Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 11 June

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

Wednesday 11 June 2014

Summary
The Summing Up Continues on Count 7
Mr Justice Sanders continues on the Removal of Evidence
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 2 and 3
The Evidence of purchasing Royal Directories and Royal Green Books
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 5
The Evidence of paying a Public Official
Mr Justice Saunders Concludes the Trial
Corrections to Evidence
Jury presented with Electronic copies of the Evidence
The Judge retires the Jury to consider their verdicts

The Summing Up Continues on Count 7
Mr Justice Sanders continues on the Removal of Evidence
Last day of summing up: Justice Saunders turns back to a telephone schedule of calls at 2.47 between Hanna and Charlie Brooks.
Saunders clarifies these calls were about Charlie Brooks letting the police in with the underground car park fob
Justice Saunders talks about “trying to see the wood for the trees” on Count 7.
Saunders talks about cell site expert – and some of his mistakes. Errors make it look like Hanna spent more time near Jubilee Barn.
This means that Hanna must have “nipped” in to the Brooks’ Oxfordshire Home on the day of Rebekah Brooks‘ arrest.
In the bigger picture, Saunders points out that material was taken from Oxfordshire to London – Black Nylon Computer Bag and Brown Bag
Brooks said he wanted Hanna to keep bags for the day: Hanna’s recollection is that there was only one bag, and to be returned that day
The Black Bag must have travelled in convoy with R Brooks to London. Hanna returns the Range Rover and intends to return Brown Bag
Instead of returning Brown Bag, Hanna takes it back, adding Jiffy Bag with Pornography – someone put this in Brown Bag. £1k missing
“What happens next?” asks Saunders. Hanna takes Brown Bag to TMS NI HQ – bagged up
Prosecution suggest that they were put in bin bags, so there was already a plan to return to bin area in underground car park.
Whereabouts of black bag is unknown at this point – though with one of three cars with Rebekah Brooks during arrest in Lewisham.
5.30 on 17/08/11 Charlie Brooks calls Hanna, asking for his bags back.
Nothing is said about black computer bag at this time: Hanna texts Marva Ingram to say someone will collect
Chris Palmer visits Charlie from 5.30 to midnight – they consumed six bottles of win. Not so incapable he can’t stand from CCTV
Ingram rings Hanna to say she’s off duty at Thomas More Square: no one’s collected the bags yet.
Another member of the protection team outside Lewisham police station returns to Wapping. Defence say got Black Bag from Brooks’ driver
No seems to have given him this instruction, because no one knows where the black nylon computer bag is: how is that, asks prosecution
The security operative returns to Wapping around 8.30 – someone puts that in bin bag too with Ingrams fingerprints: why? asks crown
Prosecution case is that the computer bag must have been put into a bin bag because plan to place near wheelie bins.
Only Mr Brooks could have instructed this bin bag plan say the prosecution – albeit indirectly
8.35 pm calls from security operative in Wapping to Hanna: Hanna then texts Charlie “Stuff is on its way”
Hanna is called by Charlie – Charlie uses his friend Chris Palmer’s phone. Where is my property? Can someone pick up some pizzas?
Hanna asks security operative to pick up Pizzas: Charlie needed “blotting paper” and regular Pizzas are “disgusting”
Prosecution say Pizza delivery is excuse for returning to car park if seen by police – hence the ‘PizzaGate’ texts by blackhawk team.
“Why, if its an ordinary delivery of a pizza, do you call it Pizzagate?” asks Saunders.
Saunders refers to the Alec Ferguson ‘Pizzagate” story cited by defence to explain the term.
“Must have looked on the invoice the most expensive pizzas ever delivered” comments Saunders on security operatives movements that night
“Have a plan – can you call” text from Hanna at 9.30pm. Prosecution originally said this was the Pizza cover. But Pizza ordered at 21.06
This “Plan” text was to another security operative returning black bag. Hanna said it was all about the gaining access to car park
Prosecution say this ‘plan’ is a rather grand term for accessing car park.
“Why do need a plan when you’re just delivering a pizza?” Saunders says, summing up prosecution case.
Saunders talks about the garlic bread special offer at Pizza Hut. 21.27 security operative arrives at Thames Quay underground car park.
Security operative seen on CCTV footage arriving, talking on phone: goes to bins, goes back to car, and then takes bin bags to bin area.
Prosecution say this indicates Charlie Brooks instructed this procedure of dropping off bags behind bins.
Defence say the timing of the call is different. Call is 15 seconds long: starts 21:29:42 – already moving to bins. Someone else instructed
Palmer collects the Pizzas and lets security operatives out. The bags are left behind the bins. Charlie said he was distracted by Sky News
Sky News coverage and amount of drink consumed are Charlie Brooks‘ explanation for leaving his bags behind bins overnight.
Prosecution say the disguise of Charlie’s bags means this was a plan all along.
CCTV footage of the arrival of Pizzas and Charlie’s bags reshown to jury “we’ll put the World Cup on afterwards” jokes Justice Saunders
CCTV footages shows security operative drop off bin bagged items behind bins: then Chris Palmer emerges from lifts.
After this C Brooks texts Hanna thanking him for delivery of Pizzas. Charlie says he knows nothing about placing bags behind bins.
Security operative texts Hanna to say he’s delivered items – but according to Hanna says nothing about leaving Charlie’s Bags behind bins
Hanna had headed home – he had no idea an additional bag had been added he says, or that Charlie’s bags had been left behind bins either
‘Broadsword to Danny Boy – chicken is in the pot… log in the hours as Pizza delivery” texts security operatives.
Prosecution say this is a joke about a real coverup. Defence say this text about ‘dead letter drops” and ‘brush contacts’ is only a joke
Charlie welcome his wife back: he told her police searched in the cornflakes. 10.30 that morning both return to Kingsley Napley
“Onto that scene steps Mr Nascimento” says Saunders, joking to the jury “you can watch that scene as many times as you like”
Nascimento spotted the bin bags with Charlie’s Bags: put them on his trolley, checked inside bags and inspected computer
Nascimento “didn’t see £1k in cash or the pornographic magazine” says Saunders: bags taken to Nascimento’s boss who calls the police
Saunders goes through the police inventory of Charlie’s Bags: computers, letters, invoices, cheque books and the famous “conker”
In the black Nylon bag is the Apple Laptop and iPad with NI tags: mainly work Charlie Brooks work related.
Charlie says it was only that Monday morning after Kingsley Napley visit that he remembered his bags, and discovered they’d been left by bin
At 11.01 on 18/07/11 Charlie calls Mark Hanna head of NI security: Hanna said to asks where bags were. 11.02 Charlie texts Palmer.
Charlie goes over to rubbish bin area on return to Thames Quay: “Why?” asks Saunders. R Brooks calls NI.
“You’ll have to consider whether Mr Brooks is telling you the truth about this” Saunders tells the jury.
“If you’re sure the prosecution are correct, and that Charlie lied about black bags” Saunders then gives Lucas directions about lies on oath
Lies are “capable of effective how you view the rest of his evidence” says Saunders. R Brooks evidence is she was unaware what was going on
Hanna’s evidence is that he thought no more about it: he met Will Geddes to talk about Brooks’ DCMS appearance.
Various calls and texts between Hanna, Geddes and other security personnel trying to track down Charlie’s bag “Can you talk re Pizzagate?”
Charlie ordered Rebekah Brooks some pizza and he joins the hunt. Charlie discovers property given to police, and threatened to sue.
Charlie’s evidence is that he threatened legal action because of lost book. R Brooks went “ballistic” when she heard what happened.
Angus McBride, Charlie’s solicitor, wrote to police about discovered items: no connection with Mrs Brooks, no attempt to conceal them
“Of course there was an attempt to conceal them” says Saunders. Charlie says this isn’t a lie – he was talking of return to bin area.
Charlie says he wasn’t trying to deceive the police – this letter indicates his desire to speak to them quick as possible.
A Belll Pottinger advisor printed an explanation on behalf of Charlie in the Daily Telegraph. R Brooks’ evidence is she knew nothing of this
Laidlaw argued for Brooks that it was “beyond ridiculous” for her to organise such a conspiracy including her mother.
The police did not recover any Brooks missing items: if there were any they are gone. Defence say the items recovered not tampered with
Saunders addresses the “missing devices” – prosecution say cannot be accounted for: defence say they can by bad NI records at the time
Saunders assures the jury he’ll be “extremely brief” going through the missing devices captured on the router at Brooks’ Oxfordshire home
The data from the router comes from a recovered computer: 10 items caught on this data from Jubilee Barn
One of these items is an iPad belonging to Charles’ Dunstone
Three iPhones issued to Brooks not returned to News International – and not recovered by police. One used the router and cannot be found
An iPad from NI captured by router was recovered during the trial: Brooks’ new PA had it. No information found. But jailbreak not done.
Prosecution asks “why has it emerged so late in the day”.
Two Blackberry’s issued to Brooks are also missing.
Those two Blackberrys were in use in 2010 and 2011: another Blackberry seized by police had 8303 emails from just six weeks
Defence say all this shows is that Brooks got through Blackberry’s at a rate of knots. HTC and another iPad have also not been recovered.
All these items issued by News International and shown not to have been returned. An Apple Mac at the office showed recent use
Brooks’ evidence is that she didn’t like using iPhones but was wedded to her Blackberry
Paul Cheeseborough from News UK explained how they tightened up their tracking of electronic devices – but after Brooks left
Carter emailed IT around summer 2011 asking them about Brooks’ equipment “so many devices?” – break for 10 minutes.
Count 7 now over, Charlie Brooks has to leave the dock to attend a funeral.
Back after the break, Justice Saunders tells the jury to make a small correction to Count 7 telephone schedule
Contrary to what he said, Saunders there was evidence on a particular text between Hanna and Brooks – about 7 plain clothes police officer
Saunders tell the jury to ignore his off the cut remark about Charlie’s Pizza being one of the most expensive in history.
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 2 and 3
The Evidence of purchasing Royal Directories and Royal Green Books
Saunders moves onto Counts 2 and 3 – alleging Coulson and Goodman conspired to buy Royal directories from Palace Cops
Prosecution say selling directories for large amount of money is severe breach of the public’s trust
Count 2 relates to a Royal Green Book: Count 3 to Royal directories – two of 15 Royal Directories seized by police on Goodman’s arrest 2006
7 internal directories and 8 Green Books recovered in 2006: delay say police because Harbottle and Lewis emails not disclosed till 2011
Saunders goes through production of Green Books and ITD’s by Royal Palaces – they are classed as ‘restricted documents’
“Security was not tight, but there was a degree of trust” about the Royal Directories: people coming and going who could have stolen them
Both Green Books and ITDs had very few mobile numbers – the ITDs were not classed as ‘restricted’ documents.
Sir Michael Peat said in witness box of “long standing practice of police selling directories” – but this was only a feeling and no evidence
According to NOTW emails the directories were worth £1k.
Prosecution case based on the Coulson/Goodman emails “on their face they amount to an agreement” says Saunders.
Saunders explains the genesis of the Harbottle and Lewis emails: arose out of Goodman’s employment tribunal in 2007.
Harbottle and Lewis, employment solicitors, were asked to check if any wrong doing in NI apart from Goodman. They gave police 200 copies
Lord MacDonald gave the police some of these emails after internal NI investigation in early 2011
Saunders reads Goodman email: “Andy: one of our Royal policeman has obtained a brand new green book… the price is £1k”
“These people will not be paid in anything other than cash… or they end up on criminal charges and so do we” writes Goodman
Coulson replies “Fine. But didn’t we buy one last year” Saunders “prosecution say a clear agreement”: anonymous Farish contributor paid
Prosecution say Farish is a police officer: Goodman say a newspaper exec and will not identify his source.
Count 3 is about a Feb 2005 Internal Telephone Directory
14/05 Goodman emails Coulson about director: “very risk document for him to nick” follows up “OK to buy this?” Coulson “Fine”
“Prosecution say it’s absolutely clear on that what’s going on” says Saunders. Anderson is paid: crown say police officer, Goodman says not
Defence say there are three reasons to conclude email not truth: only 1 Green Book at St James’ Palace for police.
Saunders goes over David Spens’ arguments for Goodman over this email “it does not include Queen’s direct line” – just exaggerating.
Spens also makes a more ‘subtle’ point: at NOTW people speak of crimes they use code, so when they don’t, no crime.
“These emails to not mean what they say” is Spens’ point.
The police have not tracked down the source of the books: 112 unidentified fingerprints: 538 officers could have had access.
A 1993 ITD – not one of the books on the count – had fingerprints from an officer called Godfrey who gave evidence about how they were used
Another police officer gave evidence on 1999 Green Book, and ESDA imprint of his signature found on that.
Private security operatives also backed up police officers in Royal Palaces – another source.
Goodman says a source of some of those books was Kenneth Stronach. Princess of Wales he says another source
Goodman gave various examples of tension between Royal Protection Officers and journalists.
“Everyone was aware at NOTW it was illegal to pay police officers after arrest of Neville Thurlbeck in 2000” (acquitted) says Saunders
Goodman’s evidence was that he exaggerated importance of sources to expedite payment. Prosecution ask why crime would speed payment?
Saunders cites Goodman emails to another NOTW staff member about dangers of paying police officers. “A man who usually wears a uniform”
“The prosecution invites you to think about that” says Saunders about this Goodman emails: “Or was it Good Old Clive exaggerating again”
Goodman’s evidence was the directories were useful for talking to various staff at weekends, or bypassing the Royal press office
Coulson’s account of these Goodman emails is that he “rubber stamped them” and didn’t think police officers were paid
These emails should have rung “alarm bells” say Coulson – he should have asked more questions – but very busy.
Prosecution say that, on first email, Coulson actually did ask a question, and so must have read it.
Coulson said he trusted Clive Goodman not to pay police officers, but that he should have made more inquiries.
Spens questioned whether this was real misconduct: prosecution say can’t get bigger breach of trust than selling items supposed to guard
Saunders says Spens suggestion leaking Weeting Officer and Guardian journalist were having a ‘relationship’ was wrong, and no payments made
Prosecution say that directories useful for blagging phone hacking info, and Sir Michael Peat – a target – mentioned in first email
Jury told they can take into account possibility directories were use for phone hacking in Coulson’s Count 1 charge
Helen Asprey’s phone number was in one of these books, and she was hacked, points out Saunders.
Sir Michael Peat‘s mobile, Goodman told jury, was obtained by him in a meeting over Prince Charles‘ PR with Rebekah Brooks.
Peat said it was unlikely he would have given Goodman his mobile, but not impossible. Goodman wrote his mobile number on directory.
Saunders goes through Sir Michael Peat references in NOTW and Mulcaire documents, which coincide with request for Green Book
“Now have his mobile so we can check out that end of it” writes Goodman to NOTW exec about Peat. Goodman says just means calling him
Goodman says email “turning” Peat’s mobile was just getting an address. Saunders says he had addresses already, but could mean other party
Greg Miskiw tasks Mulcaire on Sir Michael Peat: a number of inaccuracies on it. Goodman’s QC says these mean couldn’t have come from Goodman
Saunders runs through more evidence on Goodman trying to contact Sir Michael Peat for a NOTW story – shows how he was using mobile number
Coulson says the tip about Peat affair allegations could have come from Mark Bolland, and that he thought ‘turning mobiles’ getting address
Saunders addresses on the allegation by Coulson’s counsel that Goodman was pocketing himself cash payments to sources.
The jury are told to turn to another bundle about Goodman’s finances, and the fact he stopped withdrawing cash from accounts for over a year
Until Feb 2004 Goodman had been using ATMS extensively: they stop until June 2006: payments to anonymous sources cease in June 2006
Coulson’s counsel also suggested that many of this cash paid stories were just lifted from other papers.
Goodman denies this: he inherited a legacy, partner pregnant, expenses on advance, and change of lifestyle account for cash flow changes.
Goodman was also getting few cash payments over this period.
The Summing Up of Evidence on Count 5
The Evidence of paying a Public Official
“Last but not lea…. you must look at all of these charges with an equal amount of care” says Saunders to the jury as he turns to Count 5
Count 5 is the charge against Brooks she conspired with a Sun journalist to commit misconduct in public office by paying an MOD official
There’s no doubt Brooks authorised payment to Bettina Jordan Barber: but Brooks says she didn’t know who she was.
The jury have to be sure Brooks knew she was an MOD official, and if so, they have to be sure MOD official abused trust.
Brooks “certainly knew contributor paid significant amounts of money” and the stories the information led to
Brooks’ evidence is that she just considered the news value of the story and trusted her Sun journalist.
Saunders reprises the evidence of another MOD press official who explains how Jordan Barbed briefed on discipline and fatalties.
“She was a trusted official” said colleague of Bettina Jordan Barber. Various moves gave her slightly less access over period of indictment
During a second period of maternity leave, Bettina Jordan Barber still obtained stories, but she was still on MOD pay.
“There is no evidence that any of those people” says Saunders of Jordan Barber’s military friends “that they supplied information”
Saunders points out that the decision of what to reveal and when was the decision of the press office and a minister.
Sun Journalist would often alert MOD about stories about to be run: they commented on reactive basis.
“She was paid, you may think, a substantial amount of money” says Saunders of Thomas Cook payments. She has accepted ‘misconduct’
“You are not bound to agree with her” says Saunders of Jordan Barber’s acceptance of misconduct. Jury must decide on what Brooks knew
Brooks evidence says that payment to public officials would be justified in some cases. Laidlaw, her QC, says Jordan Barber a whistleblower
Prosecution say that paying large amounts of money to public officials undermines the whistle blowing element
Saunders reminds the jury that it’s the conduct of Bettina Jordan barber in terms of public interest they have to consider, not Brooks’
New measures relating to courts martial have created more transparency, Saunders explains.
A witness talked about managing news of ‘deaths in action’ – it would never be covered. It was a duty of care not to release to press first
Brigadier O’Donnell said in evidence that the Sun was publishing deaths before family informed – evidence proved that didn’t happen
The Sun did wait till official notification of death “but they could get the news in the paper before its rivals” because of leaked info.
The Brigadier also gave evidence on need to make inquiries before press release – example of a friendly fire incident cited.
On this friendly fire incident, the widow had been informed but the soldier’s colleagues possibly not told of appalling news.
This is the Corporal Budd case Brooks, hypothetically, said had she known the payment to Jordan Barber would not be in public interest
Saunders asks the jury to weigh up whether these stories in “public interest” or “just selling papers”
Sun journalist was not being entirely secretive as Jordan Barber named in Cook payments; Brooks says she never made financial inquiries
Prosecution say Brooks she must have known about source of stories, given their nature, amount of money paid, and duty to supervise paper
Saunders goes through 11 emails by Brooks authorising payments; defence say these were tiny proportion of other military stories.
Defence produced a “graphic illustration” of other military stories and intervening Sun pages.
Saunders says all of this is true: but these were not normal emails, and PCC code statements required Brooks to authorise.
“You need to have to time gaps well in mind” says Saunders apologising for not quite making lunchtime in his summing up
Brooks said she didn’t know of this MOD official, but she knew many public officials herself – Saunders recalls Charles Clarke.
Saunders runs through the various other sources for military stories: Brooks accepted paying public officials significantly different though
“There had to be an overwhelming public interest… a very high bar, for her to sanction payments to public officials” says Saunders.
Brooks admitted to paying public officials over a Saddam Anthrax story among other, because in public interest.
Saunders tells jury they have to compare these handful of admitted public official stories with the ones in their bundle.
The second attempt to pay public official was over MPs expenses – Telegraph beat Brooks to it because she prevaricated she said.
Brooks agreed that public interest judgement was very ‘subjective’ and major element is whether would be covered up otherwise.
Brooks evidence is that she trusted her Sun journalist and didn’t think it her job to “police” this journalist.
Prosecution say this means Brooks’ reassurances to PCC over cash payments was worthless.
Brooks said Sun journalist very experienced, one of the best in Fleet St, and trusted him. Her desk heads should have told her.
Brooks also said the source of this MOD stories is not obvious: prosecution says she should have been suspicious.
Saunders goes through other emails apparently to “my prison contact”: Brooks says a journalist. Prosecution say journo could be intermediary
Defence say “number one military contact” could have referred to a journalist.
Saunders goes through the cash payment system, and then the Thomas Cooks which could be used for payments abroad.
Brooks disputes other emails that prosecution say are clearly to public officials – not clear at all
Justice Saunders apologises for not finishing before lunchtime: break till 2.10 pm “not much longer”
Justice Saunders resumes after lunch: he reminds the jury that the charge against Brooks on Count 5 is a conspiracy charge
Saunder expresses the jury’s decision about this conspiracy is to look at whether MOD stories were for selling papers or public interest
The Boozy Captain story was only published by the Sun: Brooks said nothing here to suggest public official, but story might be buried by MOD
Another story concerns the death of four service personnel in Intelligence Corp: not named
Another exclusive story about woman soldier killed in action could not have come from MOD.
The Sun’s exclusive was the sex of the intelligence officer, sourced from Jordan Barber. Brooks said could have come from someone in Basra
No question of Govt burying story – £500 was for exclusive elements no other paper than the Sun could get.
Another MOD story shown to jury is army recruit badly hurt by a Drum Sergeants baton: Jordan Barber was back at work
An investigation was ongoing at the MOD at the time: no other papers had this story, but BBC followed the Sun. There was a Court Martial
Brooks evidence was that she was concerned by Deepcut bullying: she believed stories would be covered up and so therefore public interest
Jordan Barber was paid £3000 for this story
A second email authorisation of MOD stories by Brooks cited by Saunders: £4k for Thomas Cook payments. “Brilliant Scoop” writes Brooks
Saunders goes through these two Sun stories: first about a recruit who fell out a window and got engaged.
Sun story on this wasn’t exclusive even though described that way by Sun journalist to Brooks: no public interest, not worth £1k says Brooks
Second story is the death of Major Roberts: important because of distinguished soldier and close to Prince William.
Roberts was not identified by the Sun before family notified. But first edition of Sun printed before MOD released info: only named in 2nd
“No daily newspaper apart from the Sun picked it up” says Saunders of Major Roberts death: “the Sun got an exclusive… financial advantage”
Brooks evidence was there was no way of knowing the source of this story: public interest in the change of tactics by Taliban and fatalities
Another email to Brooks asking for money for “Ace Military Contact” for £3k – email approval needed.
Jordan Barber paid £500 for Major Robert’s story. No public interest said Brooks.
Another Sun exclusive about Hero Paratroopers: no evidence MOD were going to suppress it but treatment of soldiers part of Sun’s campaign
Another story about a Major being a sex swinger is a Sun exclusive. Brooks said no public interest. Jordan Barber paid £500
This is one of the emails for which no reply has been found, though Brooks says she probably authorised like the others.
5th email about Ace Military contact asking authorisation from Brooks for £3k – Saunders corrects: this is the one that had no reply
Saunders runs through stories related to emails: one about female soldier who fell out of the window.
The news brief for this Sun exclusive was prepared by Jordan Barber, she was paid £2k. Brooks said no public interest
Theft of a laptop story was a Sun exclusive: Jordan Barber paid £2k. Brooks said marginal public interest
6th Email about No 1 Military contact cites three stories “cheap at the price” – “yes” replied Brooks
The first of these three stories is about rookie. Jordan Barber prepared official briefing. This was a Sun exclusive. Paid £750
Second story is about corporal chucking grenade at recruit: exclusive not followed elsewhere. Brooks said this was in public interest.
Third story on fifth email is £1500 to Jordan Barber
Email six: “My dear boss” Saunders quotes email about three stories for “No 1 Military contact” for £3k – all exclusive page leads.
The three stories in this email: drugs bust in Navy would have been in public interest said Brooks: Groping major arrested: no public int.
Third story about a sergeant firing an AK47, others followed Sun exclusive. Story would likely come out in court, no public interest
Email 7 cited by Saunders: “No 1 military contact” and two exclusive stories for 3.5k : woman army captain loses limb is first story
Another Sun journalist has a byline on this second story about Afghanistan injuries: would have come out anyway said Brooks.
Colonel arrested on leaking secrets to human right group is the second story: Jordan Barber paid £2k. Brooks thought would come out anyway
Now onto the eighth email to Brooks for No 1 Military contact cites four stories for a total 4k “very good value for money”: Brooks “yes”
Saunders goes through the four Sun stories arising from this.
Saunders says there seem to be competing justifications for first story: Brooks said no public interest: he QC Laidlaw said they’re might be
Third story is a Sandhurst sex scandal about cadet having affair with sergeant: exclusive to Sun: not in public interest said Brooks.
Fourth story is about an expenses scandal: exclusive to Sun “didn’t fit well with campaign about soldier’s pay” said Brooks.
Saunders reminds the jury that Brooks described the Sun as the “squaddies paper”
Email No 9 about “massive exclusive” over fake medals scandal – two stories and Jordan Barber paid £3k. She prepared official brief.
MOD investigation into this fake medals scandal was still ongoing. Times followed Sun exclusive. Brooks said was in public interest.
Penultimate email in this Jordan Barber chain now cited by Saunders about “massively picked up” story for £4k “cheap at the price”
The story was about an Afghan stowaway: Sun exclusive picked up by others. Was in the public interest, says Brooks – serious security lapse
Last email to Brooks asking for authorisation for £4k to Jordan Barber “as ever cheap at the price” writes Sun journalist.
The first Sun story was exclusive about US complaints about appearance of British soldiers. Brooks said not in public interest
Second Jordan Barber sourced article here was about missing Blackberry – not in public interest.
Third story about soldier losing leg was Sun exclusive but Brooks thought this would have come out anyway.
Final story is about TA Squaddie who died of swine ‘flu: Brooks said public interest if MOD trying to cover it up.
Prosecution say Sun was looking for exclusives, Jordan Barber a nice little earner, Brooks – 11 out of the 29 stories had public interest
“The main question you ask yourself… was she sure money was paid to public official” Saunders says of Brooks on Count 5
Saunders goes through some other emails to Brooks about police officers: one about George Michael doesn’t seem to involve money
Another email is about the De Menezes shooting: Sun journo talks of “Stockwell Coverup” via Dick Fedorcio and how NOTW got info
“I’m not sure it’s wise putting this down on email” said Sun journo: Brooks says she thought he meant source, and a retired officer
Another email to Brooks is about Huntley: she said not clear public official.
Another email was about the Mayor of Tetbury wife swapping: “contact is serving police officer” though info not in course of his duties.
“For all she knew the police officer could have live next door to Mayor” said Brooks. Subsequent police investigations suggest retired
Email about Sandhurst picture of cop killer Brooks said could have come from someone who wasn’t a public official
“My Man at Five” is the source for another story emailed to Brooks. She said she thought it was just a contact.
Another email about the news blackout about Prince Harry – could have come from any embedded reporter in Afghanistan Brooks said.
Mr Justice Saunders Concludes the Trial
Corrections to Evidence
Saunders have finished Count 5 – now he goes to a ‘snagging list’ of things he has got wrong.
First on Saunders’ snagging list: on three emails that started Weeting Inquiry: Brooks got them on Jan 2011, prior to Coulson meeting
Second on snagging list: items taken by Kingsley Napley for legal professional privilege: documents sent to independent counsel.
On Dan Evans’ evidence: the list of phone contacts was his own which he kept, not given to him by NOTW journo.
On the Jude Law voicemail to Daniel Craig “Thanks Mate”: Evans’ evidence is that he recorded it.
In relation to Blunkett article Coulson still think it was in the public interest – and he thinks Mr Blunkett thinks it too.
“Those were factual matters” says Saunders “now some submissions”
Saunders discusses the “editors’ question” – how do we know it’s true. This isn’t important in terms of phone hacking, which is illegal.
On Brooks’ filing cabinet: one section marked ‘notebooks of R Brooks’: she was not editor at time, and copied James Murdoch’s practice
Saunders reminds the jury members of the Royal Household not fingerprinted over directories “quite a task… over 1500 of them”
Coulson distrusted Goodman’s florid language: Goodman did not claim legacy helped his cash flow.
Jury presented with Electronic copies of the Evidence
Saunders explains to the jury they now have an electronic document with virtual paper clips to avoid searching through mounting bundles
A single electronic index has been compiled – the paper clip leads to scanned version of document.
The electronic index is just a tool to help find the actual documents: if they have problems, the jury can pass him a note.
Anthony Edis QC explains to jury that they will be given a blank computer and a USB hard drive with index of combined jury bundle
The index is 304 pages long and is in date order, where possible.
It’s a searchable list in the PDF, explains Anthony Edis QC to the jury of their electronic index. He shows how to search by date using F1
Edis shows how you can search this index by names – he uses ‘Anderson’ as an example.
The Judge retires the Jury to consider their verdicts
“What can we do for you in retirement?” asks Saunders; he can explain matters of law to them. They have written directions in plain english
Counsel can help the jury with matters of evidence: “you are under no pressure of time” says Saunders. “If you wish to sit late, you can”
Jurors can rise anytime after 4.30. They must appoint a foreman or forewoman. “You have to act according to your own”
“Put out of your mind anything you’ve read outside the court” says Saunders: only evidence they’ve heard here.
“You can only discuss the case when all 11 of you are present” says Saunders: no cabales, they must act as “unit”
“Please put out your mind anything you’ve heard about majority verdicts” says Saunders.
Saunders jokes it would be inappropriate to tell them to gather up their voluminous papers. They are about to retire
BREAKING: The jury bailiff is sworn in: “It’s been a privilege to work with you” Saunders tells the #hackingtrial jury

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 – 5 Jun
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 9 Jun
Hacking Trial Live Tweets – 10 Jun

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

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s