Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 7 May

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

Wednesday 7 May 2014

Summary
	Justice Saunders explains the proceedings for the day
		Medical Reports expected on Clive Goodman
	The Prosecution Present Admissions for Rebekah Brooks
		Further evidence on Rebekah Brooks
	The Prosecution Closing Statement Begins
		Anthony Edis QC introduces his Closing Statement
		The Prosecution Case on Count 1
		The Prosecution Case on Count 5
		The Prosecution Case on Count 7
		The Prosecution goes over the chronology of Phone Hacking
		Glen Mulcaire’s Payments
		The Recruitment of Dan Evans
		Goodman’s Arrest
		The Events leading to the Closure of the News of the World
		Archived Boxes
		Max Clifford’s Settlement and Email deletion

Justice Saunders explains the proceedings for the day
	Medical Reports expected on Clive Goodman
		Back at the #hackingtrial after several breaks for legal argument and case management
		Justice Saunders apologises to jurors for delay – mainly because things had to be typed up. Admissions first, and then speeches.
		Justice Saunders explains to the jury he hasn’t had detailed medical reports on Clive Goodman, and won’t till Friday.
		The jury won’t have to attend on Friday while Goodman is considered.
		Saunder explains the prosecution will commence its closing speech today and tomorrow.
		Saunders says the closing speeches “will be a lot more exciting than my directions” but asks jury to indicate if they are getting tired.
The Prosecution Present Admissions for Rebekah Brooks
	Further evidence on Rebekah Brooks
		Bryant Heron reads out further admissions. Brooks defence bundles are true documents.
		Admissions says that Brooks’ Blackberry was seized by police on 17/07/11 – some was legally privileged to her or NI.
		Disk CP7 from Brooks’ blackberry has 8,000 emails from June July 2011, and hundreds of texts from same period
		The texts recovered include the ones between Brooks and Tony Blair: other individuals around the time of her arrest
		Jury are shown a table of Brooks’ phone texts that goes on for several pages
		A five page schedule shows the emails and texts to her mother in July 2011
		Miskiw and Mulcaire were in extensive contact in 2006
		Fingerprints of Thurlbeck were found on microcassettes recovered from NI safe.
		Members of the Royal Household were not asked to provide fingerprints.
		On Dan Evans and Daniel Craig: there is no record of Craig’s DDMs
		On Dan Evans palm pilot was a Dec 2005 number for Sienna Miller
		Police divers searched the area around Canary Wharf where Dan Evans claimed he threw his phones
		An Apple Ipad was received by Brooks team on 17/02/14 – then named ‘Julie’s iPad’ – her new PA
		The same iPad by MAC number is listed on missing devices as a snapshot from the Jubilee Barn router
		This was formerly known as Rebekah’s iPad – not on NI asset lists. Discovered by police on application to Apple registered 07/04/11
		The iPad has been forensically analysed – but not ‘jail breaked’. No data recovered earlier than 27/09/12
		Two email accounts were found on the iPad: for Brooks in 2012-13 and her PA
		An email chain between Annette Witheridge email and police officer in 2012 wrongly marked this “not disclosable”
		Laidlaw notices a typo and another error: Brooks 8000 emails recovered by police cover period from 30/05/11 to 17/07/12
		Saunders explains there’s a transcriber in the witness box.
The Prosecution Closing Statement Begins
	Anthony Edis QC introduces his Closing Statement
		Edis starts his closing speech at the #hackingtrial
		He says he won’t spend the four days he took on his opening.
		“This is not just a phone hacking trial” says Edis: there are other “serious criminal offences”
		But first he’ll look at the phone hacking allegations in general terms: “Let’s just think about phone hacking at NOTW”
		“Three very senior executives at NOTW have pleaded guilty to phone hacking…. really significant figures” says Edis.
		Edis speaks of another NOTW journalist who cannot be reported for legal reasons.
		Edis talks about the length of the conspiracy from 2000 to 8th August 2006 “a very long time” he says
		“The three people you are trying are very senior people… whose job it was to work hand in glove” says Edis of Brooks, Coulson, Kuttner.
		“These senior executives were phone hacking” says Edis of desk editors “a rotten state of affairs at NOTW”
		“You have to decide whether these senior figures knew of the rotten state of affairs that permeated that organisation” says Edis
		“In the end because of their efforts one of the oldest newsapapers went out of business, a catastrophe” says Edis of defendants.
		“Were they incompetent… did they not notice?” asks Edis. He then turns to character witnesses for Brooks, Kuttner, Coulson.
		“None of them said… this person is a useless manager” says Edis of defendants character witnesses.
		Edis uses the analogy of a murder where three people are found in the same house as a dead body, but just said “we’re in the kitchen”
		“The big picture is that. This is not an enormous organisation… At the top of the pyramid there are not that many people” says Edis.
		Edis speaks of daily editorial conferences “they were working as a team…. that insight… is a very good place to start when you assess”
		Edis explains the nature of his closing speech: he’s not going to cover every point made over the last 6 months or every document.
		“I’m going to be quite selective” says Edis: though defence might say “oh he never mentioned” and he won’t be able to address all theirs.
		“You might have to find that answer yourself without any help from me” says Edis of additional points. He then explains the timetable.
		“Two weeks for closing speeche… sounds horrific… I’ve been given two court days” explains Edis “I’m going to stick to that”
		Edis explains that they still don’t know what’s going to happen to Clive Goodman, so the chronology might be a bit broken.
		Edis is going to make some general points – a brief chronology relying on documents – and then go to 2009-11.
		“The actions of several people in 2009-11 is quite revealing of their state of mind” says Edis.
		Edis will then turn to Count 5 “number one military contact… all those stories, all that money” Then he’ll go back to Count 1 till end 04
		Edis explains he will break off in early 2005 when Goodman gets involved in phone hacking – and move straight to arrest and sentencing
		“Plain english” is key says Edis of “business emails” – “people generally mean what they say”
		Edis talks of “palace cops” in Goodman email: “plain english is a good guide… what does it mean to us?”
		“Why would anyone write this if they mean something else” says Edis. “Plain English”
		Another concept Edis introduces “value for money… was Mulcaire value for money… what did he produce?”
		From words Edis moves to numbers.
	The Prosecution Case on Count 1
		Edis talks of 2005 and 2006 hacking of Young Royals investigated by Operation Carytid which resulted in telephone data for a period of time
		“It’s like someone has turned the light on, we know what’s going on with Mulcaire and NI hub numbers” says Edis
		“It was happening then, you have to work out when it started” says Edis of phone records.
		Edis talks about the Milly Dowler moment being another moment “light was turned on” in 2002, and Blunkett in 2004 where no records exist.
		Edis talks about what these snapshots of phone hacking revealed in billing data over three phones Mulcaire, private wire, hub phone at NOTW
		These two periods in 2005, over about 6 months, billing records reveal that Mulcaire 1,450 UVN hacks alone to 88 numbers.
		Edis “That means that over 191 days 1,450 phone hacking calls were made to a total number of victims 132… that’s when the lights on”
		Edis gives a snapshot of NI direct line: “4.417 calls to UVN number… 135 victims… nine hacks a day… and awful lot” says Edis.
		“Was it a position as Daniel Evans said, the office cat knew… who knew? How could anybody not know” says Edis.
		Edis talks of DC Guest’s review of Mulcaire’s documents
		Guest summarised: “There is some evidence from year 2000 that Mulcaire was doing other things than phone related inquiries.”
		There’s no evidence of traditional PI activity in all of Mulcaire’s notes.
		From December 2001 Mulcaire was on a retainer: “What was he retained to do?…. was it a random decision an incompetent editor might take”
		“Nobody has been able to explain to us what that was” says Edis of Mulcaire’s “bumper contract” and its renewal.
		Edis says that Mulcaire appeared on budget documents every year
		Edis says it’s pretty clear from evidence what Mulcaire was doing.
		Edis says “this isn’t an attack on freedom of the press… or any tabloid press… we accept a free press is essential part of protection…
		“The ultimate protection of society is the rule of law” says Edis: “Who polices the journalists? Not Mrs Brooks it seems”
		“It is the function of the criminal justice system to enforce the law when the law is broken” says Edis.
		Edis mentions these concepts because “other people have”: he tells the jury all they have to do is consider the evidence.
		“If you’re sure – guilty. If not sure – not guilty” says Edis of the specific charges the jury have to consider.
		Edis talks of motives: “young, talented, ambitions, clever, charming people have been placed in a position of great power”
		“Ambition, lack of experience perhaps, in the excitement of the chase, they thought it didn’t matter… Is that what happened?” says Edis
		“First thing they did” says Edis of Brooks and Coulson “was to get Greg back and set up the investigations unit”
		“What was it of Greg they wanted” asks Edis. He dismisses the idea of saving money:”They gave him specific post with specific function”
		Edis says Greg Miskiw “had at his service… Glenn Mulcaire”
		“The new young thrusting ambitious team” ask Edis “needing the old hand. Is that what happened?”
		“You’re dealing with an unusual collection of people on trial here at the Old Bailey” says Edis of defendant.
		“Certainly an unusual group of suspected criminals, unusually talented, unusually articulate” says Edis of defendants.
		“These are people who held significant jobs… you don’t get those jobs without decisiveness, toughness and ability” says Edis of defendants
		“These are gifted people” says Edis. “We have suggested Mrs Brooks was a carefully scripted and choreographed performance”
		Edis few people would have sustained that. “It might be harder to see behind the mask… there has been quite an amount of choreography”
		“You care to be careful about clever little remarks about MI5/MFI… Milibands… if these people wanted to skin you alive they are capable.
		Edis sums up his version of Brooks defence – didn’t know about phone hacking, military contacts or what Charlie and Cheryl were doing
		Edis momentarily confuses Coulson and Kuttner and is corrected by Justice Saunders
		Edis summarises Kuttner’s case: “I can’t remember anything at all.. but I’m a decent chap… that’s essentially his case”
		Edis goes Mulcaire payment and defence claims “100k wasn’t very much”
		“It”s equivalent to what Clive Goodman was paid” says Edis of Mulcaire: “and when he wasn’t performing they certainly let him know”
		Edis holds up a document for all the NOTW payments for April 2002.
		Edis says this document of fixed costs would not concern an editor. Kuttner had a process analysing retainers – only 27 items.
		CORRECTION: Edis said the defendants could “spin you a lie” not “skin you alive” – must get ears de-waxed!
		Edis talks about Editors focusing on the “bit of the budget you could affect… that would certainly cover £100k” paid to Mulcaire.
		Edis summarises the counts: 1 Phone Hacking – each of the defendants could put a stop to it.
		If they knew and didn’t stop “did they agree” to let it go on says Edis. “It’s about whether they knew”
		“If you can prove that they’re guilty” Edis says of knowledge of phone hacking and allowing it to continue.
	The Prosecution Case on Count 5
		Edis talks of Count 5 and another “conspiracy… an agreement… the agreement is the crime”
		Edis says his case is Brooks agreed with NOTW journalist to pay military source in cash if story made the paper.
		“There was no restriction in this agreement” says Edis. “The idea was she brought all valuable stories… if got in paper she got paid”
		“This would include sources she got through her official duties” says Edis of Jordan Barber.
		“There was no limitation at all on this agreement… that the public interest had anything to do with this” says Edis.
		Edis: “There’s a layman’s term for this ‘corruption”: a public official is not to stuff there pockets with cash because of what they know”
		Count 6 boils “down to a matter of fact…. were Rebekah’s notebooks in those boxes… comes down to plain English”
		“There is no way Mrs Carter is going to do something with Mrs Brooks’ property, that day of all days in her career” says Edis.
		Edis: “If those are her notebooks, they’ve worked together. If they’re just cuttings – old shit to coin a phrase – they haven’t”
	The Prosecution Case on Count 7
		Edis talks of Count 7 and removing bags “was this a conception that occurred at this moment… will you take my car to London?”
		Edis suggests that Hanna driving Charlie Brooks car wasn’t spur of the moment.
		“This is nothing to do with porn or book ideas… they were in London” says Edis of Oxfordshire.
		“Why was computer equipment sourced from News International going to News International” asks Edis.
		“The only point of this was a plan to conceal material” says Edis. “Just because it was successful doesn’t mean it’s not a crime”
		Edis says “at least up to a point” both Hanna and C Brooks “have admitted they were hiding stuff from police…. a high risk strategy”
		Edis says this day all the world’s media were watching Brooks: the material could have been damaging to Brooks or the company.
		“There’s nothing more covert than Mr Jorsling” returning the bags. “Why did he do that? Did he want to get arrested?”
		“Why would anyone be doing this unless the person who benefitted most… wanted it to happen” says Edis of Count 7
		Break till 14.10
	The Prosecution goes over the chronology of Phone Hacking
		Edis continues with closing speech – now onto a chronological timeline with 1999 – some activity from Miskiw and Mulcaire from notes.
		Edis says Mulcaire working for NOTW in some capacity and Thurlbeck awaiting trial for allegations of paying police officers.
		“The NOTW news desk knew what trouble they could get into through paying public officials” says Edis of Thurlbeck trial.
		“There’s no implied criticism of using Thurlbeck after his acquittal” says Edis – but NOTW knew paying officials was a crime.
		Edis adduces documents from 2000 which tell you what Mulcaire was doing: July 2000 asked to get addresses of convicted paedophiles for NOTW
		Edis cites fifteen asterisked names from Mulcaire’s notes. “He’s clearly working for a number of journalists”
		“Two points: his existence doesn’t seem much of a secret” says Edis of Mulcaire: “work directly connected with personal project of Brooks”
		“This is him doing work of your agenda” Edis says of Mulcaire’s tracking of convicted paedophiles for Brooks.
	Glen Mulcaire’s Payments
		Edis refers to “great long list” of payments to Mulcaire: and one on 01/08/00 – “linx paedo 15 service £1,275”
		“You can see what he’s doing – he’s rendering an invoice for accounts… that’s not what Mulcaire did after Sept 2001” says Edis.
		2000 was the year Thurlbeck was acquitted: his salary was £60k, and Milner not happy about a pay increase.
		“Why was it necessary to hide, perhaps from Mr Milner, the true amount being paid to Mr Mulcaire” says Edis.
		Edis shows the jury a screen of the documents from 2000 – with Brooks arguing and winning the case for Thurlbeck’s salary increase.
		29/09/00 Brooks talks about other promotions as well as Thurlbeck moving to ‘investigations department’ “What’s he going there for?”
		“She was aware of difficulties of budget” says Edis of Brooks email in Sept 2000.
		Backdated to October 2000 is an invoice for “binology” and “paedo” from Mulcaire.
		Edis refers to Benji the Binman in comparison to Mulcaire: “In year of 2000 some indication there is work apart from phone related work”
		Edis talks about 2001, and “budget problems” which Brooks had inherited. “It went way over…. income down, and expenses up”
		Brooks has to accept 2000-01 budget, but “she’s responsible for managing it”
		Edis cites the 25/01/01 doc “the sole surviving document we have seen of budgeting” while Brooks was editor.
		In Jan 2001 email Steve Mears writes “we need details of new retainers, and increases in existing retainers… that’s the context” says Edis
		Edis points out in this “chronological survey” communication between Brooks and Kuttner: “exceptional expenditure” to be approved by editor
		“Mr Kuttner was quite intrusive with everybody” says Edis of budgets. He had monthly meeting with desk heads and 3 month meeting with Editor
		“The documents do not survive” says Edis of detailed budget docs 2001-02 “that was the year Mulcaire gets his contract”
		Edis goes to the large blue timeline document, and takes the jury to a specific tab.
		“Two boxes to look at… on McCarthy/Mills timeline….” Miskiw tasks Mulcaire for Heather Mills. No evidence either way of phone hack.
		“That was the summer of 2001… in June July 2002…. there is tasking of Mulcaire… what he was asked to do we don’t know” says Edis
		“Mr Mulcaire must have been doing something right that year to justify the contract” says Edis of 2001. Sophie Wessex story was in April
		Edis cites Brooks email to Miskiw, cc’ed to Coulson and Kuttner “we have to learn some lessons from Sophie”
		“All our entrapment and subterfuge has to be justified…. Sophie 110 % justified” wrote Brooks. Edis “We never learned what happened there”
		“Why are we warning… Greg in particular… about unlawfulness” asks Edis.
		13/06/01 “Miskiw committed the paper to paying £7.5 for ‘Emily and Alex’ (i.e. Bulger murderers)
		“That’s the editor and the managing editor taking an interest in a story directly provided by Mulcaire” says Edis.
		“She’s clearly concerned about its provenance” says Edis. “Paid £7k for Bulger but everyone had it” she wrote to Kuttner.
		“It’s inconceivable they could have had this discussion without finding out who it is” says Edis of Mulcaire’s involvement in Bulger story
		Edis suggests that the Muclaire retainer that was put in place a few weeks later makes sense.
		“There must have been a discussion between Brooks and Kuttner when this man was given a retainer” says Edis. “Unrealistic anything else”
		In August 2001 Mulcaire is tasked to target Sadie Frost.
		“The retainer contract starts in September” says Edis of Mulcaire £92k contract: “describes a research and information service”
		“That’s probably not surveillance” says Edis. “Research and information doesn’t tell you what they’re paying all that money for”
		Edis cites a note from an NI lawyer: “Euro record…. Sept 1…. 12 mths… 92k… confidentiality… no services to other UK media”
		Edis says this means NI lawyer was asked to draw up Mulcaire’s contract – this NI lawyer regularly in contact with the editor.
		Edis says of Mulcaire contract “this wasn’t just printed out by news desk editor… it went to the lawyer”
		Edis cites later 2006 document in which NI lawyer deals with Goodman/Mulcaire prosecution papers.
		Legal notes from 2006 says “research… or what ever neutral term we might use”
		Legal note says Muclaire contract described as “entirely safe doc” by lawyer because they knew they were concealing a crime.
		Edis turns to budget getting tighter in autumn 2001 – therefore Mulcaire contract “would have been quite a lot of money”
		“That is a decision that must have been taken by editor” says Edis: because the budget was Brooks’ personal responsibility in 2001.
		Edis moves onto 2002 – he’s not going to do Milly Dowler now – but also includes 2002 budgeting season – first Brooks is responsible for.
		“She’s going to see Les Hinton or Rupert Murdoch… she had a problem she had to put right, and she did… not achieved by incompetence”
		These “are documents we don’t have” of that Budget. Edis says Mulcaire must have appeared in 2002 budget documents.
		“The astrologer got more than Mulcaire” says Edis: But few did. “Brooks must have known about and approved” Mulcaire payment.
		“Why was it Mr Mulcaire’s contract wasn’t brought to an end…. it’s terminable…” says Edis
		“Her case is she never heard of Mulcaire” says Edis of Brooks “what was it Mulcaire produced for the paper over those 6/7 months?”
		Edis says “if it’s a defence left back we look back to his column to see if it’s any good” and suggests Brooks would have done with Mulcaire
		The Milly Dowler hacking takes place during this 2002 budget process.
		Edis says there are 2002 taskings for Mulcaire “for suspected paedophiles… that’s Mrs Brooks agenda” Macca ring story that summer
		“In August 2002” Edis cites Sweet’s article on Mulcaire – 18/08/02 “Mr Sweet that his page… least important page but most of that page”
		“The real story is the old club won with the help of Trigger” says Edis of Mulcaire story.
		“Actually it isn’t War and Peace” says Edis of NOTW “You might have thought the editors… might at least read the paper”
		“It wasn’t a secret” says Edis of Mulcaire: “everyone else knew… even if they didn’t see. It suggests.. something not needed to be hidden”
		Edis then turns to Mulcaire’s investigation to ‘Soham Cops’ in 2002
		September 2002 – NOTW Front Page 08/09/02 story about Ian Huntley
		“It was a very big, very tragic case… they have a story Huntley is going to kill himself” says Edis of NOTW
		Edis then turns to Mulcaire’s tasking by Thurlbeck to investigate Soham cops 13/09/02
		“Have we managed to get into that website” writes Brooks of Soham Cops investigations around the same. Edis calls this ‘hacking’
		“She is directly engaged in the investigation of these Soham cops on 13/09 with Neville, and he’s tasking Mulcaire” says Edis.
		Edis cites August 2002 Muclaire taskings of Abi Titmuss and Sven Goran Eriksson, Lord Archer, Andy Gilchrist in Nov/December.
		Edis says Gilchrist is hacked by Mulcaire – just a few weeks later Brooks takes over the Sun and initiates a big buy up of Gilchrist’s lover
		“That was a strong editorial line directly opposed to Gilchrist” says Edis. Though it couldn’t have come from hacking.
		“Mrs Brooks had a significant interest in Gilchrist” says Edis of 2002
		2003 “we’re going to do very fast… the only thing interesting is some emails that survive thanks to Harbottle and Lewis” says Edis.
		“2003 is of course another budget season…. Mr Coulson will take an interest… what are we paying this money for” says Edis.
		Edis runs through the 2004 Blunkett hacking, tapes etc. very quickly “Mr Coulson agrees he knows about it”
		Edis talks about Blunkett being described as a “success” by Coulson the next year.
	The Recruitment of Dan Evans
		2004 is also when NOTW tried to recruit Dan Evans. Kuttner also rang S Hoggart – he wouldn’t have done that without confirmation Edis says
		“2005 is a big year” says Edis. In January Dan Evans gets his NI phone, a message “scanned” from Asprey “things beginning to hot up”
		Edis turns to what he calls a “very significant document” 19/02/05 budget “cost cutting ideas” from Kuttner to Coulson.
		Edis tells the jury they should “never forget” this email from NOTW journo about payments to “greg’s investigation man” that “has to stop”
		Edis points out email suggest 1/ a single man 2/ over 100k per yea 3/ there’s a row going on between NOTW journo, Coulson, and Kuttner.
		“Someone wins this argument” says Edis, NOTW journo “was over-ruled” about cutting Mulcaire. He says only editor could have decided.
		“It’s being kicked around all spring. Is it credible that the people having this argument don’t know what they’re arguing about” asks Edis
		Edis turns to Gordon Taylor hacking: “isn’t it interesting [NOTW journalists] manage to hack people uninteresting to their editor?”
		Edis adduces the Gordon Taylor transcripts. 11/05/05
		The following day Kuttner removes the cut to Mulcaire’s retainer: “he’s doing pretty well… he’s got this story… he keeps his contract”
		“This is summer of discontent in terms of Mr Goodman” says Edis, citing emails complaining of Goodman’s stories.
		Edis suggests the NOTW executives would then be watching Goodman like a hawk – independent of Goodman’s evidence and based on documents
		That August 2005 Goodman writes “you me and the editor will end up in jail”
		Edis talks of “plain english” in context of this story.
		Fifteen minute break
		Saunders says “Mr Edis will stop at 4.15 and if he doesn’t I’ll stop him at 4.16” – some laughter.
		“It is at least happening, and it isn’t going to go on forever” says Edis of his closing speech.
		2006 is the year that a smaller cut proposed to Muclaire’s payments, but then rejected and “happy now grumpy?” email
		Edis says the change of payments to Mulcaire in 2006 was “cooking the book” and makes it “look as thought there has been a cut”
		“It’s a big year for phone hacking” says Edis of 2006 payments to Mulcaire, and NOTW journo employing him “a high season for phone hacking”
		Fred Windsor, Tessa Jowell, Prescott’s PA all hacked in 2006: and “wholesale hacking of other journalists” says Edis.
		Calum Best in May “Do his phone’ and what that might mean” says Edis.
		“Mr Mulcaire is now hacking the journalists”at NOTW: Coulson. Singh, Taylor “tells you what kind of place it was to work in” says Edis.
	Goodman’s Arrest
		“It appears the first instinct of Kuttner and Coulson” after the arrest “was to cover up: keeping Goodman and Coulson sweet” says Edis.
		Edis says Brooks joins in with this mission in 2007 at the RAC club offering Goodman a job, despite Sun PCC letter.
		“It’s a pretty dishonest letter” says Edis of Sun letter to PCC: because they were offering Goodman a job, and cash payments.
		“We have 11 emails…. asking Brooks for approving Thomas Cook payments to Bettina Jordan Barber” says Edis going through dates 07-09
		“You need to look at that letter” says Edis of PCC letter “one thing going on in public, and in private… obtaining stories”
		2009 Edis say “things start to go live again” after nothing in 2008
	The Events leading to the Closure of the News of the World
		“It all goes wrong in July 2009 when the Guardian writes a story” says Edis: “and that was on any version absolutely true”
		“The Guardian break the story and Mrs Brooks takes over CEO’ says Edis
		Edis talks about email deletion in 2010, then NYT story in 2010 which reveals new phone hacking at NOTW and journo suspended.
		“What did you do about Dan Evans, Mrs Brooks?” asks Edis. He was suspended on full pay until closure of NOTW.
		September 2010 questions about another tasking of Mulcaire by another NOTW journo. Jan 2011 Brooks sees emails. Police start Weeting.
		Brooks meets Coulson in Jan 2011 – Coulson resigns. Arrests in Spring 2011. “4th July Milly Dowler story breaks in the Guardian” says Edis
		Edis calls the “flurry of activity” after Dowler story “damage limitation”
		Edis: “Brooks knows there is a police investigation” of that 2011 and that according to docs she’s “fighting as hard as she can to keep job”
	Archived Boxes
		Edis talks of 08/07/11 “A day no-one there would ever forget…. that last day of the NOTW”
		Edis suggests it’s very “unlikely Mrs Carter would forget what would happen that day” in July 2011.
		Edis produces an archive box – 7 of which filed in 2009 – in one box now “everything that belonged to Mrs Brooks” according to Carter.
		Edis produces a Carter cuttings book: “you don’t need 7 boxes to archive that amount of material” he says.
		“What other evidence was there of what there was?” in those 7 boxes. He adduces the “record transfer list” which Carter says she didn’t fill
		Edis says filling in this form “isn’t a very complicated exercise”: the form is filled in with Carter’s name: seven entries of notebooks
		Carter had said she”d never use the term “nee wade”: Edis says the notebooks would have had Wade on outside, so would be sensible
		Edis turns to Carter’s statement to archivist Nick Mays there were her and Keegan’s notebooks: “why would she tell him?”
		Edis asks why Carter mentioned Keegan: “When the roof fell in at NOTW, the conduct of Rebekah Brooks would be subject to investigaiton”
		Edis says one of the significances of Milly Dowler story was “it fell under her editorship” – i.e. Brooks’
		“The explosion caused by that article resulted in the closing of the newspaper” says Edis of Milly Dowler.
		He says they were “putting up a smokescreen” before anyone got Brooks’ notebooks.
		Edis says that no archivist would ignore commands of chief executive officer
		“Why would you write Rebekah Brooks‘ notebooks if they weren’t hers” asks Edis. He addresses Carter’s claim she didn’t think she could file
		Edis mentions the fact that Sun office had been archived before and after Carter did it in 2009: “no rush about it at all”
		Edis says the announcement of Brooks’ move to CEO was a month before it happened.
		Edis says if the archivist filled in the form “he seemed to have satisfied himself what was in those boxes… archivists are quite careful”
		Edis addresses the suggestion Carter was “too scatty” to “pervert the course of justice”.
		“What was that performance about MI5 really about” asks Edis. “Quite a funny joke… always had been” But he calls story “preposterous”
		“It’s inserted to suggest Mrs Carter is so scatty you can’t trust her to go shopping” says Edis. HE cites Brooks praise of her memory as PA
		“I’m not being unkind” says Carter of her loyalty to Brooks.
		Edis talks of Coulson’s resignation from NOTW, and how his PA took his stuff to her “house” – “quite peculiar” that happened with Brooks too
		“Why did both of these two people do the same thing when trouble was coming” says Edis of the two PAs.
		“It is necessary for Mrs Carter’s evidence that she chose to do this… because she had a quiet moment to attend to archiving” says Edis.
		“That is patent rubbish” says Edis of box removal on Friday 8th July “it can only have had a sinister purpose”
		‘There is no way a loyal PA… would have been doing this without her boss’s instruction… it’s inconceivable” says Edis
		Edis tells the jury on Carter to “accept you don’t muck about with the boss’s property on this day of all days”
	Max Clifford’s Settlement and Email deletion
		Edis draws up some documents from 2010 for the last ten minutes of his speech today.
		He shows the ‘Max Clifford‘ document from Jan 2010 “an overview of recent proceedings” in a legal note
		Legal notes mention Clifford and Sky Andrews, and their solicitor Charlotte Harris. Edis says they’re “trying to play their hand”
		Edis says Brooks accepted the Max Clifford deal was to bring civil litigation to an end before Mulcaire forced to say who he worked for.
		Edis says this is “fifteen months before the single rogue reporter defence was officially abandoned”
		Brooks said it was to stop Mulcaire “telling lies”: Edis says Clifford settlement was to stop truth coming out – that’s 20/06/10
		21/06/10 the next day – the email deletion policy. Edis does point out that some kind of retention deletion policy is legitimate.
		Edis wants the jury to look at “what Mrs Brooks was trying to achieve” in a process other people had started when it came to deletion.
		Email deletion did explicitly talk about “getting rid” of emails “unhelpful in future litigation”
		Exceptions to email deletion talk about retaining emails related to “actual or prospective litigation however compromising they would be”
		Edis says the “clean sweep” email later that year did not enforce this preservation policy “no attempt was made”
		Break till 10 am tomorrow.

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

Related Articles
The Route to Verdict: Justice Saunders Directions to the Hacking Trial Jury
Those Rogue Reporter Emails
Stuart Kuttner Emails to Surrey Police over Milly Dowler
Kuttner Notes of Conversation with Goodman Just After his Arrest
Some of the Mysteries of Phone Hacking – Unlocked

Previous Posts
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 29 Apr
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 30 Apr
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 6 May

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