They should bring in every editor of every paper 2000- current date and ask them all, under oath, if they had knowledge of phone hacking at their paper and let's see what happens. That's the only way they will get to the bottom of this.
Andy Coulson has already lied under oath about phone hacking during the Tommy Sheridan trial. He was asked about it in court and he emphatically denied under oath that phone hacking occurred.
It depends on how much the government want NI pursued. If it is an all out attack on Murdoch, then the Met will be vigorous in their pursuit of information, if the government want this to be dropped as quickly as possible, then a few low level scapegoats will be found and imprisoned and the likes of Brooks and James Murdoch will be exonerated and the investigation will be rapidly concluded. Personally, I think it will be the latter option. The police hierarchy will take their cue from ministers on how thorough they are to be.
I'm just really hoping you're wrong on this. There's been corruption before, so why not again? But perhaps it's a bit different this time. I don't even remembering it being a news story last time, so there's more exposure and people want justice. However, as we're all aware on here, people forget very quickly. The Royals are taking over the news a bit at the moment. You just never know what might suddenly catch the attention of the news networks and the public and take the focus off this story.
I'm just really hoping you're wrong on this. There's been corruption before, so why not again? But perhaps it's a bit different this time. I don't even remembering it being a news story last time, so there's more exposure and people want justice. However, as we're all aware on here, people forget very quickly. The Royals are taking over the news a bit at the moment. You just never know what might suddenly catch the attention of the news networks and the public and take the focus off this story.
l think things will be different this time for two reasons:
1. There has been a complete public outcry over these disgusting hacking revelations and members of the public won't tolerate any backtracking or letting the crims get away with things;
2. After their botched, lazy and inept investigation last time around, the Metropolitan Police cannot afford not to do their job properly and thoroughly especially since they are under much greater scrutiny this time.
Andy Coulson has already lied under oath about phone hacking during the Tommy Sheridan trial. He was asked about it in court and he emphatically denied under oath that phone hacking occurred.
...cue long prison sentence for perjury (advisory note: if the allegations are true).
I dont know why but I want Mrs Brooks to be guilty with a capital G and Mr Coulson to be innocent.
If Mr Coulson is going down because News lnternational are using him as a scapegoat then l sincerely hope that he dishes the dirt on other senior News international staff so that they get taken down too.
PS I'd also like to see that rotten apple behind bars too.
It depends on how much the government want NI pursued. If it is an all out attack on Murdoch, then the Met will be vigorous in their pursuit of information, if the government want this to be dropped as quickly as possible, then a few low level scapegoats will be found and imprisoned and the likes of Brooks and James Murdoch will be exonerated and the investigation will be rapidly concluded. Personally, I think it will be the latter option. The police hierarchy will take their cue from ministers on how thorough they are to be.
That's the pessimistic view, however I tend to agree with you.
One thing you can be sure of, if it was some ordinary member of the public suspected of hacking which the police were investigating, doors would be smashed in at 5am computers would be seized and houses would be searched for any evidence of wrongdoing.
Coulson, on the other hand gets 24 hours warning of having to report to a police station.
McMullan has been given warning as well and he hasn't bothered to show up at Scotland Yard, if you are given a 24 hour warning what's to stop you fleeing the country
They should bring in every editor of every paper 2000- current date and ask them all, under oath, if they had knowledge of phone hacking at their paper and let's see what happens. That's the only way they will get to the bottom of this.
You are assuming they will all tell the whole truth and not lie through their teeth ?
The NOTW could have hacked into criminal's mobile phones and read or deleted messages.There could be underworld figures as well as the usual villains but if they have intercepted paedophiles,rapists and abusers phones and tampered with vital evidence pertaining to those phones it could trigger a massive compensation claim and sentences could be quashed.It doesn't bear thinking about.
l think things will be different this time for two reasons:
1. There has been a complete public outcry over these disgusting hacking revelations and members of the public won't tolerate any backtracking or letting the crims get away with things;
2. After their botched, lazy and inept investigation last time around, the Metropolitan Police cannot afford not to do their job properly and thoroughly especially since they are under much greater scrutiny this time.
Been thinking about it, and talking to friends, and I think you're right. I thought I was mad that I couldn't remember the 2007 investigation, but I asked a journalist friend (he reviews films, so not in the same league as the ones involved in this case) and he said he thinks no one really noticed. I take it that he means that he didn't even notice the story himself.
It's been a massive deal this time around. Some people I speak to aren't terribly interested, I suppose, but those who are feel quite strongly about it.
The NOTW could have hacked into criminal's mobile phones and read or deleted messages.There could be underworld figures as well as the usual villains but if they have intercepted paedophiles,rapists and abusers phones and tampered with vital evidence pertaining to those phones it could trigger a massive compensation claim and sentences could be quashed.It doesn't bear thinking about.
l think things will be different this time for two reasons:
1. There has been a complete public outcry over these disgusting hacking revelations and members of the public won't tolerate any backtracking or letting the crims get away with things;
2. After their botched, lazy and inept investigation last time around, the Metropolitan Police cannot afford not to do their job properly and thoroughly especially since they are under much greater scrutiny this time.
Before this News International did enjoy the protection of ministers and other politicians and I'm sure it would have been covered up, now however no politician wants to be seen protecting or going anywhere near them. They've lost the influence that allowed them to get away with it for so long.
Given the complexity and scale of the possible crimes, you don't really want to be arresting people when you don't have to. Arresting someone limits the length of time they can be questioned. Being there "voluntarily" doesn't.
They're probably still building a case against her, there are stories coming out that link her to as well as to the hacking but to the police pay offs.But also the police must ask her what her part was in to having Dave Cook followed, the reason she gave for it must have been a lie
Comments
Andy Coulson has already lied under oath about phone hacking during the Tommy Sheridan trial. He was asked about it in court and he emphatically denied under oath that phone hacking occurred.
I'm just really hoping you're wrong on this. There's been corruption before, so why not again? But perhaps it's a bit different this time. I don't even remembering it being a news story last time, so there's more exposure and people want justice. However, as we're all aware on here, people forget very quickly. The Royals are taking over the news a bit at the moment. You just never know what might suddenly catch the attention of the news networks and the public and take the focus off this story.
l think things will be different this time for two reasons:
1. There has been a complete public outcry over these disgusting hacking revelations and members of the public won't tolerate any backtracking or letting the crims get away with things;
2. After their botched, lazy and inept investigation last time around, the Metropolitan Police cannot afford not to do their job properly and thoroughly especially since they are under much greater scrutiny this time.
lt's also clear that menacing and nasty threats were made by News International under Brooks against Tom Watson MP because he was raising the issue of NOTW sleaze. More here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013027/News-World-Tony-Blair-tried-hush-phone-hacking-scandal.html
...cue long prison sentence for perjury (advisory note: if the allegations are true).
If Mr Coulson is going down because News lnternational are using him as a scapegoat then l sincerely hope that he dishes the dirt on other senior News international staff so that they get taken down too.
PS I'd also like to see that rotten apple behind bars too.
That's the pessimistic view, however I tend to agree with you.
One thing you can be sure of, if it was some ordinary member of the public suspected of hacking which the police were investigating, doors would be smashed in at 5am computers would be seized and houses would be searched for any evidence of wrongdoing.
Coulson, on the other hand gets 24 hours warning of having to report to a police station.
You are assuming they will all tell the whole truth and not lie through their teeth ?
It's been a massive deal this time around. Some people I speak to aren't terribly interested, I suppose, but those who are feel quite strongly about it.
What about this!!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1406429/Pottergate-we-publish-the-secret-tapes.html
"Those close to Ms Wade tell me she really fears she will end up in jail."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2011/07/08/3265296.htm
Before this News International did enjoy the protection of ministers and other politicians and I'm sure it would have been covered up, now however no politician wants to be seen protecting or going anywhere near them. They've lost the influence that allowed them to get away with it for so long.
That's just a smokescreen to get her to let her guard down.
She'll be charged.