOTW. “I was extremely ambitious”
		“He didn’t want me there entirely as a hacker… I wanted to start afresh,” says Evans of NOTW move. “I was a young guy. Made mistakes”
		The NOTW wasn’t “interested in what went on before…. I didn’t tell him. A lot of stuff I haven’t been honest about till I started therapy”
		“Hacking was the hook…. that was clearly what Andy was interested in,” says Evans.
		“You’ve never said that before,” says Langdale: “The only reason you were wanted was as a hacker.” Evans stands by his statement
		“According to you, from day one (NOTW) wanted you to get on with hacking,” Langdale asks. Evans confirms.
		“Didn’t you say from day one… you didn’t want to carry on with hacking?” asks Langdale. “Getting monstered by execs not my idea of fun”
		“I don’t full verbatim conversations that we had,” Evans answers. Saunders asks Langdale to move on – you’ve made your point
		Langdale: “The reason you didn’t succeed at NOTW because you were a failing journalist…” Evans: “I had a difficult relationship with x”
	Counsel for Andy Coulson questions Evans on Hacking
		Langdale says Evans led the hacking: “I was under a lot of duress… hard to understand pressure human beings put under in that job”
		Dan Evans says of contact list handed to him by another NOTW journo for hacking – he hacked relatively few
		Langdale then wants to go through a document, but will come to it with hard copies.
		Hard copies instantly handed to Evans and jury. Saunders jokes “We would have finished the trial if things had appeared as quickly as that”
		This is 05/01/05 email of 26 pages of contact lists and numbers from NOTW employees. Langdale asks where the instruction to hack was.
		“Is this the sort of material available to others in features department.” asks Langdale of 26 page doc. “No, absolutely not,” says Evan.
		Evans is cross examined about his notations about ‘possible hacks’ – one name he remembered as a TV exec. He’s asked Geoff Brazen
		Langdale goes through more names on 26 page list – Max Clifford – “rather a silly person to start hacking,” asks Langdale.
		“I have thought – but I don’t recall,” about whether he was instructed to hack Max Clifford, and doesn’t think he succeeded.
		Evans has noted an unsuccessful attempt to hack Calum Best.
		Very few markings until attempted hack on Sven Goran Eriksson on the 26 page alleged NOTW target list given to Daniel Evans in 2005
		“What happened to the list… he gave you?” ask Langdale. “It sat in my inbox….” says Evans.
		Dan Evans says “the general tenor of conversation… was of complete understanding of the material I had.”
		Dan Evans says he can’t pin down exact dates of conversations: “I’m here to help”: he thinks other NOTW would have been aware.
		Dan Evans said he kept his list of hacking victims “In my back pocket”
		Of investigations unit Evans was promised: NOTW journo “made his ideas and wishes plain by types of stories… he wanted quick turnaround”
		Evans realised “pretty quickly’ promised investigations unit wasn’t happening. He stayed because didn’t want to leave with tail between legs
		Evans says he’d become a father, his confidence was knocked, no offers elsewhere. His ‘pride’ stopped him looking elsewhere.
		“There was nothing to stop you looking elsewhere,” says Langdale. “There was nothing to stop me jumping off a bridge,” replies Evans
		Langdale asks why, if it was an ‘open secret’, euphemisms were used to discuss phone hacking. “Lip service was paid,” says Evans
		“Why would you need private space to hack phones?” asks Langdale. “It was an illegal activity… Fleet Street is a leaky space.”
		Langdale asks if Evans was “ducking and diving” to phone hack in open plan NOTW office: 3 or 4 phones on his desk.
		“What was the point of doing that if everyone knew what you were doing of ducking and diving” asks Langdale. “Maybe I was embarassed”
		“I wasn’t particularly hiding it from anybody… other reporters would ask me to do things…. the office cat knew,” says Evans
		Evans names three other NOTW journalists who knew what he was doing.
		“It would be very easy for anyone else…. to do the same thing,” Evans agrees with Langdale. “Did you see other people… hacking.” “No.”
		“I didn’t broadcast it, that would have been crass, it was an open secret. Everyone knew. I can’t change the facts” says Evans
		Evans says he’s tired. Saunders offers break in five minutes.
		Evans then explains his methodology – initially double tap method with two mobile phones.
		“A lot more risky,” says Evans of using the hub phone. He took risk because of restriction on expenses, leaving the office.
		“We shouldn’t be doing this but….” Evans alleges of other NOTW journalist: “Work was a never ending stream of grief…”
		“Andy Coulson knew exactly what was going on under his watch,” Dan Evans says in reply to his counsel.
		Dan Evans explains the “practical reason” at TMS made getting pay as go phones for hacking problematic.
		“What sense in that warped world…” Stop! says Saunders and re-asks the question about re-starting phone hacking.
		Langdale returns to getting pay as you go phones and top-ups in Dan Evans’ original hacking methodology.
		Jury are shown again the NOTW expenses form seen two days ago, and the invoice for mobile phones.
		Langdale asks about fake “Pete Beale” put in expenses claim: “I didn’t want to put my own name down for dodgy activities.. I flapped a bit”
		“I definitely had some other pay as you go phones,” says Evans. `Break for 15 minutes.
		Langdale asks about the other pair of pay as you go phones Evans bought. He did buy another handset for ‘regular investigations’
		Langdale goes through the advantages of pay as you go phones for phone hacking, and asks Evans why he dropped the 2005 phones.
		Evans says he ceased using those pay as you go phones because of expenses. Complains of “controlling…. bullying” other NOTW staff
		“Why didn’t you tell him?” asks Langdale of using landlines: “no top ups, forking out my own money… it was a lazy way of doing it”
		Evans claims there was “a slightly more blasé way of doing things at NOTW”: Langdale goes through Evans’s other NI phones.
		Evans barely used Nokia Brick – the “silver Nokia” was his own, with his work phone chip put in it. At “Mirror didn’t supply company phone”
		Evans was given another black Nokia in 2007, which he used in 2009 to hack Hoppen. Got damaged in a pub and so “sticky keys”
		After 2009 Evans got a Blackberry. He is asked about another phone – his personal phone.
		Dan Evans explains how he’s kept one personal for over ten years.
		Langdale, counsel for Coulson, goes back over the double tap method and it’s dangers “someone would realise they were hacked.”
		“Blocking the line with the first call, so second call would go into voice mail. The hope that the first call would not be answered.” 2 tap
		Langdale points to the second danger of double tap phone hacking – that a listened voicemail message would go to saved.
		Evans explains that he also had a direct dial number for Daniel Craig, rather than double tap. For the Orange system wasn’t needed either
		“I probably broke them and binned them,” says Evans of pay as you go. “When I was at Sunday Mirror I’d sling them in the river.”
		“How many phones did you chuck in the river?” asks Langdale. “Maybe ten..” says Evans. Police divers have searched the river jury told
		Evans says he never used his personal number because I knew “how easy it was to spin a number and get personal details.”
		Langdale then asks why he used his personal number to hack “it was extreme stupidity… but when dealing with hit men..”
		“When I was dealing with serious investigations, people who wouldn’t go to a lawyer, but would pull you off a street in a white van”
		“How many hit men were you investigating at NOTW,” asks Langdale. “One” says Evans.
		Langdale ask Evans to “think carefully” about other phones. “If you can jog my memory,” says Evans.
		Langdale asks about ELI/TDI inquiry agents used by Evans.
		Evans says these inquiry agents could “spin mobiles” – turning number into name and address, or vice versa.
		Dan Evans says he’s never heard this called “turning’ a phone. Saunders says “this is quite important”
		Only one NOTW employee called phone hacking “special checks” says Evans.
		Langdale produces another ring bound file and goes to emails on 22/07/05 from NOTW employee to various including Andy Coulson
		The email is about Sienna “crisis talks” with Jude Law and her disappearance from Dorchester, watched Law’s place.
		Email talks about “special checks” Dan Evans has made on Kelly Hoppen and her phone.
		Evans remembers Miller rang Kelly Hoppen upset: he can’t remember great level of detail “she was distraught”
		Langdale claims these “special checks” were not phone hacking. “I certainly hacked her phone,” says Evans.
		Langdale goes back to Evans 4th statement in civil proceedings May 2011.
		The fourth witness statement refers back to second statement and “DE Hoppen doc” about an electoral name check using CAMEO system
		Langdale re-reads Dan Evans statement about the Craig/Miller affair which details watching the house, personal info checks etc.
		“The Jude Law Sienna Miller affair was the only show in town, clearly the lead for all the tabloid press,” says Evans 2011 statement
		Langdale asks about something Dan Evans said about other “sources’ within Kelly Hoppen’s circle: “that wasn’t true.. source was her phone”
		Langdale introduces a new call schedule for “Coulson Jury Bundle Number One” – he says they’ve seen before. Edis says they haven’t.
		The schedule shows a year of Evans hacking Kelly Hoppen’s phone 2005 to 2006 and the failed hacks of 2009
		Evans says he’d need more call data to establish these Kelly Hoppen hacks were a “double tap”. Generally use first system. Sometimes direct
		Call data billing shows two 15/07/05 hacks on Kelly Hoppen: “Could have picked up voicemail,” says Evan.
		Langdale says the call is 1.30 mins too short to a call in tears: how did Evans know it was Miller: “Because of the number she was calling”
		“I called up the number the day after she left, listened to a 1.30 minute message,” says Evans.
		“Must have been something you were doing that justifies special checks,” says Langdale. “Why?”
		“There were other sources of information for this story,” says Langdale of Sienna Miller in tears. “What were they?” asks Evans.
		“This isn’t a special check,” says Evans of getting address. “Don’t worry Mr Evans, I used the word ‘check'”
		Break till tomorrow.

Note: All the defendants deny all the charges. The trial continues.

Related Articles
Peter Jukes interviewed by Jason McCrossan on 106.9 SFM
Those Missing Rebekah Brooks Devices
What was in Charlie Brooks’ Brown Bag: ‘I’ll sue!’
Livetweeting the Hacking Trial till the Verdict
The Pizzagate Tapes

Previous Posts
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 24 Jan
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 27 Jan
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 28 Jan

Links: The Trial So Far | Full Trial Summary | Indexed Evidence | Breaking News