Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

interestrateripoff

Breaking News 3 Ex Journalists Plead Guilty To Phone Hacking

Recommended Posts

Former News of the World journalists Neville Thurlbeck, Greg Miskiw and James Weatherup and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire have pleaded guilty to phone-hacking charges, court hears. More details soon …

Guardian running this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of Brooks or the Murdoch gang but it is pretty damn disgraceful that the prosecution would bring this up - looks downright malicious.

I wonder was the threat of public embarrassment and the impact on their private lives used to try to coerce them during the investigation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just seen this flash up on reuters.

small fry.

next step is to get the entire board of directors in court for criminal activity( illegal interception of communications)

...AND JAIL THEM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

small fry.

next step is to get the entire board of directors in court for criminal activity( illegal interception of communications)

...AND JAIL THEM.

It's always easier to court martial some captains, rather than the Duke of Wellington. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of Brooks or the Murdoch gang but it is pretty damn disgraceful that the prosecution would bring this up - looks downright malicious.

I wonder was the threat of public embarrassment and the impact on their private lives used to try to coerce them during the investigation?

I don't think the prosecution are muck raking or trying to make a moral point. What they are trying to establish is that Coulson and Brooks were quite literally 'in bed with each other' making it harder for the defendants to claim that each party did not know what the other was up to. Given that 3 of the accused have already copped a plea of guilty then ignorance is really the only defence left to the rest of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the prosecution are muck raking or trying to make a moral point. What they are trying to establish is that Coulson and Brooks were quite literally 'in bed with each other' making it harder for the defendants to claim that each party did not know what the other was up to. Given that 3 of the accused have already copped a plea of guilty then ignorance is really the only defence left to the rest of them.

Yes, it seems an entirely relevant disclosure, which if ignored would leave all sorts of questions depending on the verdict. Especially since the revelation has been in the public domain for many months now, just not in newspapers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the prosecution are muck raking or trying to make a moral point. What they are trying to establish is that Coulson and Brooks were quite literally 'in bed with each other' making it harder for the defendants to claim that each party did not know what the other was up to. Given that 3 of the accused have already copped a plea of guilty then ignorance is really the only defence left to the rest of them.

But if they where having a "secret" affair and keeping it secret from their partners isn't it also likely they may have kept secrets from each other as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the prosecution are muck raking or trying to make a moral point. What they are trying to establish is that Coulson and Brooks were quite literally 'in bed with each other' making it harder for the defendants to claim that each party did not know what the other was up to. Given that 3 of the accused have already copped a plea of guilty then ignorance is really the only defence left to the rest of them.

And ignorance of a law is no excuse in the eyes of the law.

I can remember being 7 or 8 and answering a question in an English Language test about why it was illegal to offer a Police Officer any kind of gift as such gifts could be construed as bribes.

I look forward to hearing how adults in the position of running national newspapers explain their actions with regards to alleged payments to Police Officers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if they where having a "secret" affair and keeping it secret from their partners isn't it also likely they may have kept secrets from each other as well?

That will be up to the jury to decide. Something they would not have been able to do if the affair had been kept secret from the court.

The judge clearly regards it as admissible evidence .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really up on this whole phone hacking affair. How come only the Murdoch staff are in the dock after it was shown a load of papers not owned by him were doing it just as much?

I seem to recall the Daily Mirror being the worst offender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of Brooks or the Murdoch gang but it is pretty damn disgraceful that the prosecution would bring this up - looks downright malicious.

I wonder was the threat of public embarrassment and the impact on their private lives used to try to coerce them during the investigation?

It is the sort of stuff their "news" papers would have loved to splash about, so who cares? I find it quite funny actually, I think the penny has dropped for Brooks that she is now caught on the other side of the wiretap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That will be up to the jury to decide. Something they would not have been able to do if the affair had been kept secret from the court.

The judge clearly regards it as admissible evidence .

Yep the judge seems happy to allow it. I do wonder what other personal gems will come out in this case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really up on this whole phone hacking affair. How come only the Murdoch staff are in the dock after it was shown a load of papers not owned by him were doing it just as much?

I seem to recall the Daily Mirror being the worst offender.

+1. When's Moron going to see the inside of a courtroom?

It is the sort of stuff their "news" papers would have loved to splash about, so who cares? I find it quite funny actually, I think the penny has dropped for Brooks that she is now caught on the other side of the wiretap.

Yeah, schadenfreude is funny, but at the end of the day...two wrongs don't make a right. Both Brookes and Coulson had/have partners who arguably don't need, and probably don't (I'm thinking Coulson's missus here, not that I know anything about her) deserve to be hurt. If I were a juror I'd be tempted to ****** the CPS barrister off just for that- the little turd.

Yep the judge seems happy to allow it.

And? Loads of judges are demonstrably stupid and/or awful people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before it goes:

Personal life

Brooks became engaged to actor Ross Kemp (best known for portraying volatile hardman Grant Mitchell in EastEnders) in 1996, and married him in June 2002 in Las Vegas.[49] On 3 November 2005, it was reported that Brooks had been arrested following an alleged assault on her husband. She was later released without charge and the police took no further action.[49] The Sun had been running a campaign against domestic violence at the time.[29][67] The couple had spent the previous evening in the company of the former Cabinet Minister David Blunkett, who had resigned for the second time on that day.[68]

Private Eye and The Independent[69] reported that the couple had separated; this was not widely reported in the remainder of the British press. 7 March 2008 issue of Private Eye refers to her "paramour", former racehorse trainer and author Charlie Brooks. The Guardian reported on 5 June 2009, that she would marry Brooks.[70] The Independent reported that Brooks and her fiancé had married in a lakeside ceremony in June 2009.[71] The couple are key members of the Chipping Norton set, and live in Churchill, Oxfordshire, and London.[72]

In July 2011, MP Chris Bryant claimed that Brooks had previously implied that he would loiter in a London park because he was homosexual,[73] and that Kemp had responded, "Shut up, you homophobic cow."[73]

It was announced by Bell Pottinger that Rebekah and Charlie Brooks were expecting a daughter in early 2012 via a surrogate mother.[74] Scarlett Anne Mary Brooks was born at the private Portland Hospital in London on 25 January 2012.[75]

During the Phone Hacking trial on 31st October 2013, it was reported that Brooks and Andy Coulson had an affair that lasted from 1998 to 2004. Hopefully, her partner at the time, Ross Kemp, kicks the living ****** out of that weasel Coulson and publicly cites Brooks as being a dirty slag. [76]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1. When's Moron going to see the inside of a courtroom?

Yeah, schadenfreude is funny, but at the end of the day...two wrongs don't make a right. Both Brookes and Coulson had/have partners who arguably don't need, and probably don't (I'm thinking Coulson's missus here, not that I know anything about her) deserve to be hurt. If I were a juror I'd be tempted to ****** the CPS barrister off just for that- the little turd.

And? Loads of judges are demonstrably stupid and/or awful people.

Their affair is very relevant to this case, as pointed out earlier in this thread.

Also, if either of them REALLY didn't want to hurt their partners, then why did they both have affairs, even through during the time each got married?

They only have themselves to blame, certainly not the CPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

I'm no fan of Brooks or the Murdoch gang but it is pretty damn disgraceful that the prosecution would bring this up - looks downright malicious.

Brooks must be amazing in bed. That's the only conclusion I can arrive at to explain this entire story.

I do think it's a bit unfair that trying to bribe public officials should be considered a serious criminal offence. Now, them accepting said bribes, is a different matter entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol

I'll bet David Blunkett could quite honestly say, I never saw anything!" :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.