Coulson & Brooks hacking trial starts today

[Los Endos]

Mermaid said:

kev1974 said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2671081/I-...
.

This comment from a DM reader sums it up really.

"She says she is innocent. I would say she was found not guilty!"

Indeed she may say she was found not guilty, which is of course is true, but never less she is infact saying - I was a senior leader of an organisation that was wholly unfit to lead, since on my watch we had systemic and industrial harvesting of illegal data for which I could neither account for or control.

But we all know she is not saying that.....

Jesus.... The women has no humility in face of the sheer revulsion of these proven illegal practices - stunning arrogance !

[gpo746]

Breadvan72 said:

Yes, although a fair few mess with it and don't get caught, but those that do get caught get a bit of a kicking. See also civil contempt - get done for that and expect a bit of a battering from the Judge.

I could be like your shorthand version ?

So come on BV what do you think Mr Coulson will get ?
I'm estimating a 12 month sentence

[jmorgan]

Somehow I am not going to be surprised at a suspended sentence.


No legal eagle here so my un knowledgable cynical gland is on overdrive.

[Zod]

Steffan said:

Breadvan72 said:

That is true. Markets are odd, and often far from rational. I can think of a couple of bazzers who are famously crap but who are in fashion with the market, so they get lots of work and high fees, perhaps on some sort of Emperor's new clothes basis. Having said that, the best people really are super ace, and when the st is really going down they can be worth every penny.

Breavan is absolutely correct in reminding us how much better the British Courts are than most, in resisting attempts to pervert justice in trials. Our system is not perfect but is a lot less imperfect than many others. There are the occasional serious attempts as in the recent Hume/Pryce trials where subsequently a Part time judge was jailed for her dishonest testimony. Very sad case all round really because all Pryce managed was to ruin her own position, and thst of her friend. However as we must all remeber Congreve was absolutely spot on with his "hell knows no fury like a woman scorned, " muse and it would serve us all well to remeber that fact. Imperfect the British justice system may be but it's probably one of the best in the world.

Edited by Steffan on Thursday 26th June 19:25

After my post the other day, I feel that I must commend the good sense of this post.

[Zod]

jmorgan said:

Somehow I am not going to be surprised at a suspended sentence.


No legal eagle here so my un knowledgable cynical gland is on overdrive.

Not going to happen. He is going to jail, but I suspect he will be free by next spring.

[Megaflow]

Anybody see the still of her getting into a car on Channel 4 news last night, they said she looked relieved. In my eyes it was more like a smug "got away with that smile"

[Steffan]

Zod said:

Steffan said:

Breadvan72 said:

That is true. Markets are odd, and often far from rational. I can think of a couple of bazzers who are famously crap but who are in fashion with the market, so they get lots of work and high fees, perhaps on some sort of Emperor's new clothes basis. Having said that, the best people really are super ace, and when the st is really going down they can be worth every penny.

Breavan is absolutely correct in reminding us how much better the British Courts are than most, in resisting attempts to pervert justice in trials. Our system is not perfect but is a lot less imperfect than many others. There are the occasional serious attempts as in the recent Hume/Pryce trials where subsequently a Part time judge was jailed for her dishonest testimony. Very sad case all round really because all Pryce managed was to ruin her own position, and thst of her friend. However as we must all remeber Congreve was absolutely spot on with his "hell knows no fury like a woman scorned, " muse and it would serve us all well to remeber that fact. Imperfect the British justice system may be but it's probably one of the best in the world.

Edited by Steffan on Thursday 26th June 19:25

After my post the other day, I feel that I must commend the good sense of this post.

I thank you, Sir. I will try to keep this up but I am not consistent either on writing or in life.

[turbobloke]

Steffan said:

Zod said:

Steffan said:

Breadvan72 said:

That is true. Markets are odd, and often far from rational. I can think of a couple of bazzers who are famously crap but who are in fashion with the market, so they get lots of work and high fees, perhaps on some sort of Emperor's new clothes basis. Having said that, the best people really are super ace, and when the st is really going down they can be worth every penny.

Breavan is absolutely correct in reminding us how much better the British Courts are than most, in resisting attempts to pervert justice in trials. Our system is not perfect but is a lot less imperfect than many others. There are the occasional serious attempts as in the recent Hume/Pryce trials where subsequently a Part time judge was jailed for her dishonest testimony. Very sad case all round really because all Pryce managed was to ruin her own position, and thst of her friend. However as we must all remeber Congreve was absolutely spot on with his "hell knows no fury like a woman scorned, " muse and it would serve us all well to remeber that fact. Imperfect the British justice system may be but it's probably one of the best in the world.

After my post the other day, I feel that I must commend the good sense of this post.

I thank you, Sir. I will try to keep this up but I am not consistent either on writing or in life.

[carinaman]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/phone-h...

Was he referred to as 'Steak Knife' or 'Stakeknife'?

The photo of that invoice doesn't please me as much as the one from Bliar advising Brooks to do a Hutton.

[Regiment]

I haven't been following the trial that closely but from what's been reported on Sky News, my understanding was that if Brooks was innocent, it'd make her the most terrible, incompetent business woman to ever get a job in the UK. How did she not know what was going on, especially considering a lot of the people working for the paper reported that it was pretty much common knowledge that that's what was happening.

[Dr Jekyll]

Regiment said:

I haven't been following the trial that closely but from what's been reported on Sky News, my understanding was that if Brooks was innocent, it'd make her the most terrible, incompetent business woman to ever get a job in the UK. How did she not know what was going on, especially considering a lot of the people working for the paper reported that it was pretty much common knowledge that that's what was happening.

The point is that it was common knowledge that it happened in general, but not proven that she knew it happened in these particular cases.

[Steffan]

Dr Jekyll said:

Regiment said:

I haven't been following the trial that closely but from what's been reported on Sky News, my understanding was that if Brooks was innocent, it'd make her the most terrible, incompetent business woman to ever get a job in the UK. How did she not know what was going on, especially considering a lot of the people working for the paper reported that it was pretty much common knowledge that that's what was happening.

The point is that it was common knowledge that it happened in general, but not proven that she knew it happened in these particular cases.

I was always doubtful of the outcome because of the distance between RB and the actual physical perpetration of these crimes. Too many intervening individuals who actually arrange for the hacking for direct personal responsibility being proved against the distant heads, to be beyond doubt. Rather like the Stafford Hospital case where the lives of hundreds were ruined, destroyed and shortened and made utterly awful. Only a tiny minority of relatively junior staff mostly nurses have been prosecuted in any way and few of those if any have been jailed. Not one senior member of staff has ever been charged and they will not be.

Like it or not successive trials have shown that unless there is absolutely believable and relevant testimony clearly showing the personal involvement of senior staff with signatures on documents and further testimony to their being present at the actual crime and the planning thereof then there is a very fair chance that such criminals will walk away scott free. Unless there is a change in the law whereby Directors become personally liable for the misdeeds of their staff during their Directorship I doubt there will be. Probably explains why there have been so few prosecutions of bankers following the banking crisis. The current system is ineffective at bringing very senior individuals to task in most businesses.

Sadly as ever, given the mantra of the "Me First" political approach that our politicians all personally demonstrate daily, unsurprisingly there is no interest in any of our political leaders in addressing that fact because it might well have repercussions on their chummy colleagues and friends and very possibly on themselves. So just this sort of "I knew nothing about it" defence will go in high office nationwide. The famous line of the Judge in the Aberfan disaster inquiry, underlining that the accused "Could and should have known exactly what would happen" produced no prosecutions then, nor changes in the law at thevtime and nor has it since. In consequence on this will continue to go.

[EskimoArapaho]

Dr Jekyll said:

Regiment said:

I haven't been following the trial that closely but from what's been reported on Sky News, my understanding was that if Brooks was innocent, it'd make her the most terrible, incompetent business woman to ever get a job in the UK. How did she not know what was going on, especially considering a lot of the people working for the paper reported that it was pretty much common knowledge that that's what was happening.

The point is that it was common knowledge that it happened in general, but not proven that she knew it happened in these particular cases.

But it's more than that. If you're smart and you want underlings to break the law to get the stories that make you and the company look good, you build a few layers of semi-plausible ignorance* into the way they work for you. And she's very smart.

* This jury decided that "semi-plausible ignorance" beats "beyond a reasonable doubt". Rightly so, in light of the evidence, but clearly wrong on merit.

[Mermaid]

EskimoArapaho said:

But it's more than that. If you're smart and you want underlings to break the law to get the stories that make you and the company look good, you build a few layers of semi-plausible ignorance* into the way they work for you. And she's very smart.

* This jury decided that "semi-plausible ignorance" beats "beyond a reasonable doubt". Rightly so, in light of the evidence, but clearly wrong on merit.

& lucky that she has Rupert on her side - if he was on the other side, I suspect the smoking gun may have been found. And I do not rule that out as a possibility in the future.

Edited by Mermaid on Sunday 29th June 18:37

[Fastpedeller]

Steffan said:

Sadly as ever, given the mantra of the "Me First" political approach that our politicians all personally demonstrate daily, unsurprisingly there is no interest in any of our political leaders in addressing that fact because it might well have repercussions on their chummy colleagues and friends and very possibly on themselves. So just this sort of "I knew nothing about it" defence will go in high office nationwide. The famous line of the Judge in the Aberfan disaster inquiry, underlining that the accused "Could and should have known exactly what would happen" produced no prosecutions then, nor changes in the law at thevtime and nor has it since. In consequence on this will continue to go.

Yes indeed - And the very much used phrase of "lessons learned" that never seem to be acted upon........ Nobody really learns because they know what corruption/cover-ups are going on.
I expect we'll never hear the truth re Hillsborough, and nobody will be brought to task.
How is it that a retired Police Officer isn't dealt with, but alleged offenders from 30 years ago where the 'victim' remembers they were abused (quite correctly)is dealt with. doesn't seem consistent (especially where innocent folk died allegedly)

[Steffan]

Fastpedeller said:

Steffan said:

Sadly as ever, given the mantra of the "Me First" political approach that our politicians all personally demonstrate daily, unsurprisingly there is no interest in any of our political leaders in addressing that fact because it might well have repercussions on their chummy colleagues and friends and very possibly on themselves. So just this sort of "I knew nothing about it" defence will go in high office nationwide. The famous line of the Judge in the Aberfan disaster inquiry, underlining that the accused "Could and should have known exactly what would happen" produced no prosecutions then, nor changes in the law at thevtime and nor has it since. In consequence on this will continue to go.

Yes indeed - And the very much used phrase of "lessons learned" that never seem to be acted upon........ Nobody really learns because they know what corruption/cover-ups are going on.
I expect we'll never hear the truth re Hillsborough, and nobody will be brought to task.
How is it that a retired Police Officer isn't dealt with, but alleged offenders from 30 years ago where the 'victim' remembers they were abused (quite correctly)is dealt with. doesn't seem consistent (especially where innocent folk died allegedly)

I entirely agree, For those reasons I expect no change. Pity.

[carinaman]

Coulson to face a retrial on making corrupt payment to public official(s) for information. The report on R5 mention Goodman and the 15? Royal Phone Directories found at his flat.

[12TS]

Interesting, poor old Coulson is being put through the wringer isn't he. Bet he must regret his actions now.

I wonder if with continuing scrutiny like this there will be a smoking gun for RB somewhere. Archer got away with it for a while as did Aitken, but the more times this is reviewed the more chance there is of something new emerging. Plus I guess there will be some journos digging away to see what can be found.

I suppose it's a very small chance on the whole, but if it were me and I was guilty I'd always sleep a little uneasily at night. Maybe RB doesn't have these kinds of issues though.

[Steffan]

12TS said:

Interesting, poor old Coulson is being put through the wringer isn't he. Bet he must regret his actions now.

I wonder if with continuing scrutiny like this there will be a smoking gun for RB somewhere. Archer got away with it for a while as did Aitken, but the more times this is reviewed the more chance there is of something new emerging. Plus I guess there will be some journos digging away to see what can be found.

I suppose it's a very small chance on the whole, but if it were me and I was guilty I'd always sleep a little uneasily at night. Maybe RB doesn't have these kinds of issues though.

My experience of very successful individuals who make millions from business almost invariably have a massive overriding self preservation instinct that surmounts everything other consideration. Generally very direct and cutthroat in their approach. IME they generally do not ever consider failure or indeed anythingbotherbthan themselves and generally sleep the sleep of the comfortable. Robert Maxwell for example could have slept comfortably in a corkscrew because his life was the only one he ever worried about. I suspect that RB is the same but I have never met her.

[carinaman]

I'm finding the idea that RB and AC were in a relationship and work colleagues but didn't discuss news stories and their source difficult to believe. I don't think such a thing would happen in other work environments but somehow it didn't happen in an industry whose raison d'etre is to discover and propagate tittle tattle?