Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 28 May

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

Wednesday 28 May 2014

Summary
	Andy Coulson’s Closing Statement
		Timothy Langdale QC presents the Closing Statement for Andy Coulson
		Unanswered Questions
		Failings of Prosecution Case
		Guilty Pleas and Phone Hacking
		Dan Evans Evidence
		Clive Goodman’s Evidence

Andy Coulson’s Closing Statement
	Timothy Langdale QC presents the Closing Statement for Andy Coulson
		Back at the #hackingtrial after what Justice Saunders called an “Alzheimer’s moment” as he forgot something about Spens’ address
		Timothy Langdale QC is now on his feet giving his closing address to the jury for Andy Coulson
		“Case theories have been disposed of, criticisms of police brushed away…. it’s as if the juggernaut must keep moving” says Langdale
		Langdale talks about Operation Weeting – it has not been “rigorous, open minded or fair”
		Langdale tell the jury to do what the prosecution failed to do: not “theories or wishful thinking…. someone has to pay for phone hacking”
	Unanswered Questions
		Langdale says his criticisms of the prosecution case are “basics”
		“How is it the prosecution called Dan Evans” about Miller hack asks Langdale “without discovering Sienna Miller was in the country”
		Langdale criticises the prosecution for not checking Andy Coulson‘s whereabouts during party conference and alleged Miller/Craig hack
		Langdale asks how prosecution could rely on Goodman emails to Coulson while keeping from them “extraordinary level” of Goodman’s hacking
		“It was left to the defence to bring out to you what the extent of Goodman’s hacking was” says Langdale.
		Langdale uses Calum Best as an example: “no evidence that Do His Phone email was followed by a hack”
		Saunders apologises for interrupting Langdale – defendants have problems hearing.
		Langdale says a “crucial email that supported Coulson’s account… on the day Calum Best did his evidence… the prosecution changed”
		“The prosecution didn’t care who it was… but it had to be an instruction to someone” says Langdale of Calum Best email
		BREAKING: Langdale blames the prosecution for failing to “fingerprint members of the Royal Household” over Goodman’s royal directories
		Langdale says he won’t go into great detail or “we’ll be here in Doomsday” and apologises that jury have to “listen to people in wigs”
		“Why has the David Blunkett material survived?” asks Langdale of tapes recovered from NI safe; they would be destroyed if “sinister”
		Langdale asks why the Daniel Craig material “hasn’t survived… according to Dan Evans, put into the legendary editor’s safe?”
		Langdale asks Coulson sent Greg Miskiw to Manchester in December 2003, and then leave NOTW for Mercury Press Agency?
		“It’s apparent… Mr Coulson wanted Greg Miskiw eased out” says Langdale, saying they wouldn’t lose “the man running Mulcaire”
		Langdale asks why, if Mulcaire was so vital, would Andy Coulson cut his budget?
		Number Six of Langdale’s unanswered questions: if hacking an open secret at NOTW, why no emails requesting or sanctioning it?
		Langdale says there’s only one open email “Do his phone” – “demonstrably a false conception” he maintains. “Why are there not more?”
		“Where is the office cat?” is Langdale’s last question.
		Langdale points out that the Office Cat metaphor picked up by two “thoroughly unreliable” witnesses – Goodman and Dan Evans
	Failings of Prosecution Case
		Langdale says every witness the prosecution has called “has an agenda of their own to pursue”: Evans and Goodman “thoroughly suspect”
		Langdale criticises the “trial process” – no one defendant is more important than another: his criticisms of Prosecution are not “personal”
		Counsel for Coulson, now addresses the prior press coverage of phone hacking: “it’s not the tabloid press who is in trial”
		Langdale talks of law’s “delay”: asks jury to remember 14/04/14 – first day of Coulson’s evidence – “12 yrs exactly from Milly Dowler story”
		Langdale mentions “hostile and aggressive manner” in which the prosecution cross-examined Belinda Sharrier, Coulson’s PA
		Langdale talks about absence of emails – almost nothing for 2004 – “gaps in evidence must operate… to benefit of Mr Coulson” he says.
		“Whatever is insinuated by the prosecution, you cannot speculate to Coulson’s detriment where there is a gap” says Langdale.
		“Operating since 1843, with a lot to live up to” says Langdale of NOTW: “a competitive place to work”
		“Don’t forget the good” says Langdale of NOTW mentioning a variety of honourable witnesses from the Sunday tabloid who’ve appeared in court
		Langdale says “prosecution called 14 witnesses who used to work at NOTW” and claims they seemed to “discredit the evidence they gave”
		8 of 14 NOTW employees said “they’d never heard of phone hacking until Goodman’s arrest” points out Langdale for Coulson.
		Langdale reminds jury that 7 NOTW employees praised Coulson’s management skills.
		“It contradicts the prosecutions suggestion, you may think, that the paper was hardly War and Peace” says Langdale of volume of work at NOTW
		“Many positive aspects” to NOTW says Langdale “even though it might not be your cup of tea”
		Langdale says it’s “hardly the case” there was bullying at NOTW. He agrees it was “secretive” but it had to be.
	Guilty Pleas and Phone Hacking
		Langdale talks about the guilty pleas of Mulcaire, Miskiw, Thurlbeck and Weatherup “no guilt by association”: no “Andy top left” tasking.
		Langdale says of Coulson taking responsibility in 2007: “honourable and appropriate basis for resignation, but not for conviction”
		Langdale talks about a number of “wild assertions” from the “thoroughly tainted witnesses” Dan Evans and Clive Goodman at #hackingtrial
		Langdale turns to some pie charts the defence have produced from Mulcaire notes.
		Langdale says, of Mulcaire’s notes under Miskiw taskings, less than 5% are linked to stories in NOTW.
		Langdale turns to schedules showing hacking of Coulson from Mulcaire and NI private wire line
		Langdale says there’s no explanation for Coulson being “both a conspirator and victim” and asks why he wasn’t “better protected”
		Langdale says the lack of protection of Coulson’s phone against hacking is an indication he knew nothing about it.
		Langdale says Coulson “inherited Mulcaire” via Miskiw: “the prosecution rely on tiny reference to Mulcaire in not very prominent story”
		Turning the NOTW edition about Mulcaire AKA ‘Trigger’ – same days as Soham victims found.
		Langdale points out that though Sweet said Mulcaire was “generally known around the office” – Beasley and Scott contradict this.
	Dan Evans Evidence
		Langdale now turns to Dan Evans’ evidence.
		“Two very important pillars supporting prosecution case, Dan Evans and Clive Goodman” says Langdale: “two star witnesses”
		Langdale says even the prosecution said Evans and Goodman were “so unreliable they said to only believe them when evidence to back them up”
		“Not the right approach” says Langdale: “throw into the melting pot” – hardly consistent with rigorous approach”
		Langdale calls Dan Evans a “dishonest witness”: he tells jury “to keep in mind attempts to manipulate the process… to implicate Coulson”
		Langdale says “there are a number of similarities between Goodman and Evans … particular habit of blaming others, lawyers or bosses”
		Langdale summarises the history about Dan Evans’ arrest: hacking since 2005, stopping in 2006, then hacked Kelly Hoppen in June 2009
		“This man who was hired as an ace hacker, using such a clumsy method” says Langdale of Evans using his own phone to hack Kelly Hoppen.
		Langdale says Evans made “false witness statements” in civil case, claiming their were “sticky keys” on his phone.
		“I was towing the party line” said Evans of sticky keys excuse. Langdale says he stuck by that story.
		Langdale says Evans “tried to find a way out of his predicament” after arrest: and said “all I’m interested in is full immunity”
		Langdale talks about Section 71 and 73 SOCPA immunity deals.
		Langdale says it took five days before Dan Evans told his solicitors about the hacking of Daniel Craig.
		May 2012 – Evan’s solicitor O’Kane meets DI Moore about a SOCPA deal who asks: “does it include… the bigger picture… what others did?”
		July 2012 Dan Evans is interviewed by police for three days over Sunday Mirror and NOTW, Langdale reminds the jury at #hackingtrial
		Evans talks about taking the “wrong path” and going back to right path: “sentiments quickly abandoned when he didn’t get what he wanted”
		Another “scoping and debriefing interview” in September 2012: “shame they didn’t check on dates… of great Jiffy bag incident”
		“Dan Evans was telling the police what they wanted to hear” says Langdale: and in their enthusiasm police overlooked evidence.
		04/01/13 CPS reject full immunity for Evans. 08/01/13 Evans’ solicitors rejected partial section 71 deal.
		28/06/13 Evans new solicitors say Evans had not understood Section 73 immunity: “a clear example of Dan Evans not telling the truth”
		Langdale calls the information from Evans’ newly instructed solicitors about not seeing a Section 73 deal: “absolute nonsense”
		“Please reject the offer… when there’s no stomach to take investigation forward” wrote Evans to previous solicitors about partial immunity
		Langdale says all this proves Evans’ was “lying” and part of an “unseemly rush to get him to give evidence” at #hackingtrial
		Langdale calls Evans other evidence “less fact than fiction” – elements of truth about meeting at Aldwych, but can’t prove hack of Craig
		“You’re a company man now” recalls Langdale, and Evan’s evidence of Jiffy Bag: “the whole story a confection from start to finish”
		“One has to query the whole account given the significant number of elements… untrue or at least improbable” says Langdale of Craig hack
		15 minute break
		Justice Saunders tells the jury that his decision to join counts 2 and 3 with 1 was on the “basis of statute law and legal precedent”
		Justice Saunders didn’t join the counts “so the truth would come out” and doesn’t want the jury to get the wrong impression
		Langdale turns to Evans’ evidence about the Law/Miller/Craig story
		Langdale says Evans’ account of September 2005 “fabricated” and goes back to events of preceding five months.
		Langdale turns to NOTW pieces by other journalists about Sienna Miller in 12/02/05: she said she was “speaking off the record”
		Langdale asks the jury to consider whether this was “sensible account” by Sienna Miller about talking to a NOTW journalist.
		22/07/05 internal NOTW emails cited by Langdale about “crisis talks” and “special checks Dan Evans has made” over Miller and Hoppen.
		Langdale counters the prosecution’s suggestion that “special checks by Dan Evans” means phone hacking.
		Langdale turns to evidence of two hacks of Kelly Hoppen’s phone on 18/07/05 by Dan Evans.
		Langdale says Dan Evans’ evidence of this was “hopeless… he was starting to change his account” – initially saying Miller left message
		First version of Evans was he checked Miller’s number on his palm pilot. Second version it could have been Miller’s sister.
		“Where do you go with a witness like that who changes his account” asks Langdale:
		“Some special checks” says Langdale noticing the number of people on email: “broadcast to a diverse number of people”
		“Dan Evans had to agree [senior NOTW journalist] had given the game away” in email over “special cheks” says Langdale.
		Langdale says “special checks” refers to TDI tracing, blagging etc.
		Langdale asays “NOTW didn’t need to hack Kelly Hoppen at this time” over Miller/Law “NOTW were getting a lot of information from both camps”
		Langdale goes through the NOTW story about Sienna Miller “sobbing down the phone to Kelly” about Law: “not a message… a conversation”
		“There was quite a lot of traffic” said Evans “referring to special checks”: “This the only email, what happened to others?” asks Langdale
		Langdale turns to email Evans alleged he received telling him to “jump off a cliff” or find a story. That weekend he hacked Craig
		Evans said he hacked Craig on Sunday, and retrieved Miller message from Saturday. Went into office on Tuesday “wagging his tail” 27/09/05
		Langdale says of Evans’ claim he had never read other stories about Miller/Craig “he used the maybe I was on holiday routine”
		Langdale goes through Evans’ evidence of recording Miller’s message: “she gave a variable account… I love you might not mean anything”
		Langdale talks about Evans hacking a message from Kate Mosse to Daniel Craig while at Sunday Mirror saying “I love you” multiple times
		Langdale points out that Sienna Miller wasn’t in the Groucho club on that Sat/Sun, and “no trace” of Evans’ hack.
		Langdale goes through Evans’ account of telling NOTW staff – “no evidence at all of activity” Evans’ described says Langdale.
		Langdale goes through Evans’ evidence about arrival of Coulson and NOTW exec to listen to Miller voicemail. But Coulson wasn’t in London
		Langdale says that Evans’ evidence “it might have been the next day” he played tape “…. just won’t do”
		Langdale says the prosecution’s case had been “holed below the waterline… and so they tried to salvage something from the wreck”
		Langdale says “it’s extremely important” that during his x-exam of Evans he was firm about the “Tuesday”
		Prosecution had pointed out Evans had said the “thought” it was Tuesday. Langdale turns to 2012 interview on “Tuesday or whenever it was”
		“It was a Tuesday” continues Evans in police interview: and Senior NOTW journalist saying “this is fucking great” and Coulson arriving
		Langdale says prosecution case that this was on Wednesday because Labour Party conference meetings “cancelled”
		But Langdale says “prosecution completely ignored” Belinda Sharrier’s evidence that ticking of appointments mean they took place.
		Langdale says Sharrier completely “honest witness” who got “flustered” by prosecution cross examination.
		Langdale says the cross examination suggested “there was something sinister” about what Sharrier had done
		Langdale on the prosecution: “Mr Edis is capable of making running for a Number Nine bus look sinister”
		Langdale denies anything Sharrier did was “sinister” when Coulson resigned.
		Langdale talks about Sharrier’s account of dealing with emails, notebooks and personal items when Coulson resigned in Jan 2007
		Langdale goes through Evans’ use of trace agents TDI/ELI compared with the hacking of Daniel Craig.
		“There is no trace of any hacking of Daniel Craig‘s phone that weekend, on hub phone or mobile” says Langdale. Only later during the week
		“What’s he doing hacking Daniel Craig the next day?” asks Langdale of Evans activity after his account of the Jiffy bag moment at NOTW
		Sorry for brief interruption: Twitter for iPad decided to re-install itself.
		Langdale is going through additional hacks by Evans around Jade Goody “run of the mill ordinary stuff” and nothing on Miller/Craig
		Langdale goes through Evans’ account of using burners and his own phone for hacking, and “dealing with hit men” with fake phones.
		“It just comes out of his mouth with an extremely fertile imagination” says Langdale of Evan’s “inventiveness” over tabloid stories.
		Langdale goes through the copying of the Miller message, destroying the tape, putting in Jiffy Bag, false delivery and then put in safe
		Langdale goes through the “probablys” in Evans account of Miller hack and NOTW office celebrations.
		Langdale says Dan Evans got this account of destroying tape from his time at the Sunday Mirror
		“There never was a tape put into a Jiffy Bag, and dealt with the way Dan Evans suggests” says Langdale.
		Langdale says another NOTW journalist was getting the Miller/Law/Craig information from “sources”
		Timothy Langdale QC, for Coulson, goes through other examples of “Dan Evans deliberately fabricating material”
		Langdale calls Evans’ contradictory account of Daniel Craig Sienna Miller affair “a completely barmy story”
		Langdale goes through Evan’s account of Jude Law’s “hostile aggressive sound message” left on Daniel Craig‘s phone: “plainly a fabrication”
		Langdale points out that Law confronted Craig in a conversation, according to his evidence, and didn’t leave it on a voicemail
		“You’d think if you were the police” says Langdale of Law voicemail message: “you might have bothered to check what the phone records show”
		“If it was true” says Langdale of Evans’ trying to impress “rude and aggressive” senior he would have immediate told of Law voicemail
		“Where does that leave you, with a witness the prosecution seek to rely on?” asks Langdale “obviously, patently invented another voicemail”
		Langdale turns to an email to Coulson on 08/10/05 about Dan Evans getting the byline for his “checks” and bring in Goody, Gerrard stories
		Again, Langdale says these “checks” mentioned in email to Coulson would be about phone “traffic” and tracing.
		Langdale turns to 01/11/05 email from Evans to another NOTW journo “my worry is the same one I put Miller Craig stuff on that was destroyed”
		Langdale says it can’t be the same tape because he destroyed that tape before November.
		Langdale explains “parodying Dan Evans” that “everyone knew” he’d destroyed the Miller/Craig tape: “that myth just won’t do”
		“That’s another example of him saying the first thing that comes into his head” says Langdale of Evans. Break till 2pm.
		Back at #hackingtrial after lunch
		Langdale corrects what he said “about what police could have bothered to look at” about Dan Evans. They had no access to electronic diaries
		12/02/06 New Bond girl story cited by Langdale: Dan Evans claimed “could have been hacked from voicemail…. changing his story”
		Langdale talks about Evans’ reason for leaving the Sunday Mirror – wanted to get back to real journalism rather than phone hacking.
		Langdale asks of Dan Evans “why go?” to NOTW from Sunday Mirror if he was being recruited to hack phones?
		“The NOTW had a perfectly good hacking service already” says Langdale of Evans: “if the prosecution are to be believed”
		Langdale says Evans went about phone hacking with “some relish”: if phone hacking was “no secret” why did they use “euphemisms”
		“What was the point of doing that?” asks Langdale of ducking behind desks, secret rooms, Evans’ said of his hacking: “if everyone knew?”
		Langdale asks why, if Coulson knew about Evans’ hacking, there was any need to talk about it a One Aldwych interview?
		Langdale turns to an email which the prosecution claim support Dan Evans’ evidence 25/05/05 about Hannah Pawlby and Charles Clarke
		Langdale asks “what is sinister” about Thurlbeck having the mobile phone number of the Home Secretary’s advisor?
		“You simply cannot rely on anything he says against Mr Coulson” concludes Langdale on Evan. He now turns to Clive Goodman
	Clive Goodman’s Evidence
		Langdale calls Goodman’s evidence a “remarkable exhibition” – more memorable to the jury because more recent.
		Langdale recalls Coulson’s evidence on Goodman “resentful…. a trick customer…. you saw that yourselves in the witness box” he tells jury
		“You could have fooled me” says Langdale of Goodman’s claim that he didn’t “take any pleasure” in implicating Coulson in phone hacking.
		Langdale says that Spens, Goodman’s QC, spent 1 hour on defence and rest on attacking Coulson.
		BREAKING; Langdale says of Goodman’s counsel’s, David Spens QC, closing speech “it’s unusual… to face two prosecution speeches”
		Langdale calls it an “unusual feature” that prosecution were “able to train Goodman gun on Andy Coulson“
		Coulson’s QC says prosecution knew Goodman was guilty of “hacking on a far wider scale” and he was “fortunate” not to face further charges
		BREAKING: Langdale calls Goodman a “surrogate prosecutor” who can be deployed without any “comeback against him”
		Langdale repeats prosecution claim that Goodman can be trusted when he is backed up with documents: “Let’s look at his evidence”
		Langdale says Goodman seems “credible” on sources, Royal Household, and own admissions of “fanciful constructions”
		Langdale runs through Goodman’s claims of demotion, humiliation at news conferences, bullying, young Royals, constantly berated.
		“Not quite the picture painted by Evans [I think he means Goodman]” says Langdale: “he was never demoted”
		Language “You’ve seen it all, email after email… this was a newspaper office, no doubt pretty tough talking, voices could get a bit crisp”
		Langdale says “there’s a pattern” of Goodman missing conferences and Coulson saying “where the hell are you?”
		Langdale points out that Goodman never mentioned any of this alleged bullying “two lurches after a rabbit” [hare] in his dismissal appeal
		Langdale talks about some sympathetic NOTW emails sent to Goodman about his daughter’s illness “sorry to hear that”
		Langdale talks of Goodman’s “touchiness… and primadonna behaviour you’ve seen in witness box” in response Coulson’s ‘fine’ reply on email
		Langdale turns to the 2005 Kuttner email about the “problems Clive Goodman was causing… not cowed into submission” no mention of bullying
		Langdale talks of “world weariness and frustration” Goodman caused at NOTW: he says the jury saw the same when Edis lost his cool with him
		“Perhaps you got an inkling” about Goodman says Langdale, in his appearance in witness box: “hardly a shrinking violet”
		Langdale says these characteristics caused “Goodman to falsely blame” Coulson for phone hacking.
		“It’s obvious to any reader that Goodman has some sources of his own” says Langdale:
		“If you look at language and assume hacking, you can easily assume the language means hacking” says Langdale of “benefit of hindsight”
		Langdale says of language “turning mobiles… scammed… quiet look….” etc “nothing to do with hacking”
		Langdale: “Goodman very prone… to florid language where simple language would do, claims that verged on fantasy” – humbug, a load of bull
		“He acknowledged he could spin a story for dramatic effect, and in fact tell lies” says Langdale of Goodman.
		Langdale reminds the jury that Coulson thought the emails about Palace Cops “a load of bull”
		Langdale: “If he had thought Clive Goodman was paying a policeman… he would say don’t be such a bloody idiot and send me that again””
		Langdale goes through the amounts of money passing through Goodman’s account for cash contributors – average about £25k a year
		Langdale points out how Goodman didn’t withdraw any cash for a year: his evidence of a new lifestyle, and inheritance – not using for cash
		“Why is it cash withdrawals resume in 2006?” when Anderson, Farish and Hall stop getting paid in cash in Spring 2006 asks Langdale
		“You’ve only got Clive Goodman‘s words” on who was getting the cash, says Langdale talking of “payment for sources for lifted stories”
		Langdale goes through a series of stories which are a “straight lift from other publications” which Farish, Hall and Anderson got paid for.
		“They must have thought it was money for old rope” says Langdale of Goodman’s account of paying his sources for lifted stories.
		Langdale goes through criticisms of Goodman by Kuttner of claiming money for “repeats” or “a story he had lifted”
		Langdale goes through Goodman’s evidence on Mulcaire and Miskiw.
		“Clive Goodman knew Miskiw was using Mulcaire to hack long before he told you” says Goodman, promising more evidence of his “dishonesty”
		Goodman had said “it was all done through Greg… no direct access to Glenn Mulcaire” but then said Mulcaire called him in October 2005
		Langdale says when confronted with “incontrovertible evidence” Goodman changed to saying he had “occasional” contact with Mulcaire.
		“Does his story about Mulcaire stand up” asks Langdale: “No it does not” Goodman hacking long before he originally confessed to.
		Langdale goes through admission Goodman “scammed” info from Helen Asprey that he himself was hacked. But tape found at Mulcaire’s house.
		Langdale says Goodman was “doing something odd with money” about the Asprey hack, which billed against Anderson.
		Goodman also paid Miskiw to pass on £700 to Mulcaire for hack – cash that went into internal mail: “Doesn’t make any sense at all”
		By early 2005, there is direct phone contact between Goodman and Mulcaire – Van Cuttsem story in April. ‘Hall’ source gets £250
		Langdale talks of Goodman’s “grosser untruths” in the witness box: couldn’t remember the Royal Princes and Kate Middleton.
		“If there are I don’t recall” said Goodman of further hacking. Langdale: “His counsel called it a white lie, I’m going to call it a whopper”
		Langdale says Goodman deployed another “dishonest line” on his return: “I don’t recall the question”
		“A complete farce in the witness box” says Langdale of Goodman’s ability to recall of hacking Prince William at Sandhurst
		“It’s astonishing that you heard about this extensive further hacking when the defence call it” says Langdale: the prosecution could have
		Langdale breaks for 15 minutes saying he knows this is “very tough going” for the jury
		After the break, Langdale turns to three issues: Alexander Project, transcript of Prince Harry, and conclusion of Mulcaire retainer.
		Langdale says there’s evidence Coulson did not know that the Goodman/Mulcaire Alexander Project was based on hacking.
		“Why on earth did he agree to it?” asks Langdale: NOTW already paying Mulcaire “Over £100k a year on contract… makes no sense whatsoever”
		“What else is he going to be doing for this £500 a week” asks Langdale of Mulcaire “why can’t he do it himself under his £100k contract?”
		“Hardly a massive increase in information the NOTW was going to get” says Langdale of hacking royal aides
		Langdale asks why Coulson would give a “trial period to Glenn Mulcaire.. to hack three extra phones… doesn’t make any sense”
		“He knew it to be utter nonsense” says Langdale of Goodman’s claim that he was getting “tit bits” of security services hacking of Royals.
		“He couldn’t have told Coulson this, and even if he did, why would Coulson pay £500 pw for information piggy backed off security services?”
		Langdale talks about a “territorial and combative department head” who would objected to another use of Mulcaire.
		“It would have caused an enormous row” Goodman said of senior NOTW journo knowing about the Alexander Project.
		Langdale goes to Goodman’s first legal statement after arrest – his proof of evidence in 29/10/06 and a “paragraph than never resurfaced”
		Paragraph 28 of Goodman’s Proof of Evidence sets out the position with Mulcaire, another desk editor, reporters “not allowed to talk to him”
		First Goodman proof of evidence says he discussed the Mulcaire Alexander project “often” with “territorial” desk head.
		Goodman’s proof of evidence said Coulson would “square” other NOTW journo and they would “discuss” results of Alexander project “often”
		Langdale says Goodman had “abandoned” the position that other NOTW journo knew by 2007
		“Mr Goodman will tell serious lies to back up what is essentially his false story” says Langdale.
		Langdale reminds jury Coulson said that Kuttner made the decision which budget the Alexander/Mulcaire payments came out of.
		“If there’s one document” says Langdale about Alexander Project “that shows the real position its this one” He directs jury to specific tab
		“These documents demonstrate absolutely that Coulson did not know that Alexander was Glenn Mulcaire” says Langdale.
		“They make no sense at all if Coulson knows Alexander is Mulcaire” says Langdale of Feb 06 “matey’s weekly payment” email with stories
		“Over 8 week period used stories worth” almost 4k “and obtained long list of names, contacts, connections” wrote Goodman of Mulcaire project
		“Where is it?” asks Langdale of this “long list” of contacts from Alexander Project. Goodman was unable to give “any sensible answer”
		Goodman wrote in Feb 06 “there are costs for Matey for setting up…. will go elswhere… he’s not a hack”
		“Completely and absolutely unnecessary if Coulson knows he’s Mulcaire” says Langdale of this email. Mulcaire on contract: can’t go elsewhere
		Goodman writes a “big story goldmine” – “completely and utterly pointless if the editor knows who this is” remarks Langdale.
		Langdale says Goodman’s line “pretty devastating for my network” must mean human sources.
		“That document by itself, and please read every word of it, demonstrates Goodman telling a false story” abt Coulson knowing it was Mulcaire
		Langdale says he’ll “probably take most the day” tomorrow to conclude his closing speech, but will finish with Goodman in the morning.
		Langdale not addresses Goodman’s assertion that after arrest, Coulson was “conspiring with NI to make me take all the blame”
		Another bug apart from DM’s in new @twitter @Support iPad ap: can’t repost failed drafts
		“You will decide what you think” says Langdale to jury about the Alexander Project. “if you can bear another half hour” on Goodman
		BREAKING: Langdale says it’s “ironic” that prosecution and Goodman allege a coverup at NI when police and CPS had “coverup” in 2006
		“It’s not for Mr Coulson to defend everything done by NI on his behalf before his resignation” says Langdale of alleged cover-up
		Langdale talks of “stark” accusations by Goodman against Henri Brandman, his own solicitor – but he did not tell them the truth
		Langdale notices that Goodman did not include John Kelsey Fry on his “hit list” though he was the “master strategist” according to Goodman
		“All the major decisions were made on the advice of Kelsey Fry” says Langdale: which is a “fly in the ointment” for Goodman’s coverup theory
		Langdale says Kelsey Fry QC was “airbrushed” out of the picture: “How could there be a coverup without him? There couldn’t. There wasn’t”
		Langdale: “You might think an organisation like NI… would be concerned about damaging allegations that are a lie… as much as true”
		Langdale goes through post arrest note which he claims show Goodman “giving a story” to Stuart Kuttner
		Langdale deals with Goodman’s allegations Coulson told him that, from discussions with home office, he wouldn’t face a custodial sentence
		Langdale says a “lack of clarity” “permeates” Goodman’s alleged contemporaneous notes of conversations with Coulson post arrest
		Langdale says Goodman has given an “unreliable and slanted” account of Cafe Rouge meeting with Coulson that was “taped up”
		Langdale asks why Goodman didn’t asked Coulson about Mulcaire on tape to get “absolute confirmation”?
		“Very important feature” says Langdale about Goodman failing to ask Coulson directly about “carrying the can”
		14.04 date of Goodman’s contact meeting: 13.55 Cafe Rouge meeting ends: gets home and listens to tape – 20 mins long – poor quality
		“Somehow he manages to create another report 19 minutes after meeting…. somehow the tape seems to have got lost” says Langdale of Goodman
		“Nothing surprising or sinister” says Langdale of Brooks passing on police briefing about hacking to NI lawyer, and lawyer to Coulson
		Langdale says 03/11/06 document about Brandman “being frustrated” about Goodman shows there was no coverup – operating under instruction
		Langdale now turns to the ‘almost unintelligible” transcript of Goodman meeting with NI Lawyer: it shows “perfectly good relations”
		Justice Saunders: “My concentration is beginning to drift” Langdale: “Mine is too” – court breaks 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 – 20 May
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 21 May
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 27 May

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