Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 10 June

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

Tuesday 10 June 2014

Summary
	The Summing Up Continues on Count 1
		The last full day of Justice Saunders Summing Up
		Justice Saunders QC continues his review of Count 1
		Goodman pleads Guilty
		Coulson’s Resignation
		Brooks job offer to Goodman
		The Guardian Hacking article in 2009
		Email Deletion Policy
	The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 6
		Count 6 and the Archived Boxes
	The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 7
		Count 7 and the Removal of Evidence

The Summing Up Continues on Count 1
	The last full day of Justice Saunders Summing Up
		Last full day of judge’s summing up at #hackingtrial- huge thanks to @JonLippitt and @thetuftii who have summed me up every day for 7 months
		I wouldn’t have been able to record nearly half a million words of evidence of the #hackingtrial without your individual contributions
		In less than a week, 1/3rd of costs for Inside the Phone Hacking Trial covered: http://www.hackingtrial.com/#!about/c240r That’s why you get named in the book
	Justice Saunders QC continues his review of Count 1
		Justice Saunders mentions something “Coulson relied on” in his description yesterday of the Alexander Project with Goodman and Mulcaire
		“Mr Langdale relied on” a passage in Goodman’s early proof of evidence, which is different in his evidence.
		Justice Saunders tells the jury that he’s slightly changing the order of evidence to suit the commitments of defendants.
		The events after Goodman’s arrest in 2006
		Justice Saunders now addresses what the prosecution call “cover up” and the defence call “damage limitation”
		Justice Saunders says that though it is “ironic” two editors who exposed wrong doing would be trying to limit damage of phone hacking
		Justice Saunders says it is legitimate: the question is whether defendants were covering up their own culpability, not just the company’s
		Justice Saunders says Coulson cannot be held accountable for what happened at NI after he left in 2007
		Langdale says that even if there was a coverup, it doesn’t mean that it was anything to do with what Coulson did, and maybe fighting lies.
		Justice Saunders says the same applies to Brooks: were they trying to combat Goodman’s lies.
		Coulson’s evidence is that he wouldn’t have been offering to keep Goodman in a job if he’d known about his allegations.
		The prosecution say that Coulson kept offering Goodman a job to keep him quiet.
		Coulson’s evidence is that Goodman got a good deal from a limited investigation, precisely because he got legal cover from NI
		“Why there was a limited investigation is not for us to speculate about” says Saunders about the 2006 original phone hacking inquiry.
		Justice Saunders tells the jury they will have to look at the evidence to see if it supports Goodman or Coulson’s argument.
		Saunders says there’s nothing wrong with NI paying for Goodman’s lawyers, but they owed their duty to him not NI.
		“They also have a duty of confidentiality” says Saunders of Henri Brandman, Goodman’s lawyer in 2006.
		Any advice should be “in Clive Goodman‘s interest and not the interests of News International” says Saunders of lawyers’ advice
		Saunders runs through Brandman’s advice to Goodman after arrest to “say he’s a lone wolf acting on his own”
		Coulson and Kuttner were involved in meetings with Brandman after Goodman’s arrest “it looks like they were advising NI not Goodman”
		Kelsey Fry was at these meetings without Goodman, but at that point was acting for NI and did not know he would be acting for Goodman
		10/08/06 Kuttner asks Goodman about police interview: Kuttner provided money to tide Goodman over after arrest.
		Justice Saunders asks to the jury to turn to the contemporaneous note made by Kuttner after talking to him on release from custody in 2006
		Goodman says these notes show “Kuttner was pumping him for information… and finding out what the police know”
		Marks on the original handwritten note show his emphasis: mainly about other NOTW staff mentioned by police to Goodman in interview
		Coulson said he knew nothing of the matters in Kuttner’s notes: meetings with lawyers to defend company, not personal interests.
		Coulson said the allegation that secret services were providing royal voicemail access would have “been the story of a lifetime”
		“What did Mr Coulson know?” asks Saunders about the briefings after the arrest of Goodman in 2006.
		Goodman’s contact note of a meeting with Coulson has been queried in terms of dates: Goodman says they’ve been re-dated when saved.
		Saunders reads out Goodman’s claim that Coulson told him he had contacts in police and Home Office, and that he wouldn’t be imprisoned
		Goodman says he found Coulson’s call “disturbing” feeling he was being “bounced” into pleading guilty: so he downloaded NI emails
		Goodman downloaded from NI server in an Internet cafe several emails relating to hacking after his arrest in August 2006
		Goodman says he downloaded those emails “for self protection, because he believed he was being hung out to dry” – soon after arrest.
		Goodman forwarded emails to Tony Lorenzo, an employment laywer, at Lewis Silkin:
		Goodman’s claimed he wasn’t acting alone, but that the editor had authorised Mulcaire payments: he covertly recorded Coulson at Cafe Rouge
		Goodman’s note of Coulson conversation was that “no one wanted a jail sentence” but Goodman would continue job if he said “he acted alone”
		“You can be one of those people who come back – it’s up to you” said Coulson to Goodman.
		Goodman believed Coulson had lots of details about the case he could only got from Henri Brandman: and he used same “lone wolf” expression
		“That put the fear of God up me” said Goodman of Coulson using the same “lone wolf” line as his lawyer Brandman
		18/08/0 two days after Goodman’s first hearing his sister writes to Coulson “he was pleased you went to see him”
		The magistrates court couldn’t deal with the conspiracy charge, so Goodman’s case went to the Crown Court.
		31/08/06 Coulson rang Goodman to offer him serialisation work. Preparation for the Court case began with Proof of Evidence.
		Henri Brandman wrote the first draft of the Proof of Evidence – Goodman made amendments that Coulson and Kuttner knew of Alexander payments.
		Goodman wrote a confidential note to his counsel Kelsey Fry with his “personal circumstances… references to ‘the editor and dark arts'”
		Goodman also mentions to Kelsey Fry that he had to produce “transcripts of voicemail messages… for executives… Mulcaire well known”
		Goodman says Kelsey Fry had the confidential proof when he met with NI lawyer later.
		NI lawyer told Goodman he couldn’t expect to keep his job at NI if he named other people, and Coulson would deny all knowledge of payments
		Both Kelsey Fry and Brandman were aware that Goodman was alleging others were involved – both told him not to mention to judge.
		“For what reasons was that advice being given” asks Saunders of lawyers “in so far as Mr Coulson and [NI Lawyer] involved”
		Saunders now cites the recorded conversation between Coulson and Goodman: Langdale asked why he didn’t try to entrap Coulson in confession
		Goodman’s answer to this is that he though Coulson would “smell a rat” and he still hoped to keep his job.
		Saunders cites a passage where Goodman explains to Coulson how Mulcaire was contracted: “long before Brooks and Coulson arrived at NOTW”
		Saunders asks the jury to “read” Goodman/Coulson transcript and consider Langdale’s submission that co-conspirators wouldn’t talk that way
		Some discussion between Spens and Langdale about the timing of Carluccio meeting between Goodman and NI Lawyer.
		Saunders turns to partly inaudible recorded conversation between NI lawyer and Goodman in Carluccio’s cafe in September 2006
		08/09/11 is the date of this Carluccio meeting: NI Lawyer had “reported” back to Coulson: “he didn’t know what was going on”
		22/11/06 Goodman told by Kelsey Fry “the judge would take a dim view of naming others… Goodman decided to accept the advice of counsel”
		Saunders reads an email from NI lawyer to Coulson discussing Goodman’s conversations with his lawyers and confidential ‘essay’ on others
	Goodman pleads Guilty
		29/11/06 Goodman pleads guilty and there was a discussion by Coulson of NOTW apology for hacking “on his watch”
		Goodman’s counsel say Coulson was trying not to antagonise Goodman. Coulson’s counsel say he was just try to make things better for Goodman
		Justice Saunders goes through the various versions of the NOTW apology and statement after original Goodman and Mulcaire guilty pleas
		“It’s for you to consider” says Saunders to the jury, an email that discusses what Goodman might say between plea and sentencing.
		Goodman asks advice from Kelsey Fry whether he should name other NOTW desk editors in his “plea of mitigation” – told to leave them out.
		NI Lawyer turns up at legal meeting when Goodman told “not to name others”: he would still have a job. Goodman complained about NI lawyer
		NI lawyer was supposed to turn up and talk about probation service and Sara’s law: instead, Goodman wrote, offered “crude carrot and stick”
		Goodman wrote to his lawyers in 2006 that he was more frightened by NI lawyer than the prosecution case against him.
		NI Lawyer writes to Coulson about public NOTW statement and impact on Goodman: “with probation man he’ll stray off the preferred line”
		Coulson asks NI lawyer about “preferred line” “what makes you think that?”
		Goodman says this breached his confidentiality with lawyers. NI lawyer had right to defend NI but not to use contacts with Brandman to do so
		Goodman says he did name Coulson in probation report, but a “senior editor” is just named in final version,
		NI lawyer reports to NI exec about “what’s been going on” with Goodman and his original hacking case. 31/12/06
		NI lawyers report to NI exec says Goodman says hacking “done with authorisation of editor…. real possibility allegation come out”
		Coulson has said this is the first time he head of Goodman allegations at end of 2006
		Defence say Goodman is telling lies about Coulson in his “desire for revenge’ and rely on email to his employment lawyer
		Goodman thanks Lorenzo for “keeping a rein my Old Testament inclination for vengeance”
		Goodman says he’s over personal resentment but angry over NI. Langdale responded with memorable phrase “You could have fooled me”
		Coulson has said that he spoke to Rupert Murdoch around arrests “the most valuable thing a newspaper has is the trust of its readers”
		Coulson’s case is that the instruction of lawyers was part of his “duty of care” towards Goodman.
		Justice Saunders cites an email from Coulson to his PA to print out his confidential draft messages around this time.
		Coulson evidence is that he never told Goodman to plead guilty, but kept him on full salary.
		Coulson says he would have been unlikely to stay 4hrs at legal meeting after Goodman arrest, and didn’t know then of his allegations.
		Coulson said he recognised phrase “going off the reservation” and it did reflect the way Goodman had behaved: did not recognise “Lone Wolf”
		Coulson denied Goodman’s claim they had leverage with police: the NOTW had a difficult relationship with Sir Ian Blair at the time.
		Justice Saunders now turns to NI Lawyer’s note of Brooks’ meeting with police on 15/09/06
		Coulson briefed by NI lawyer: Saunders” “does this mean as prosecution say there was a lot going on at NOTW that had to be kept under wraps”
		Justice Saunders points out that Coulson decided not to tell the police around Goodman arrest about Thurlbeck hack of Blunkett
		Coulson, NI lawyer, and NI exec all knew about Blunkett hack: “How could they not have discussed this?” asks prosecution.
		Coulson’s evidence is that he and other execs did not ‘conspire’ to conceal Blunkett hack from police but independently withheld information
		“The whole issue of when Mr Coulson got to know who Goodman was blaming is important” says Saunders; but maybe some confusion over time.
		Coulson did find out about Goodman’s essay but not in detail: and had no idea what the “preferred line” is mentioned by NI lawyer.
	Coulson’s Resignation
		Coulson said he had decided to resign from NOTW over christmas: he told his wife, Brooks and brother in law
		Coulson held back his resignation until sentencing. Rupert Murdoch rang to thank him the day he resigned.
		Coulson’s PA emptied his office and he collected diaries and notebooks from her house. PA said she knew no discussions of phone hacking.
		Sharrier, Coulson’s PA, said he mainly used his memory or made notes on scraps of paper: she doesn’t know what happened to printed emails
		14/11/10 Coulson meets Brooks for breakfast – he had no recollection of her saying about emails that opened Operation Weeting.
		By Christmas 2010 Coulson had decided to resign from Number 10
		Coulson handed his notebooks to his lawyers. He has no idea where they are now.
		Mulcaire’s payments continued after his arrest in August 2006 well into 2007: Justice Saunders cites emails between Kuttner and NI Lawyer.
		Coulson emails Kuttner in December 2006 asking if Mulcaire’s payments will end this month: he suggest this months payment is final
		NI lawyer replies that continuing Mulcaire payments are useful for “keeping him non hostile”
		Kuttner talked of picking up Goodman from police station: he had very little involvement after that. Denies he was probing Goodman.
		Kuttner attended legal meetings after Goodman arrest but can’t remember what they are about, or other NOTW journo mentioned on his note
		Kuttner notes after Goodman debrief another NOTW journo “close to Glenn” and NI call data indicating that back in August 2008
		Kuttner’s notebooks were archived in the archives – from where they were recovered.
		Goodman sacked while in prison and paid 70k in lieu of notice. A letter by Colin Myler initiates the “single rogue reporter” line.
		15 minute break.
	Brooks job offer to Goodman
		Back after the break at the #hackingtrial Saunders is going through Goodman’s appeal and the Harbottle and Lewis emails never handed over
		Goodman covertly recorded first appeal on 20/03/07 with Cloke and Myler 20/04/07 Brooks offered Goodman job at the Sun he didn’t take
		Brooks said the job offer was to stop Goodman going to an industrial tribunal – but it was only half way through the hearing
		Saunders suggests NI had already made up his mind on Goodman’s appeal. Brooks offered Goodman a second job he didn’t take
		Prosecution say Brooks took a “full part in the damage limitation”: Brooks said she was acting out of loyalty to NI Exec.
		Saunders asks the jury to consider whether Brooks was trying to stop “lies” coming out about NI, or her own involvement.
		Saunders points out that Counts 6 and 7 can relate to hiding evidence of others as well as Brooks.
		Brooks was on holiday when Goodman arrested: she was not involved in sorting things out.
		In Brooks’ evidence, the Mulcaire Goodman arrest was part of a collective failure to rein in private detectives
		Brooks met Superintendent Surtees at the RAC Club – they told Brooks her phone had been hacked, even though she changed pin.
		“Senior NI personnel including Rupert Murdoch knew this meeting was taking place” says Saunders of Brooks’ meeting with police in 2006
		Brooks used this meeting to find out what the police had discovered, both for NI and for Andy Coulson, says Saunders. Cites NI Lawyer note
		There are some difference between hand written note by NI lawyer, and email version: but they tell you what Brooks knew at time
		Notes; 110 victims, £1m of payments to Mulcaire, 5-10 will give evidence, not widening case to other NOTW journos “directly accessing”
		Brooks to NI Lawyer: Khan and Hugh Grant words identical to New articles: lots of phone contact between Mulcaire and NOTW.
		In handwritten note by NI lawyer some initials, prosecution say, refer to another NOTW journo other than Goodman.
		Brooks has no recollect of any other NOTW journos being mentioned by police in 2006: prosecution say she couldn’t believe Rogue Reporter
		Brooks discussed affair with Coulson and NI exec: Coulson resigned. It was NI Exec’s idea to leak that her phone had been hacked, she said
		Saunders rereads the much cited “It’s going so well today” email exchanged between Coulson and Brooks on day of Goodman/Mulcaire guilty plea
		Coulson said in evidence that this was one of the worst days of his life: all he meant that was the press reporting was limited and fair.
		“It never was leaked” says Saunders of Mulcaire hacking of Brooks’ phone
		Brooks says of offering Goodman job back that she wanted to stop him leaking lies about NOTW.
		Brooks said that an industrial tribunal would created “damaging headlines” but no allegations against her by Goodman.
		Prosecution argue that if Goodman was lying his case would be dismissed by industrial tribunal.
	The Guardian Hacking article in 2009
		Sept 2009 Brooks becomes CEO of News International reporting to James Murdoch – she’d known about promotion from July 2009
		Guardian publish in 2009 allegations of widespread hacking – but not prior to 2005. ‘For Neville’ emails about Gordon Taylor emerge.
		Gordon Taylor claim settled by NI “for large amount of money”: Brooks accepts she did nothing to investigate phone hacking in 2009
		“Whether the best interests of the company were best served by damage limitation exercise” asks Saunders mentioning costs since.
		Saunders asks the jury to look at the settlement organised by Brooks with Max Clifford “with some care”
		Saunders says that Max Clifford litigation team wanted “Mulcaire to name names”: opposition to order came from Mulcaire, costs paid by NI
		Max Clifford wanted deal in writing. Brooks didn’t want that, as she was about to appear under oath at DCMS committee.
		20/09/10 Brooks met Max Clifford and settled a £25k for something around £1m: she said principle reason was stop Mulcaire naming names.
		Brooks also contacted Sunday Times to stop them publishing a story about a Max Clifford client, Clifford didn’t want published.
		Brooks was not concerned about her personal position she said, but protecting financial and reputaitonal damage to the company
		Brooks took legal advice, but it was her decision to settle with Max Clifford. She addressed this issue in early prepared statement.
		Saunders asks the jury to compare Brooks’ prepared statement on Clifford and her evidence in witness box.
		In prepared statement Brooks said Clifford had five years loss of earnings from the NOTW because of fall out with Coulson.
		To the jury, Brooks said the “main aim” was to stop Mulcaire naming names: “Has she forgotten… or is this a coverup of the coverup?”
		“This all begins to unravel” says Justice Saunders as he turns to 01/09/10 New York Times article naming wider hacking at NOTW
		This NYT article mentioned Dan Evans and the For Neville emails. Brooks said she was assured by Colin Myler investigation taken place.
	Email Deletion Policy
		Saunders talks about the many ‘admissions’ on email deletion: “nothing wrong with an email deletion policy per se”
		Prosecution say Brooks was using email deletion as an excuse to get rid of an incriminating emails.
		Saunders cites Brooks email “No company wide comms. Yes to Jan 10. Clean sweep”: Prosecution say no provision for keeping relevant emails
		Brooks says knew little of email archiving, but knew it needed modernising. James Murdoch arrived from Sky: couldn’t believe how antiquated
		Brooks says the date Jan 2010 was because move to TMS wasn’t until 2011: so year’s retention.
		Prosecution says there was no provision to keep emails for litigation at this clean sweep moment.
		“Some 3 million emails permanently from pre 2005” says Saunders: Prosecution say not a coincidence.
		Defence say prosecution have misinterpreted these emails: everyone would have understood “clean sweep” would be subject to legal limitation
		Saunders explains 27/01/10 legal retention doc precedes Brooks’ “clean sweep” email.
		Brooks writes to News Corp exec about suspension of NOTW journo after disclosure in the Sienna Miller case of further hack emails
		Will Lewis now in charge of internal investigation “all this going on during the bid for BSkyB” says Saunders.
		Those three email came out of Sienna Miller litigation: NOTW journo sacked: Coulson resigns.
		In 25/01/11 – the day before emails given to police – Brooks asks Hanna to give her office a “clean sweep”: defence say regular event.
		In March 2011 “suggestions made in Parliament hacking happened during Brooks’s editorship”: she wrote political motivations:
		Justice Saunders says Chris Bryant is not here to answer Brooks’ allegations himself, but as Milly Dowler proved the timescale was true.
		But, Justice Saunders adds, the fact that hacking happened under Brooks’ NOTW editorship does not mean she knew it.
		Police very angry that lawyers from Burton Copeland removed things from James Weatherups arrest.
		In April Brooks convinced she would be arrested. The Harbottle Lewis files found. Lord McDonald took the files to police 20/06/11
		04/07/11 Guardian Milly Dowler story published on line – the false hope element erroneous. Brooks heard at fertility clinic
		Matter raised in Parliament by Tom Watson, as an MP friend of Charlie Brooks informed him by email.
		Brooks wrote to police, Dowlers and her staff: she started getting death threats. Concerned about ‘killer photograph’ on arrest.
		Brooks said she considered resigning on Dowler story, not because she knew anything about it because it was on her watch.
		Decision to close NOTW, talked about before, now taken. Murdoch tells Brooks not to resign till he gets to UK
		Brooks writes to James Murdoch with a Plan B to slam Colin Myler and NI exec, and “ring fenced for me, though I hardly have reputation left”
		Brooks reports to James Murdoch advice from Tony Blair: “an independent inquiry…. Lord McDonald mentioned again”
		Brooks is planning how to re-employ sacked NOTW staff. Angry Town Hall meeting on 08/07/11
		Prosecution suggest Plan B and Blair emails attempts by Brooks to hang onto her job. Brooks says responding to Murdoch for her to stay
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 6
	Count 6 and the Archived Boxes
		Justice Saunders goes into great detail summing up: record 7k words tweeting yesterday could be beaten today at #hackingtrial
		Justice Saunders is now moving to Count Six: he explains he’s spent the majority of trial going through hacking: the other counts important
		“Same attention please to other counts as count one” says Saunders who then goes through allegations Carter removed Brooks’ archive boxes
		“In this charge, and this charge alone, you convict both or acquit both” says Saunders over Count Six
		The inventory for the archive boxes said they contained notebooks for 1995-2007 and covered part of the time for Count One/alleged coverup
		The archive boxes taken out the day Coulson was arrested and NOTW preparing for last edition: prosecution say Carter must have known this
		Saunders explains how the boxes were taken from archives, to NI, to Carter’s house, and by all admissions the contents disposed.
		“The issues you have to decide: what did the boxes contain… why were they removed… did Carter instigate it?” Saunders tells the jury
		“How did it happen boxes were delivered on the 8th rather than the 11th. What happened to the contents” asks Saunders.
		On 8th July NOTW closure was announced and Brooks drafted resignation letter – the prosecution say “opportunity to remove” coming to an end
		Defence case is that if these boxes were incriminating, why didn’t Brooks remove them in 2006, or 2009 – instead put in archive – or 2011?
		Defence ask why Brooks didn’t remove archive boxes during arrests of early 2011 “she had plenty of opportunity”
		Carter worked for Brooks from 1995 till her resignation: she took redundancy a week after Brooks left.
		Carter wrote a beauty column, for six years around 2009: she kept scrap books.
		Deborah Keegan worked for Brooks from time to time at the Sun prior to promotion to NOTW: became second PA when Brooks returned to Sun
		Keegan was on holiday the seven boxes removed from archives.
		Brooks, according to Carter, only occasionally used notebooks, pages and notebooks thrown away. An A3 pad main source of notetaking.
		They used desk diaries until 2009 when electronic diaries replaced them.
		Keegan said Brooks didn’t regularly keep notebooks: also confirms use of A3 pad. Carried leather folder as CEO.
		Brooks herself said that when she became editor she rarely used notebooks. Defence say there may have been notebooks, but not regularly
		On the filing of the boxes in September 2009: Brooks stored personal stuff in filing cabinets. She knew nothing of filing – done by others.
		Carter says she never used archive facility before or after 2009: this was the one and only time she filed for Brooks. \
		Keegan however had archived her own notebooks, and for Rebekah Brooks. She filled in a form. Temps did some other filing.
		“None of that other material – apart from those 7 boxes – has been removed from archives. All the other stuff is still thee” says Saunders
		When Brooks become CEO the available space was much more restrictive. Carter didn’t really want to move to “corporate land”
		At first, Brooks CEO office was half of the office Rupert Murdoch used to have. Only four drawers instead of 15 cupboards.
		Carter said she put a lot of stuff in boxes on her own. Threw out five bags of rubbish. Seven archive boxes were used
		Carter says she filled the 7 boxes with her 30 scrapbooks and 3 items of Brooks: prosecution notes they would not fill anything like 7 boxes
		Saunders points out that archive notes recommend full packing, and notebooks to be filed vertically.
		Phillipa Bishop was called in by Deborah Keegan to do some additional filing the jury were told by Carter.
		Jury bundle 3 is numbered consecutively notes Justice Saunders, with delight.
		Saunder turns to the archiving in October by Bishop – itemising the contents of archive boxes.
		Carter packed the 7 archive boxes. Keegan’s account was important things were kept aside but it was “chaotic” – did number boxes
		Saunders tried to clarify with Keegan: sometime witnesses agree with suggestions because it might seem “impolite”
		“I try to ask open questions… a rare thing in this case” says Saunders of Keegan: she could not remember any form being filled in.
		It’s accepted that Keegan had nothing to do with archiving of boxes. She left a note giving dates, which provided information for form
		Saunders turns the jury’s attention to the archive form.
		Carter’s evidence is that she filed her own notebooks under Brooks’ name because she didn’t think she could store own stuff in archive
		Prosecution say she would have needed far fewer boxes, and would never have used Brooks’ name for her own stuff. Carter denies this
		Saunders addresses the accusation archivist Nick Mays might have “boring life…. not like top QCs”
		Saunders jokes that the two QCs who mocked Mays will “not have a speaking engagement at the archivists dinner this year”
		Saunders goes through Mays’ evidence on who might have filled in this form about the 7 boxes. Either Mays or someone called Jensen
		Saunders says it’s up to the jury to decide how important that is. Prosecution case is that someone would have checked if notebooks.
		“All for you to decide, if you think they’re necessary to decide” says Saunders of archiving records.
		Saunders talks of the temporary facility to store property at Wapping which was sent various items of Brooks’ memorabilia.
		“Burke relies on the fact she uses archive” says Saunders of Carter email about putting stuff in storage. Only archivists make distinction
		The portrait of James Murdoch was stored in Wapping, which was to be vacated. The 7 archive boxes were stored in permanent Enfield facility
		Archivist email to Carter asks about framed front pages with storage: Carter asks Viner about keeping massive framed picture in office
		Carter’s evidence is that she believed Mays talking about 7 boxes: “can she have made that mistake if she read it carefully?” asks Saunders
		Saunders recalls Viner’s evidence – she cannot remember this email. Some more memorabilia stored later without paperwork.
		Carter says she really made no distinction between archives and storage.
		Carter accepts she initiated recovery of 7 archive boxes: copyright dispute about copyright led to meeting with Farrer’s lawyer 07/07/11
		Saunders says this reason for retrieving boxes only came to Carter recently while reviewing evidence.
		“You’ll have to think quite carefully about this” says Saunders “she said nothing about this to the police. Maybe litigation still ongoing”
		“If she’d been asked by the solicitor’s to find something, why isn’t there a note of that” says Saunders of the prosecution doubts.
		Carter said “there were previous communications” about archives: other calls she thought mean they wanted boxes out of archives.
		Carter was aware of hacking scandal, but it had no impact on her till 04/07/11 – and that was not the reason she retrieved boxes.
		Saunders cites an 08/07/11 email prosecution say in relevant about iPad and “they must not keep any old devices”
		Charlie Brooks had bought silver from Times: Nick Mays chasing him up at end of June. Carter emailed archivist saying she had cheque
		04/07/11 email from Carter to Dyas gets no response – he’s not there. On the 07/07/11 “Urgent can you call me?”
		Prosecution say “what at all is urgent?” NOTW closure announced that afternoon. Carter says she knew nothing of this till after email sent.
		Carter sends two emails to Nick Mays: “Nick can you give me an urgent call….. as soon a possible please”
		Prosecution say there is no urgency about these boxes – she doesn’t even want them back.
		Carter speaks to Mays on phone – question is did she want them back urgently. Defence say no: normal delivery time next Monday is fine.
		Keegan emails Carter that morning: “please call Nick in archives”
		Normal delivery time for boxes would have been following Monday – but delivered on 8th. Mays says Carter requested this, made diary notes
		Prosecution say Mays diary says specifically “please return Rebekah’s notebooks”: Mays say she wanted them “urgently” – courier firm used
		“Premier Poss for move of material from Crown” someone noted. In event, it was impossible for Premier to courier the boxes.
		Mays and Carter make email contact trying to phone each other that morning according to evidence.
		In original statement, Mays said Carter rang to say she wanted them the next days. Defence say no contact was made again.
		By the time the archive boxes couriered from Enfield, Avril Russell box added because going to Thomas More Square.
		11.48 is time of the journey order for Enfield. Defence say Mays’ note explains that last edition of NOTW historic documents needed.
		Defence say the archive order only expedited because of urgency for historic documents from archive for last edition of NOTW
		Paul Nicholas wanted historic archive material delivered urgently: because it required special care Crown actually did delivery.
		Prosecution say that the only reason Premier were mentioned was that there must have been a requirement to expedite.
		Defence say Crown happened to be delivering historic material: “two competing points you’ll have to consider” says Saunders.
		Carter said she would collect boxes around the time Brooks at Town Hall NOTW meeting – so she didn’t tell her why or what she was doing.
		Carter recruited her son Nick as a courier. Defence say Carter would never conscript her son in anything conceivably criminal.
		Since there were no messengers for 10th floor, Deborah Keegan called her husband to help. Mays can only remember one person receiving
		Mays said he was told the 7 archive boxes would be permanently removed, the first thing he knew about it.
		Saunders turns to collection sheet “all 7 boxes permanently withdrawn” Carter told Nick Mays “they belonged to Carter or Keegan”
		Mays says this explanation of contents was “something Carter just volunteered”
		Nick Carter took boxes home: something he did on a regular occasion with beauty products. Gary Keegan often help move things too.
		Nick Carter can remember anything being collected but 7 boxes, and no other witness remembers anything else.
		Carter looked through boxes on Sat afternoon – disposed of her stuff, but kept two Brooks filofaxes, one 99 desk diary, A5 2007 phone book
		Carter says she returned Brooks’ 4 items to the office the next week.
		The Man City football shirt is still in her mother in law’s garage
		On the Sunday Carter when to see Brooks’ mother: she said she did not take anything with her: a 3 hour round trip – she stayed 1.5 hours
		Brooks was that lunchtime at James Murdoch’s house.
		Prosecution say real reason was not to check if Deborah Weir was OK she had her friend there. But Carter says Weir like second mother.
		On the following Monday, Carter emailed Mays in response to a missing trolley: “spent the whole weekend looking at 7 years of beauty colums”
		Defence say if that is it true it proves she was looking a beauty books. Prosecution say isn’t it an odd thing to say to Nick Mays.
		Saunders says similar considerations related to Carter’s previous statement to Mays they were not Brooks’ notebook.
		Prosecution say that she wouldn’t volunteer error. Defence say that’s just what Carter is like: “For you to consider” Saunders tells jury
		Mays emails Carter about further return of Brooks’ property in wake of NOTW closure – Carter says more confusion between archives/storage
		Carter assisted at Enstone: the next week she took redundancy and decided to emigrate. On 22/07/11 Brooks’ memorabilia removed
		Carter had the other items stored a Carter’s mother in law’s garage. Viner had to secure Brooks property and NOTW offices.
		Lots of property now stored with MSC under security: Viner asked to set up an outside office for Brooks during leave of absence 14/07/11
		This move overtaken by events on Brooks’ resignation on 15/07/11: police had asked her to leave premises by lunchtime.
		Brooks left computer equipment behind – escorted from premises. Not easy for Brooks, or Viner. Police arrive that evening.
		“The sealing down… did not include the outer office which contained many of Brooks’ files” says Saunders of her resignation.
		Carter worked for a week for the new CEO at News International. Viner had no recollection of booking van for Carter’s mother in law
		There’s no record of any payment for a removal van, but NI was in transition and records might have got lost.
		12/07/11 filing list pointed out to jury. Spare notebooks in stationary shelf “the prosecution rely on this”
		Other items, minus Man City framed Football shirts, transferred by Carter’s husband to Oxfordshire: subsequently sent to Kingsley Napley
		24/11/11 police visit Carter’s house when Cheryl and husband were on the way back from Australia, paid for by Brooks.
		In Australia, Carter was offered a potential job at a News International paper: Carter said she didn’t want that, but work on beauty product
		Carter’s house search and she was interviewed on return from Australia. Defence point out she didn’t try to contact Brooks.
		Saunders say there were ‘inaccuracies’ in that first Carter statement: defence call them “mistakes” – prosecution call them “lies”
		Carter got Boot Camp dates wrong, says wasn”t going to work for another newspaper, and got framed pictures wrong.
		Carter says faulty memory. Prosecution say she wouldn’t have forgotten the day NOTW closed.
		Saunders has a “word of warning” about Burke’s suggestion the police could have prompted Carter over details: “they’d have to very careful”
		Carter told Brooks after this interview but told her nothing to worry about. Arrest 06/01/12: complete transcript available to jury.
		Interview suggested Brooks did have notebooks/notepads: now she says she was mistaken. Saunders asks the jury to consider if confused
		Though Carter’s family had gone off to Australia, Carter had to stay in UK
		A large amount of material was kept a Kingsley Napley, Brooks’ solcitors. Carter identified 4 notebooks, which police couldn’t see
		The four notebooks contained legally and professionally privileged material.
		Carter went with Henri Brandman to inspect items at police station to identify objects she had removed from archives:
		Brandman writes back with “results of the visit” identifying the four items.
		Black Time Diary, A5 Hardback notebook 2007, two black Filofaxes identified by Carter.
		Prosecution case is that these four items do no match ‘notepads’ or ‘notebooks’ described in previous statements.
		Brooks evidence is that she knew nothing of this as dealing with fallout of closure of NOTW, she been anticipating police interview.
		Prosecution case is that Carter would not have done this without Brooks’ knowledge
		On the Sunday after, Brooks went with Charlie to James Murdoch and lunch with Anderson. 10 minute break.
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 7
	Count 7 and the Removal of Evidence
		Saunders explains he’s on course to get jury “out by lunchtime” tomorrow
		Saunders turns to Count 7: 16th-18th July 2011 – Crown alleges C Brooks, Mark Hanna and others kept incriminating items away from police.
		“Mr Brooks is central to this allegation” says Saunders: the “issue” is was removing items “intended to perverting the course of justice”
		Prosecution say that if items kept away from police it had to be for Brooks “and her encouragement and knowledge”
		Hanna believes that “what he was moving for Brooks was legal pornography”
		Saunders deals with “discrete issue” about Hernandez and Hanna conversation on the last edition of NOTW: Hanna was Hernandez’ security boss
		Hanna and Hernandez went for a drink at the Dickens Inn for an hour after locking down NOTW – a few pints and bottle of wine undisputed.
		Hernandez says the conversation ranged over several events, but mainly closure of NOTW.
		Hanna said how proud he was to work for NI, and the security work he did for Brooks. He said protection work and backup driver
		Hernandez says Hanna said he dug a hole in the ground and “burnt stuff”: they said nothing more and carried on drinking
		Hernandez understood the hole to be dug in Hanna’s garden, but disputes suggestion Hanna was talking about having drink around bonfire.
		Hanna agrees about meetings – but was not close to Hernandez, and never said anything about burning stuff.
		Hanna did say he had regular bonfires: he might have used word “firepit” – but “none of the rest was correct”
		Prosecution say “why should Hernandez make this up?” Defence say “he could have been mistaken”: this is not evidence against Brooks.
		17/07/11 mounting pressure and tension for Brooks. Increased security for NI execs, especially for Brooks. Subcontracted ICP ran by Geddes.
		Geddes had provided additional security in April when they thought she might be arrested. They were there to prevent the ‘killer photo’
		Preparations for DCMS committee interrupted by news police wanted to interview books: Enstone weekend devoted to preparation for interview
		Hanna drove to Enstone in new Volvo: Hanna had left his wife’s Clio at TMS
		Hanna was expecting to be at Enstone till the Monday morning – sudden move to London on the Sunday unexpected to him.
		C Brooks visited Jubilee Barn all those four days from Thursday to Sunday 17th July. He went to get shoes Brooks wanted.
		Charlie took Brooks’ mother on the 15 minute trip from Jubilee Barn to Enstone: took case including £1k of cash (never found)
		“Something was removed from that bag” says Saunders “but no specific evidence anyone did do that.”
		Weir had breakfast at Enstone, and said she had to meet lawyer at Jubilee Barn, and said Hanna escorted her back.
		Three cars arrived to take Brooks to Kingsley Napley – and advance and follow car. They didn’t know police interview at Lewisham that lunch
		News of police interview was kept secret in order for it not to leak out.
		C Brooks evidence is that they were in a rush to leave Enstone, and black nylon computer went into Golf or another car with Brooks
		At the time Charlie thought the black bag was in his range rover with his brown bag. But now think recovered from Audi going to Lewisham
		Charlie says he asked Hanna to drive Range Rover to London, and he assured belongings were his own personal stuff.
		There was no arrangement at that time to return Charlie’s personal stuff – the Brown Bag and the Black Bag he believed were in Range Rover
		Charlie Brooks didn’t want the bags to be caught up in police search if his wife arrested – the Apple Mac had his novel Switch on it
		Harper Collins wanted the Switch novel finished. But neither items had been in Jubilee Barn since early on the Friday.
		Brooks said he told Hanna to accompany Weir back to Jubilee Barn to stop her getting “mugged” by paparazzi
		Hanna’s recollection slightly different. No mention of returning property, just unexpected return of Range Rover: Hanna had to get insurance
		Hanna went home first to drop off his work car, with another driver so he collect Clio.
		Hanna’s reason for accompanying Deborah Weir was to protect: he said he never entered Jubilee Barn. Prosecution say devices removed
		Prosecution say that property could have been removed from Jubilee Barn earlier, and existing security could deal with Paps.
		Hanna’s father in law, from what he could, saw nothing dropped off by Hanna when he returned to his Bedfordshire home.
		Saunders asks the jury to look at the cell site and call data around that Sunday 17th July 2011. Brooks arrives at Lewisham around noon
		Charlie Brooks meets up with lawyer Angus McBride at Chelsea Harbour
		11.52 CCTV shows McBride meeting C Brooks 12.10 C Brooks goes down to bin area with Jiffy Bag and computers – just after arrest
		The items had been in a drawer at Thames Quay say Charlies, Jiffy Bag contained legal pornography – feared leak to the Guardian.
		The Vaio was old and also contained legal pornography: Charlie afraid police might destroy it. Prosecution dispute this was all he removed
		Prosecution say that the level of security people involved mean it’s unlikely just legal porn involved.
		Brooks texts Geddes . Geddes rank Hanna. C Brooks says this was about returning his car and fob for police to come and search.
		Hanna’s account is slightly different. The text was about Brooks’ arrest. Hanna says he rang Charlie, annoyed at not knowing about trip
		It’s at this point, Hanna says, Charlie asked him to look after the Brown Bag – no mention of Black Bag.
		“Hanna was showing no urgency to get to flat because he then went to Thomas More Square” says Saunders.
		Hanna says he didn’t go into TMS. There were demonstrators around Wapping and he had to ensure Murdochs got into the building securely
		Hanna and then returned with another driver to Chelsea Harbour: he says he left nothing behind in Wapping.
		Brooks told Hanna where the fob was in the Range Rover and he entered underground car park at Thames Quay
		Brooks met Hanna at car park: Hanna had Brown Bag with him. Brooks asked him to keep hold of it, and mentioned pornography by bins
		“He was satisfied by what he saw the pornography was legal” says Saunders of Hanna, who also thought Vaio might contain it too.
		No mention of Black Bag with Charlie’s laptop at this moment, which Saunders says is surprising.
		Defence says nothing happened at this point is possibly perversion of course of justice – nothing relevant to police inquiry.
		Charlie says he was surprised Hanna had Brown Bag with him, which surprised him. Didn’t register Hanna didn’t have the Black Bag.
		Charlie asked Hanna to collect Vaio and Jiffy Bag according to his evidence – they didn’t talk about it.
		“This was all done with the solicitor sitting upstairs,” Saunders say of defence because they didn’t want lawyer knowing about this.
		Hanna returns back to Wapping and News International to leave these items at lost property: Marva Ingram came out with bin bags
		Marva Ingram had been told someone would come and collect bin bags: prosecution say unusual procedure to conceal Hanna’s return.
		“Why put in dustbin bag at all” say prosecution unless to be returned to bins. Ingram’s testimony inconsistent with fingerprint evidence.
		Defence say that prosecution case that she wrapped second bag might be explained by bin bags being flat packed, or prints other ways.
		C Brooks texts and then calls Hanna – never heard what that was about. 3pm police search Chelsea Harbour for 2 hours.
		Saunders says the fact there were solicitors present a both searches in London and Oxfordshire suggests the police were expected.
		Among the items recovered was a torn up version of Brooks’ resignation speeches. Two desks top computers might have been used by Brooks
		Charlie helped the police with passwords. The Hewlett Packard contained the unsent letters to Andy Coulson.
		Laidlaw says if Brooks concealing items, that is one they would have removed. Break till tomorrow at 10 am.

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 – 4 Jun
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 5 Jun
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 9 Jun

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