Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 19 May

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

Monday 19 May 2014

Summary
	The Prosecutions Cross-Examination of Clive Goodman Continues
		Clive Goodman questioned about Palace Royal Protection
		The Hacking of Royal Phones
		Goodman’s Arrest in 2011
	Clive Goodman questioned further by his own Counsel
		Counsel for Clive Goodman closes his Defence
		The Judge has some final questions for Clive Goodman
	Justice Saunders provides further Direction to the Jury
		Changes to the Indictment Sheet
		Directions on Counts 2 and 3
	The Prosecution continues its Closing Statement
		Anthony Edis QC presents his closing statement on Count 6 and 7
		Further Closing Statement on Count 1, 2 and 3

The Prosecutions Cross-Examination of Clive Goodman Continues
	Clive Goodman questioned about Palace Royal Protection
		Clive Goodman, former NOTW Royal Editor, is back in the witness box at the #hackingtrial, being cross examined by Andrew Edis QC
		Edis goes back to an email argument between deputy managing editor Paul Nicholas and Goodman
		Goodman’s email from 08/07/05 talks of the manning crisis at Royal Protection squad after 7/7 bomb attacks.
		Last email was to Coulson: Edis says “a source who knew a lot about the police. Goodman: “about the palace” Edis: “About police at palace:
		Another Goodman email talks of “uniformed folk”: 14/07/05 email talks about live ammo being issued to Royal protection “longstanding source”
		Two days after 7/7 terror attacks the Queen opened a memorial to WW2 women.
		Another Goodman email “the copper has got the memo in his hands”: Goodman tells jury this was to persuade senior NOTW staff to pay.
		Another Goodman email about a missing Royal protection cop found shopping: “I can get exact spot… but might be dangerous to source”
		Goodman explains about missing palace cop in 2005: “when something like this happens in the Royal Household… everybody knows”
		Edis goes through Goodman’s email to Nicholas about his sources needing to be paid for by cash “or we all go to prison”
		Another Camilla/police source talks about getting more info from Mark Bolland, Colleen Harris “or our source inside palace”
		Edis points out Goodman forwarded this “lie” about sources to his sister. Goodman says accepted practice like “the cheque’s in the post”
		Edis says that this practice of “paying police officers… over and over again” shows it was “acceptable” at NOTW.
		Edis talks about another email “planning to corrupt a Sandhurst Cadet” over pictures of the Royal Princes.
		“Should we read it in its plain meaning or do we have to re-write it?” asks Edis. Goodman: “we have to read it as meant, not what you want.”
		“It’s his father who is offering to sell what’s gone on… there’s no suggestion the son knew anything about this” says Goodman.
		Another Goodman NOTW story is about a Mr Onions playing with his gun: “my man” says he’s a Gulf War veteran writes Goodman.
	The Hacking of Royal Phones
		Edis then goes through a schedule of Goodman’s phone calls in 2006, provided by Coulson’s team.
		There’s a series of calls in Jan 05- May 05 hacking Helen Asprey: August through October 2005 some other targets – Mark Dyer.
		There’s “relatively infrequent” hacking of these targets till the Matey/Alexander project with Mulcaire starting in October 2005
		Goodman says it “would have impossible without” Mulcaire regularly getting changed UVNs – unique voicemail numbers.
		Goodman says he doesn’t know how Mulcaire got these UVNs. “I was quite horrified when I saw the dossier of phone after phone” says Goodman
		21/12/05 is the first hacking of Kate Middleton: Goodman doesn’t know how Mulcaire got this but was “astonished”
		29/01/06 Goodman started hacking Prince William: “I’m not denying any of this” says Goodman.
		Goodman agrees these UVNs of Kate Middleton and Prince Wililam were some of the “most highly protected targets’ in the country
		Edis : “You wouldn’t have gone to those sensitive targets without direct authorisation of the editor” Goodman: “To be fair to Mr Coulson..”
		BREAKING: Goodman says he never told his editor Andy Coulson directly about the hacking of Kate Middleton and Prince William
		“These other royal voicemails…” says Goodman: “Glenn provided because it showed what he could do”
		Goodman claims police inquiry in 2006 “wanted to ringfence the inquiry because they didn’t want to embarrass members of the Royal Family”
		BREAKING: Goodman claims the original police phone hacking investigation in 2006 didn’t mention Royal Princes to save them “embarassment”
		Goodman explains some of the inconsistencies of his evidence at the hackingtrial due to his ill health – heart condition and pneumonia.
		05/11/05 Kuttner talks of Goodman’s “time wasting pantomine”: Goodman thought his survival chances at NOTW “pretty thin” at the time
		Weatherup emails Goodman in 2005 about a source: Goodman replies “he’s in a difficult profession” – doesn’t mean of police officer
		Another email about surveillance: “Derek busy with Neville…. suggest Rob”: Edis says Muclaire never involved in surveillance.
		Another email cited by Edis about a source “in uniform” providing an army cadet’s file – actually on internet. Edis “You got swindled there”
		“That’s the way of the world” says Goodman of NOTW being charged for an army timetable easily available on the internet
		Goodman/Coulson email about Prince William “out beagling” cited from 26/01/96: voice transcript came from Mulcaire
		“I don’t remember” says Goodman of telling Coulson the source of this story was from a phone hack: “but it’s possible” he says.
		In justifying paying Mulcaire in February, Goodman cited the Beagling story as an example of his worth.
		“You were making Mr Coulson aware of the hacking” says Edis: “Oh yes,” says Goodman but not sure “after the event” or not .
		BREAKING: Goodman says he told his editor Andy Coulson that a Prince William “beagling” story was the result of phone hacking early in 2006
		Another Goodman email about Sir Ian Blair being “drunk” suggests to senior NOTW executive that the source is a police officer.
		Goodman says he lied that a story about Ian Blair was from a police officer, to make the story “better more believable”
		“Mr Alexander most important… I’m relying on him to work the same magic with Harry’s passing out party” writes Goodman about Mulcaire 2006
		Goodman agrees “the same magic” he wrote about Mulcaire in 2006 means “phone hacking”
		Another about “Prince William‘s Bike – a Yamaha” is sourced from someone at Clarence House: Goodman names number of sources there.
		Stolen laptop story from 2006 “cops suggest contractor swiped it” was credited to Goodman’s source ‘Farish’: he says not a police officer
		This story about the stolen laptop never appeared, nor was Farish paid in 2006, because Goodman was arrested.
	Goodman’s Arrest in 2011
		08/07/11 Goodman arrested again over Royal Directories – no comment interview: as first time “details of my arrest leaked to the Guaridian”
		“Further details of the case I was facing appeared in the media” says Goodman of his second arrest: “before I knew about it”
		Goodman says he didn’t tell the police about fear of leaks in first interview: “we couldn’t make accusations” until knew where coming from.
		“You knew what the truth was” says Edis “but he was just a solicitor.” Goodman says he told solicitor the truth.
		In a subsequent interview in June 2012 (when leaks had been ‘dealt’ with says Edis) “no reason to keep quiet”
		Edis points out that Goodman was told at beginning of interviews “It might hurt your defence” if you don’t mention things now.
		Edis goes through Goodman’s prepared defence statement in 2012 about payments to anonymous sources.
		Goodman says in prepared statement he never paid a police officer: £4k recovered at Goodman’s property in 06 was his personal trainers
		“I had never any reason to believe this paperwork had been unlawfully acquired” said Goodman in 2012 of Royal Directories.
		Goodman says “there’s no evidence they’ve been stolen. Edis cites Goodman email “risk things to nick”. Goodman says exaggerating.
		“All you’ve ever said is this piece of paper” says Edis. “As is my right to do so,” says Goodman “under proper legal advice”
		“Nothing’s been made up” says Goodman: “All I’ve done is stand by my legal advice… and make the best case I could”
		Edis says “you had no reason to trust the legal profession” in 2012 having been “stitched up” in 2006
		Goodman blames his NI appointment lawyers of being “in cahoots” with the company to make him take the blame.
Clive Goodman questioned further by his own Counsel
	Counsel for Clive Goodman closes his Defence
		Brief re-examination by Spens for Goodman: he says he “totally” trusts his current lawyer – but not his previous one Henri Brandman.
		13/10/05 email brought up again by David Spens QC about a “police contact”: means anyone who has contact with police says Goodman
		03/02/05 email between Goodman and Coulson cited by Spens terminating Matey payments: Mulcaire carried on “a payment by results basis”
		BREAKING: Goodman says Andy Coulson knew Mulcaire was still working for him after ‘Alexander Project” terminated in February 2006
		11/03/06 CGWelsh story: “comes from William himself” – Goodman thinks it was a result of a hack, but could have been from Mark Dyer
		Goodman says another Senior NOTW journalist never knew he was hacking: “huge explosion… he thought Glenn Mulcaire was his”
		Spens goes back to 14/08/06 Cafe Rouge meeting with Coulson and Goodman post the latter’s arrest.
		Goodman says this note of the Cafe Rouge meeting was made within minutes of seeing Andy Coulson.
		The top left hand of the document has a creation date at 16.24 on 14/08/06 – with the meeting starting at 15.20
	The Judge has some final questions for Clive Goodman
		Justice Saunders has some questions for Goodman about “overall view of phone hacking you actually did”: began in Jan 05 at request of Miskiw
		Goodman agrees he had some interaction with Mulcaire before Alexander Project: he doesn’t believe he was given UVNs at that time.
		When the Alexander payments began in October 2005 he agreed to provide the UVNs of three royal aides: Harverson, Dyer, Lowther Pinkerton
		During the Alexander Project Mulcaire gave Goodman new UVNS; Kate Middleton and Prince William: Prince Harry afterwards.
		Justice Saunders establishes that Mulcaire wasn’t paid for these extra UVNs: “he was showing off” says Goodman “flourishes”.
		“He would harvest material himself” says Goodman of Mulcaire post Alexander Project: “if he got nothing he was paid nothing”
		Break for 15 minutes.
		For the first time in weeks all the defendants (except Stuart Kuttner) are back in the dock at the #hackingtrial for Edis’ closing speech.
		Before that David Spens, QC, closing Goodman’s case has 2 Brandman legal attendance notes for 10 & 11/08/06 and to go into the jury bundles
		Timothy Langdale QC also has a new index for the Coulson defence bundle, and a new document on 2006 pre-arrest cash payments.
Justice Saunders provides further Direction to the Jury
	Changes to the Indictment Sheet
		Justice Saunders gives an update programme for the trial, set back a bit by Goodman’s illness. Monday 9th June jury will retire for verdict
		Edis will complete his address to jury for prosecution today – and perhaps Laidlaw for Brooks will commence.
		Justice Saunders has now a new draft of the charges for the jury: with new directions for Counts 2 and 3, and Count 5 runs together with it
	Directions on Counts 2 and 3
		Saunders says this will be “quite an important document”: he now goes through his directions on Counts 2 and 3 against Coulson and Goodman
		Saunders explains that the counts allege Goodman and Coulson entered into agreement with Royal Protection Officer (s)
		Count 2 originally included both a Green Book and Internal Directory: now limited to Green Book “arguable a more confidential document”
		Count three relates to an Royal Internal directory – and “may have been a different officer”
		Saunders goes through the three emails that show Goodman asking for payment for two directories – they agree.
		Saunders says that though the emails talk about paying a protection officer – both defendants say they didn’t mean that.
		Goodman says his account was untrue: if jury agree with him neither are guilty.
		If they believe Goodman did pay a Royal Protection, the jury have to assess whether Coulson agreed to this.
		“If Mr Coulson did not believe he was paying a Royal Protection Officer… he is not guilty”
		If the jury believe Coulson agreed to paying a police officer, then the jury have to judge whether an official committed “serious misconduct
		Saunders says it “is part of the duty of Royal Protection Officer” to protect Royal Household from “intrusion” or “theft”
		Saunders says there’s no evidence police officers had “reasonable excuse” to provide books for money
		Justice Saunders says it’s for the jury to consider whether selling a Green Book or an Internal Directory are both serious abuses of office
		Saunders reprises the “route to verdict” on Goodman and Coulson: first decide guilt or innocence of former before the latter.
		To reflect modern legal rulings Saunders talks of being “sure or not sure” rather than “beyond all reasonable doubt”
		Saunders explains the same route to verdict for Count 3 against Goodman and Coulson and conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office
The Prosecution continues its Closing Statement
	Anthony Edis QC presents his closing statement on Count 6 and 7
		Edis says he will come in “under budget in terms of the time allocated” to his closing address: he’ll finish well before close of business
		Edis takes the jury to Count 6 and 7 schedule of documents: 17/07/11 21.09 Hanna texts Jorsling “Have a plan. Can you call please”
		Edis says the prosecution case is that Hanna was “managing this operation” for Charlie Brooks, and ultimately Rebekah Brooks.
		Edis says the prosecution no longer suggest Hanna text is about a pizza: “point of this is that he was giving…. Jorsling an instruction”
		Edis focuses on some more words for jury to consider: “Broadsword to Danny Boy… Chicken is in the pot”
		“Fucking amateurs. We should have done a [Dead letter drop] or Brush contact”: Edis says this is funny but serious in intent.
		“Log in the hours as Pizza delivery” is not just a joke is it?” say Edis: it’s accounting procedure “to conceal what’s really happened”
		Edis asks what “chicken in the pot” means. “The chicken is where it’s mean to be. Where are the bin bags, behind the bins” he says.
		Edis says the “fucking amateurs” line mean security operatives have been told what to do: “this is quite revealing”
		“They know it’s supposed to be a secret” says Edis of Broadsword/Danny Boy text: “they complied with covert instructions”
		“There’s humour but it means “I’ve done my secret little job” says Edis reminding jury of his line logging it “perverting course of justice”
		Edis now addresses Cheryl Carter’s journey to Oxfordshire on 10/08/11 to see Deborah Weir because “she was all on her own”
		Edis says Deborah Weir wasn’t on her own on the long journey from Warrington to Oxford: he says “weird” Weir didn’t remember friend Hazel
		Edis says Carter told a lie to Nick Mays about what she had been doing that weekend: he says Carter’s journey had a “covert purpose”
		Edis talks of two reasons Deborah Weir’s journey to Jubilee Barn on 17/07/11 accompanied by Hanna: he says both reasons don’t work.
		“We don’t have texts” says Edis of the reason for Hanna’s journeys. He says he never contended Hanna and Sandell were to search the Barn.
		Edis says prosecution maintain Hanna went to Jubilee Barn to scoop up something – and that the black bag was more of a focus than brown
		“Not all the computers or documents moved around by the team that day” were returned in the black bag says Edis.
		Edis says “it does not matter precisely” how the bag moved from Oxford to Wapping: “under direction of Mark Hanna.. the important thing”
		“How could Mr Jorsling deliver back to Mr Brooks two bags without Mark Hanna knowing there were two bags” says Edis.
		Edis points out that none of the defendants on Count 7 mentioned any of this in original interviews.
		“You’re entitled to remember what kind of people you’re dealing with here” says Edis of no comment interviews:
		“Each of these people is strong minded, successful, and don’t need to hide behind legal advice” says Edis. “Particularly Charlie Brooks“
		Edis points out Charlie had emailed police with an innocent explanation for the bags, and “got PR man to tell lies to Daily Telegraph”
		Edis talks to the jury about leaks: “why would anyone be embarrassed about the truth being leak to the press?”
		“These are grown up people who’ve taken a particular course” says Edis to jury “and you are entitled to take this into account”
	Further Closing Statement on Count 1, 2 and 3
		Edis goes back to Count 1, Phone hacking: he says Royal directories Counts 2 and 3 were “raw material” for Mulcaire to hack victims.
		Edis says it’s been “unusual sequence of events” with Goodman returning mid way through his closing address for cross examination
		Edis reminds the jury about all the emails he’s been through today: “it stand both as a cross examination and a closing speech” he says.
		“I’m going to say relatively little” about Counts 2 and 3 says Edis because he reprised the material this morning.
		Edis stresses the importance of budgets – though no budget documents survive from 2002, “you can make inferences” from those that do.
		“The control of the paper’s finances is absolutely central to prosecution case” says Edis of Mulcaire’s contract in September 2001
		“It was quite a big deal” says Edis of Mulcaire’s deal: “and quite a secret deal… but not secret from the bosses” he adds
		Edis turns to a document that says NI lawyer was consulted about Mulcaire’s initial contract.
		Edis says the price of the contract and duration very important – but the “very important” nature of Mulcaire’s services was never recorded
		NI lawyer “knew perfectly well that this was a contract for the kind of services you can’t write down in a notebook” says Edis.
		Edis adduces a “candid” document from same NI lawyer in 2006 after Mulcaire’s arrest describing contract as “neutral”
		Edis maintains that NI lawyer would not have drawn up such a “neutral contract” merely on instruction of a desk editor like Greg Miskiw.
		“Paying someone a lot of money for something that dare not speak it’s name” says Edis of Mulcaire contract would need higher authorisation
		Of Goodman’s evidence Edis says “where it’s the most sensible explanation of documents… you can accept it, because of what docs says”
		“Where we only rely on what he says” Edis says of Goodman “you cannot accept it because he is not an honest man”
		Edis turns to Goodman’s employment appeal where he said, in 2006, that Mulcaire had been working then for NOTW for 10 years.
		Goodman knew Mulcaire was providing “some kind of secret service” from sitting next to Miskiw: Edis says reliable – “documentary support”
		Edis says Goodman’s contemporaneous evidence of who Mulcaire was was known right a the beginning – if not what he was doing.
		“She must have known what he was doing” says Edis of Brooks’s authority to approve the Mulcaire contract.
		Edis says the jury might look at Count 5 against Brooks, before looking at Count 1: “allowing journalists to commit crimes for stories”
		“You can bring in” an adverse conclusion against Brooks for misconduct to bear in phone hacking charge: illegal ways of getting stories.
		Edis says the jury can bear in mind counts 2 and 3 against Coulson when taking into account the phone hacking charge – Count 1
		“if you conclude he is guilty” says Edis of procuring Royal directories, perhaps for phone hacking, it’s clearly relevant.
		“Some of these counts are…. relevant we say… one against the other” says Edis of cross admissibility of some of the charges.
		Edis now turns to Milly Dowler and asks for all the press screens are turned off for the “sensitive letter” Brooks wrote to Coulson.
		“Does it mean what it says” asks Edis of Brooks’ love letter – “”effectively to herself since she didn’t send” – why would you lie?
		Edis says that Brooks evidence was she was going to send this to Coulson at the time – therefore this is the truth of their relationship.
		“It’s obviously true because of when it was written” says Edis, and turns to Brooks’ “new rules” for working with Coulson in Feb 2004
		Edis reads: “For six years I’ve waited” Brooks wrote in 2004. Coulson had said they’d got back together soon after this letter until 2007
		Edis asks about the length of love affair “why does it matter?”: he says were they sharing “confidences without inhibition” over Dowler.
		Of the affair “where they back together in 2004” is also extremely important Edis says because of the hacking of David Blunkett‘s voicemails
		Edis says the Coulson Brooks is relevant not “because they did anything wrong” but because of the “secrets” they could have shared
		Break till 2pm
		Jury back at the #hackingtrial after lunch, with the end of prosecutor Andrew Edis‘ closing remarks.
		“To avoid all risk of putting the wrong thing on the screen, we’ve decided to put this in as hard copy” Edis says of the Brooks’ love letter
		The love letter is putting into a series of documents starting in 1998 – though the letter was from 2004
		Edis reminds the jury that Brooks had said she could trust Coulson with any confidence back in 2002.
		Edis asks the jury to read several paragraphs of the love letter again, particularly a phrase “for six years”
		“I confide in you, I seek your advice” Edis requotes: “But how does this work thing manifest itself” wrote Brooks in 2004
		“Obviously I can discuss concerns worries with you… any more” wrote Brooks. Edis says “this isn’t a rambling incoherent letter”
		“This is an elegant, eloquent and painful letter” says Edis: “Does it mean what it says?”
		Edis says the letter was written “while they were both editors of rival newspapers… it relates to a 12 month period”
		Edis reminds the jury that Coulson had suggested Brooks might have put one of his NOTW stories “on the internet”
		“Though you’ve heard a lot of evidence about the competitiveness of the newspapers” says Edis. “They were under same roof.”
		“Don’t abandon common sense” Edis tells the jury: “If you keep your common sense beside you all through this you’ll find a way through”
		Edis now turns to the Milly Dowler evidence: “the broad outline and quite a lot of the detail of it is already in your mind” he tells jury
		“Why is it important” says Edis taking the Dowler story “at a higher level. He says Dowler featured in the NOTW “pretty much every week”
		“It was an enormous story” says Edis of Dowler disappearance and NOTW: “and therefore was of great and proper interest to the news desk”
		Edis points out that Kuttner told the police twice about intercepting Dowler’s voicemails, and NOTW “sent a whole posse of journalists”
		Edis says there’s an “illustrative” contrast between the hacking of Dowler and others: if they tracked her down “no one would mind”
		Edis says revelations about McCartney, Gilchrist, Miller etc were treated very differently
		Edis says that both Kuttner and Coulson don’t directly deny the Dowler hacking: “from April three defendants.. all knew about phone hacking”
		“The only inference you can draw” says Edis of Dowler hacking “that the people involved were happy for it to carry on”
		“None of them lifted a finger to stop it” says Edis of post Dowler hacking, and the extension of Mulcaire’s contract.
		“This is just something else they’d been paying for since the previous September” says Edis of Dowler hacking.
		Edis talks about the “at this distance” phrase heard recurrently from the trial and talks of the evidence of Hennessy
		Henessy gave evidence Brooks “spoke to someone about missing Surrey schoolgirl” when she was on holiday in Dubai in 2002.
		Another witness said Brooks “was on the phone a lot” that week: phone evidence says she was ringing the editor’s desk a lot.
		Brooks also called the “night editor” at lot of NOTW: “all that phone traffic” proves Brooks was in control of the paper says Edis.
		“As you would expect her to be… a young editor of a paper… a deputy editor young and inexperienced….was Milly important?” asks Edis
		Edis says the story was important enough to sent journalists off to Telford, and another NOTW journo called factory between news conferences
		Edis points out another NOTW assigned, and Kuttner called factory. They told the police on Saturday.
		“They didn’t tell the police as soon as they knew” says Edis of Dowler: “and someone is answerable for that decision”
		Edis points out Bucktin had said sending five journalists plus photographers was “a big deal”
		Edis says that finding Milly would have bumped 15k Greco buyout to middle pages or next edition of NOTW.
		Edis: “They are both working on it…. Mrs Brooks has drawn attention to calls of Mr Greco… one of them’s going to end up on front page”
		“We invite you accept the evidence of Hennessy and Keyworth which draws Mrs Brooks right into this story” says Edis of Milly Dowler.
		Edis turns to Kuttner’s interview with police after arrest: he says of Dowler Kuttner “can remember” talking to the police
		20/04/02 email was produced by police: “Mr Kuttner begins to prevaricate and bluster” says Edis and promises to do “research”
		“He’s quite happy and talkative” says Edis of Kuttner during police interviews until this email is mentioned.
		“I can’t remember… but I’m a person of exceptional character” says Edis is “essentially Kuttner’s case”
		Edis says that though Kuttner’s memory was tested by experts in 2013 “but you’ve heard nothing of them”: you have “his own word only”
		“Do you remember” says Edis that Kuttner could remember the case of David Shayler “when it could help him”
		Edis points that Coulson produced the three editions of NOTW on 14/04/02 on Dowler: “quite a substantial rearrangement took place”
		Edis says the original Dowler story was “dressed up to look like a police source… who knew? Who made that decision?” he asks jury
		Edis reminds jury that Coulson had changed NOTW “because he was unhappy with the mix…. you can’t change it without reading it”
		Edis says Coulson is “tied” closely with Dowler hacking because story contained mention of voicemails, and there were calls to Thurlbeck
		17/04/02 Missing Milly appears on editor’s conference list “the editor is Rebekah Brooks… she’ll be sitting around a table discussing this
		Edis says the deputy editor, managing editor, Thurlbeck or Miskiw would all known what this ‘held’ story was about on Brooks’ return
		“The editor must have made some decision about it” says Edis of Dowler story: “they must have told her how they handled previous week”
		“How did this conference actually work unless they talked about the story and how it was handled” says Edis of Dowler story.
		Dowler on newslist on 18/04/02 – Kuttner sends Surrey police email on 19/04/02 – that Friday evening held story is replaced by another.
		20/04/02 Kuttner repeats his email to Surrey police re Dowler voicemails and rewriting an article “as a consequence” of talking to police
		Edis suggests that the story had been rewritten on the basis that no one could believe that Milly was actually getting a job in Telford.
		Edis talks about the “extraordinary state of affairs” that there was another girl called Amanda who had one digit different from Milly’s no
		“It’s so unlikely to be true” says Edis of sending journalists to Telford based on voicemail “you’d only countenance it because it was true”
		Edis talks about Brooks “big thing” being Sarah’s Law she was “intensely interested” in child abduction stories.
		Edis says a “significant part” of Brooks’ case why she wasn’t interested in Milly was because of a “police steer” the father was suspect.
		Edis turns to Kuttner email of 12/04/02 – a senior member of management – and his continuing interest in Milly case.
		“Mr Kuttner is doing quite a lot of work on the theory a predatory paedophile is responsible for Milly’s disappearance” says Edis
		Edis points out that in her prepared statement on Milly Dowler, she never mentioned ‘police steer”: “seems to have become important since”
		Edis says the Milly Dowler story in NOTW affected the “whole paper… and three people in charge of that didn’t know what was going on”
		“Why would Neville not tell them?” asks Edis, pointing out that senior management didn’t think hacking a crime, and public interest defence
		“There was nothing secret in NOTW about the interception of Milly’s phone, otherwise they wouldn’t tell the police” says Edis.
		Edis says 16 million readers knew Milly hacking was going on, so did the police, but Brooks, Coulson and Kuttner claim they didn’t
		“When you gain that knowledge you don’t lose it” says Edis of Milly Dowler hacking.
		Edis says the claim that the Milly voicemails came from police is “quite similar” in the “line of deniability” in Dan Evans’ accounts.
		Edis talks about Macca’s wedding ring hacking allegations, and Eimear Cooks lunch meeting with Rebekah Brooks
		Edis talks of Cook’s divorce from Montgomerie “the extremely successful and rich golfer”
		Cook’s evidence was that Brook talked about changing PIN numbers and the Macca ring story: was that true?
		Edis says Brooks had already changed her PIN number, and knew about phone hacking.
		Edis then refers to Cooks’ claim that Brooks was arrested after an altercation with her husband Ross Kemp – can’t have happened
		Edis addresses the defence case against Cook – she must have made everything up because she got the Ross Kemp account wrong.
		Of Annette Witheridge’s evidence about a source on Macca wedding ring: “it doesn’t mean hacking didn’t also happen”
		Edis says Mulcaire was tasked “very shortly” after Macca wedding ring story in July 2002.
		Edis says the Macca wedding ring story was from 2002 – a bit of strange thing to have stuck in Cook’s mind in 2005.
		“You have to decide was she honest or not?” says Edis of Cook: “the case doesn’t hinge on it…. but some supportive evidence”
		Edis turns now to Andy Gilchrist being a “target of interest” to Brooks and that Mulcaire was commissioned around this date in 2003/4
		Edis shows the jury Goodman’s filofax recovered from police search – it has Michael Peat‘s mobile number in it
		Edis says Goodman must have bought the date filofax pages in 2001/02 – and stuck in printed notes some time later.
		Edis says this doesn’t prove Goodman had Peat’s phone number at that time: “it doesn’t say very much really”
		10 minute break.
		Edis is back on his feets: “I’m addressing you about three defendants… Count One…. Brooks, Coulson and Kuttner”
		Edis is now on the Blunkett hack: Coulson said he was “shocked” by Thurlbeck’s hack, but was persuaded by public interest”
		“But all the things that made it in the public interest weren’t included in the paper” says Edis of Coulson and Blunkett hack.
		“This hack was done further to an existing conspiracy Mr Coulson knew was happening” says Edis.
		“Mr Coulson’s story is ridiculous and we invite you to reject it” says Edis of Coulson’s claim that Thurlbeck’s revelation was new.
		“The amount of hacking going on was absolutely phenonemal” says Edis of Coulson in 2004 “and he was quite happy for it to go on.”
		“Did he tell Mrs Brooks?” says Edis of the fact Coulson didn’t publish Blunkett’s lover’s name, but Brooks at the Sun did.
		Edis adduces the calling billing detail between Brooks and Coulson on the morning Coulson interviews Blunkett saying there was “agreement”
		Edis points out that according to Coulson’s evidence a senior NI exec and senior NOTW exec knew of Blunkett hacking: why not Brooks?
		“It all works very nicely” says Edis of NOTW and Sun coverage of Blunkett’s affair: “but only if they co-operate”
		Edis says Coulson’s account “falsifies what happened” with the Blunkett hack: “It was carry on hacking at News of the World, wasn’t it?”
		Edis talks about Coulson’s response to Thurlbeck hacking – the School of Excellence. Around this time PCC specifically mention voicemails
		NI lawyer with Blunkett tapes was supposed to be involved in School of Excellence: Edis adduces the evidence produced by Coulson: two lines
		NI lawyer was supposed to be briefed by Coulson on the dark arts in this School of Excellence.
		“What kind of response is that to what Neville had done?” says Edis of two lines of School of Excellence.
		Edis talks about Dan Evans, like Goodman, being a “difficult witness” and the jury have to be “cautious” about self confessed phone hackers
		“There’s no doubt Dan Evans has a interest” says Edis: “if he sticks to that… telling the whole truth.. he gets reduction of sentence”
		Edis turns to Evan’s evidence of Miller/Law story – a coincidentally busy time with Brooks seeing Eimear Cook and more hacking of Blunkett
		Edis cites a NOTW email recruiting Dan Evans: Evans had said he’d been recruited for phone hacking: Blunkett story just exposed by Mulcaire
		Evans says that three people meeting Dan Evans knew about hacking: a senior NOTW journo clearly did because he was given his contact sheet
		“The document exists… it really did happen. [NOTW journo] really did give Dan Evans a whole list of numbers to hack” says Edis.
		13/01/05 is when Dan Evans legitimate work phone was given to him – he had two other mobiles issued to him on expenses – phone hackers kit
		“These are documents that support” what Dan Evans was saying, maintains Edis. Two “burners” bought in February 2005
		“That doesn’t depend on him” says Edis of Evans “that relies on documents.
		Edis now adduces what he calls the “Office Cat” email 25/05/05 from NOTW senior journo to Dan Evans and others after Charles Clark story
		Email says Neville “already has” mobile of Hannah Pawlby; her phone hacked 18/06/05 with lots of messages from journos
		“Why does Neville need it?” says Edis of Pawlby’s phone number: “We know what Neville used to do. Hacks phones with Glenn Mulcaire”
		Edis says that though phone hacking wasn’t directly talked about by 2005, it does pop up and quotes Evans’ line “even the office cat” knew
		Edis asks the jury to consider whether Evans did listen to Sienna Miller‘s message on Daniel Craig‘s phone. “
		“If Evans made it up, it’s a lucky lie” says Edis of his evidence on Miller “because she says it’s the kind of message she would have left”
		Edis talks of phone evidence showing Evans had been hacking Miller on a Tuesday when Coulson at Labour Party conference.
		On the wednesday, Coulson’s meetings with Labour ministers were marked “cancelled” – Coulson “perfectly able to get back to office”
		“Of course they wanted to be back at the office, there was a paper to be published” says Edis of Coulson on that Wednesday.
		Edis turns to Evans first police interview with Evans: “i think it was the Tuesday morning… two tuesdays previously I think”
		“When he was first asked he wasn’t sure” says Edis of Evan’s evidence: “was he caught out in a lie or did he just get the date wrong?”
		There’s a byline row in October after the Miller story goes into the paper: Coulson replies “it should be Dan’ NOTW journo mentions “checks”
		“When they’re talking about ‘checks’ they’re talking about phone hacking” says Edis about Coulson approving Dan Evans byline.
		“No one’s ever said this is one source story… Dan Evans told you about… but that’s what you do” says Edis of Miller/Craig phone hacking
		01/09/05 Evans is involved in an email chain with other NOTW journos about stuff being on “tape” – “same one I put a lot of Miller stuff on”
		Edis says this means Evans is telling others that the stuff was on a tape “no one can accuse him of destroying…. everyone knew”
		“No one can criticise Dan Evans for destroying that tape” says Edis because “it was destroyed because it had Miller voicemail”
		“You don’t look at his evidence on its own” says Edis of Evans. “There’s a lot of evidence against Mr Coulson anyway… put it in the pot”
		“Poor old Mr Blunkett was the target of phone hacking again” says Edis of Sally Anderson – including Anderson who “told lies about him”
		Edis points out Mulcaire can be heard listening to Blunkett voicemail to Anderson “just say I love you and it’s 50 grand”
		“That’s the reality” says Edis: “You can hear Blunkett at a desperate point in his life and Mulcaire counting the cash”
		Edis turns to the Harry exam story: he says it’s absolutely clear these are hacking stories like Harry injuries.
		Edis talks about Goodman transcript of Harry exam story “you can’t exactly trust him” but an “as we know” email “corroborates what he says”
		Edis turns to the “spoiler” email: Mulcaire is doing so much phone hacking he sends an “overload message” “I’m hacked out” says Edis
		Edis says Mulcaire was hacking Dennis Rice at Mail on Sunday over the Prescott story when NOTW was planning “spoiler”
		“This is a big deal” says Edis of Prescott story: “every big story that’s being looked at by now involves phone hacking.”
		BREAKING: Edis says that Goodman said every major story at NOTW based on phone hacking IN 05 – but there are documents to back him up
		Edis now turns to the ‘Do his Phone’ email from Coulson around the time of a tasking of Mulcaire for both Calum Best and NOTW journo
		Edis says that prosecution do not maintain that Coulson was involved in the tasking of Mulcaire against another NOTW journo.
		“By this stage, they’re really turning on each other” says Edis of Mulcaire’s hacking of Coulson, Brooks and other senior journalists in 06
		Edis talks about Muclaire’s “blagging the billing” of NOTW journalist and analysing his connections with Calum Best.
		Edis says of “scraping the bottom of the barrel” email from Coulson about Best is about not wasting resources on insignificant stories
		“Two forms of investigation, actually three” says Edis of NOTW journalist at this time – billing, hacking of his phones and contacts.
		Edis says “we don’t care a hoot about” whether “do his phone” concerns Calum Best or NOTW journo: “it’s still a crime”
		“But actually we do say this is about Calum, because his is the only name on this page” says Edis of ‘Do HIs Phone” – a hacking instruction
		“Coulson thought that phone hacking was a pretty good idea when you wanted to know what people were up to” says Edis.
		Edis says Coulson “was absolutely at the heart” of the “2006 coverup” of phone hacking – there are a lot of documents to prove that he says
		Edis says the first reaction of Coulson/Kuttner on Goodman’s arrest is not to investigate but “to cover it up – that’s evidence of guilt”
		“That’s all Coulson and Kuttner are doing” says Edis of coverup: “that’s all quite evident by the documents” – ie. legal notes and emails
		NI lawyer’s note of Brooks’s meeting with DCI Surtees cited by Edis: mainly about “what other people were up to” says Edis.
		NI note of Brooks’ meeting post Goodman/Mulcaire arrest with police mentions 100 victims, not connected with Goodman
		Edis says NI lawyer note acronym spells out the name of another senior NOTW journalist known by police to be involved in hacking in 2006
		“From then on Mrs Brooks knew the police investigation had revealed phone hacking on quite a wide basis” says Edis.
		Edis says the original phone hacking investigation was just the tip of the ice berg, and Brooks knew Goodman wasn’t “single rogue reporter”
		“It’s all going so well today” email from Coulson to Brooks email on Goodman’s guilty plea cited by Edis in his closing.
		“Mr Goodman’s involvement limited to Alexander contract” says Edis of 2006 “so it was possible for single rogue reporter line to run”
		Edis says that various NI journalist “made a pretence” phone hacking was being dealt with while Brooks approving cash payments to officials
		“He was offered quite a lot of money to keep quiet” Edis says of Goodman
		“Contrary to the line” says Edis “it would be disgraceful behaviour to do snooping” Brooks offered Goodman a job.
		Edis turns to Brooks’ involvement in Max Clifford settlement – “quite a lot of money… to keep it under wraps” says Edis.
		Edis reminds the jury that Brooks said they didn’t want Max Clifford “telling a lot of lies”: He says it was to stop the truth coming out.
		Edis says we don’t know the whole truth now, perhaps never will, “but we know a lot more about what was happening now” thanks to MSC
		“It nearly succeeded” says Edis of coverup of phone hacking; “but it didn’t”
		“None of us can tell you what to do” says Edis to jury:
		Edis tells the “really important phase” is now coming out: and they they must return a true verdict based on your conscience.
		Edis takes his last 30 second to explain he won’t be here for the next few days. And thus he closes the prosecution argument.
		Jury back at 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 – 14 May
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 15 May
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 16 May

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