LATEST FROM LEVESON

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2012/jan/09/leveson-inquiry-kelvin-mackenzie-dominic-mohan-live

Former Sun Editor John Edwards:



Leveson inquiry: Sun picture editor John Edwards has followed Kelvin MacKenzie and Gordon Smart in giving evidence

12.59pm: Edwards says that the Sun's photographer outside the house of Ting Lan Hong, the mother of Hugh Grant's child, left before the PCC got in touch.

"We weren't harassing him; we weren't harassing her. We were simply there. We were there in an attempt to capture a happy photograph of Grant and his girlfriend [posing with the child]," Edwards says.

"It's a difficult line to walk," he adds, referring to public interest and intrusion into privacy.

1.03pm: Edwards says he will always check to see if a celebrity looks uncomfortable with photographs being taken.

Asked again about the Lily Allen photograph, he says the fact that Allen was heavily pregnant at the time tipped the balance against publication.

Back on the Hugh Grant photographs, he says there were "no visible signs of distress" from Grant or Hong so the Sun felt there was no reason to contact Grant's agent.

1.06pm: Edwards is asked about press intrusion alleged by Kate and Gerry McCann.

"I'm a dad of a little girl who was seven at the time," he says. "I felt tremendous sympathy with the McCanns … Looking back on it now I don't think it was right that Mrs McCann had to drive through that crown of photgraphers and TV cameras."

He is referring to the ambush of paparazzi that greeted the McCanns on their arrival back in Leicestershire shortly after Madeleine disappeared.

"We got it spot on in Portugal," he says, "but we may not have been so good when it came back to Leicestershire, no."

He suggests in any other such case the number of TV cameras and photographers allowed to attend events should be limited.

1.08pm: Edwards has finished his evidence and the inquiry has broken for lunch. The hearing will resume at 2.15pm.

PDF of Mr Edwards' statement here:

http://regretsandramblings.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Witness-Statement-of-John-Edwards.pdf

This is interesting:


Kate McCann
Did your newspaper instruct any photographer, employed or otherwise, to follow or
take photos of Kate McCann on her return from Portugal in September 2007? Did
your newspaper publish any photos of Kate McCann taken in this period? If so, did
the picture editor inquire into the context in which the photos were taken? If so,
what in your view justified the publication of these photos?


The Sun has never employed any photographer to follow Kate McCann but we did
photograph her and family on their return from Portugal, On one occasion pictures were
provided by the Press Association after their arrival at East Midlands airport. This was
arranged on a pool basis. We did continue to cover this story in the days to follow. We
were part of the press and TV crews who were stationed on public land at the exit to the
housing development where they live, From this vantage point our photographer took
pictures of them leaving and arriving home by car. We did not follow them at any time, Qn
one occasion we took photographs of Mr and Mrs McCann walking to and from church, but
we were already there and photographed them as they approached. d, I believe that in the
early days after Madeleine’s disappearance, they were prepared to be photographed
without pixilation of their children’s faces. However. as the story unfolded and media
attention increased, the family’s media representative requested that their children’s faces
should be pixelated and this was respected, At that time, no complaint about our behaviour
was made, and we believed that continued publicity of this terrible story was paramount in
the search for Madeleine. Had we been aware that our behaviour was causing the
McCanns concerns, we would have acted upon them. I believe that The Sun has had a
positive relationship with the McCanns since the very beginning of the search for their daughter. For example, f helped design, print and distribute about 2,000 missing posters of
Madeleine with full co-operation from the family, especially Mr McCann’s sister who had
asked for our help directly {see Exhibit "JEI"). In May of this year The Sun serialised the
McCann’s book. running extracts every day for a week: and to promote the book Mrs
McCann agreed to be photographed and interviewed by The Sun, and appear in a video
that has been posted on the title’s website.

this is my honest opinion: it was good to know this about The Sun: "I believe that The Sun has had a positive relationship with the McCanns since the very beginning of the search for their daughter. For example, helped design, print and distribute about 2,000 missing posters of Madeleine with full co-operation from the family, especially Mr McCann’s sister who had asked for our help directly. In May of this year The Sun serialised the McCann’s book. running extracts every day for a week: and to promote the book Mrs McCann agreed to be photographed and interviewed by The Sun, and appear in a video that has been posted on the title’s website." All positive help is welcome. Well done The Sun.

Yes, I think the Sun got it just about right, Pedro - realistically, nothing can be perfect in a situation like that.

More today about photographers:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/11/leveson-inquiry-peter-wright-live

11.25am: Silva is questioned about Kate and Gerry McCann.

11.28am: Silva says that most pictures used of the McCanns were from outside agencies, rather than Daily Mail photographers.

He adds all of the photographs used would have been approved by the McCanns' press officer, Clarence Mitchell.

He admits the paper used unblurred pictures of the McCanns' children. "This was a unique situation … where we'd been allowed to stand in a certain position … and take pictures of the children," he says.

Silva says he understands the point that using the pictures was against the Mail's general policy.

Jays asks whether he should not have used the pictures.

"In hindsight, possibly … but there was no objection raised at the time," he adds.

11.29am: Silva is being asked why the paper's normal policy on pictures of children did not apply to the McCanns.

"It was the most intense story I've ever worked on," he says. "One of the most difficult I've ever had to work with."

11.31am: Asked if he has any recommendations, he says the PCC and NPA should get involved were there another situation like the McCanns.

"If you take the McCann situation, if we are unfortuately in that situation again, an organisation like the PCC should be stepping in."

He suggests a PCC training scheme for freelance photographers "where they're aware of their responsibilities".

Oh, the forkers won't like this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/11/leveson-inquiry-peter-wright-live

2.14pm: Wright is asked about the Mail on Sunday's coverage of the Madeleine McCann case.

He ia also sked what he made of Daily Express's coverage of the disappearance of McCann.

"They gave it a great deal of coverage – more than I thought was warranted. I'm sure they'll be able to explain why to you."

2.16pm: Wright says he sent a very experienced former Observer journalist, David Rose, to Portugal to do a "cold" review of the story.

The journalist filed an investigation into one of the police officers in charge of finding McCann, noting that the officer had worked on a similar case before and had faced allegations he forced an admission from a parent of the missing child.

David Rose's report:


Lies, beatings, secret trials: the dark side of police handling Madeleine case


By DAVID ROSE
Last updated at 18:57 16 September 2007


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz1jARxwtaD

Wright says he sent a very experienced former Observer journalist, David Rose, to Portugal to do a "cold" review of the story.

Wow.

That article is really good and pulled no punches.

Today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/12/leveson-inquiry-richard-desmond-peter-hill-live

12.08pm: Neesom is asked about the Daily Star's coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

She confirms that she was involved in some of the stories but "not necessarily all".

Asked how the libellous stories ever saw the light of day, Neesom says: "The source of the stories was entirely coming from Portugal … and we were being fed stories by the Portuguese police and press."

"It was a risk and to this day I regret what happened in the McCann case and all I can do is repeat the apology on page 1 for the hurt and distress we caused them."

She says she is not sure the paper's coverage increased its sales.

12.10pm: Jay describes the McCann stories as "extremely wounding and damaging", and asks Neesom about her thought process.

"With hindsight, I honestly don't recall what my thought process was. It was huge story, which everyone was talking about at the time," she says, adding that she thought the stories were coming from a reliable source.

"It was a huge huge story and mistake were made, for which I am truly sorry," she says.

---------------

Oh my!

"The source of the stories was entirely coming from Portugal … and we were being fed stories by the Portuguese police and press."

This bears repeating.

"The source of the stories was entirely coming from Portugal … and we were being fed stories by the Portuguese police and press."

About: "The source of the stories was entirely coming from Portugal … and we were being fed stories by the Portuguese police and press." This is no surprise to me.

OMG!!! Is everyone sitting down?


http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jan/12/leveson-inquiry-richard-desmond-peter-hill-live

2.34pm: Hill is being asked about Express's coverage of the Madeleine McCann case.

He accepts he was running a very high risk running the stories.


This was an unprecedented story that in my 50 years of experience I can't remember the like. There was an enormous clamour for information … it was an international story on an enormous scale. It was not a story you could ignore. You simply had to cover it as best you could.
2.36pm: Hill denies that, in effect, he accused the McCanns of killing their child.

The former editor says: "I did not accuse them of killing their child. The story that I ran were the people that did accuse them and those were the Portuguese police."

He adds that there was "reason to believe that they might possibly be true."

2.38pm: Jay accuses Hill of "whacking the story" into the paper.

Hill responds that Jay is putting him on trial.

He is reassured by Lord Justice Leveson that this is not a trial.

2.40pm: Hill says the paper did its best to check the accuracy of the McCann stories it printed.

He says: "We did the best we could do which was not very much. I'm not saying it was nothing but it was not very much."

Jay puts it to him that he had one eye on the circulation figures. "One always has an eye on the circulation figures," Hill replies.

Hill says he received estimates of sales figures on a daily basis. He adds that McCann stories boosted circulation "on many days".

2.43pm: Hill denies that he was "obsessed" with the McCann story, as claimed by former Express journalist Nick Fagge at the inquiry last year.

He adds that "it was nothing to do with an obsession; it was more to do with a method of working".

Jay argues that there is a difference between stories about Big Brother and about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

"On the McCann story the entire country had an opinion," says Hill. "These were strong opinions and were informed by the information that was coming from Portugal. We were not to know at the time the Portuguese police were not behaving in a civil manner."

2.47pm: Information is "a free for all", Hill says, adding that had newspapers stopped being printed "it might have made it worse", referring to the internet.

2.48pm: Hills says he was not troubled by the direction of the stories. "There was an enormous clamour for information and I felt this story should keep running," he tells the inquiry.

Jay asks: "What happened between you and the board after the £550,000 libel case with the McCanns?"

Hill: "Nothing."

2.49pm: Hill has now completed giving his evidence.

==============




We were not to know at the time the Portuguese police were not behaving in a civil manner

We were not to know at the time the Portuguese police were not behaving in a civil manner





Have just seen this. So there it is. Now, we know he must know who the big mouth was.

Troubles? I guess this may come out in the libel trial?

If there ever is a libel trial ..... your longtime friend and defence lawyer running away a few weeks before it starts is generally considered a bad sign...

Now all this - I would be surprised if Ms Duarte DIDN'T enter it into evidence - it's all been sworn on oath, remember.

Gonc hasn't a snowball's. He has all but been named in Westminster as the source of all the libel, smears and lies.

I gather smiffy has said something or other about Leveson. If anyone wants to read it, a copy's here:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post54005.html#p54005

Long as no-one wants me to read the latest load of nonsense.

Precis. Lord Justice Leveson is IN IT.

Could someone clarify something for me?
I note that on the Leveson reports at the top are the words copy to CPS. Is that the Crown Prosecution Service?

Desmond now - he whinges a bit about the Mail being horrid to him then we cut to the chase:


4.13pm: Asked about the PCC, Desmond says: "This is an association where our competitors - or our idiots, shall we say … At the end of the day all newspapers were doing the same thing. I saw it that we were the only one who was honest and apologised properly …

"Then to see the chairman of the PCC on BBC TV and vilify Peter Hill and Express Newspapers, that was the final straw. I felt it was a useless organisation run by people who wanted tea and buscuits, and phone hackers; it was run by people who wanted to destroy us."

Admin note:

4.14pm: Desmond defends Express editor Peter Hill over the paper's Madeleine McCann coverage.

Every paper, every day, for that amount of time, was talking about that story. Poor old Peter Hill … I remember calling him that night, I spoke to him for about two hours, because he'd done it to the best ability, reported the facts. Unfortunately, it was fair to assume that the Portuguese police were a reliable source.

Desmond says he didn't think the stories boosted circulation.

4.19pm: Desmond says that newspapers make money mainly through advertising, not really by circulation.

"The editors have to believe by writing [a big story] it will lift copies. But unfortunately we're in a non-growth business."

He adds:

This inquiry is probably the worst thing that's ever happened for newspapers in my lifetime.

The sales of newspapers has never been so bad … and it's not because of the inquiry, it's because of the hacking thing," Desmond tells Leveson. "I'm not blaming the Leveson inquiry … hacking is illegal, why are these people still walking the streets?

4.21pm: Desmond says he likes Lord Hunt, the new chairman of the PCC, but "I'd rather get rid of this [Leveson inquiry], prosecute people that committed offences, and get on with business. Have a proper RCD board of business people … And definitely, no tea and biscuits."

Leveson says: "I'm sorry, RCD?"

Desmond shoots back: "Richard Clive Desmond."
4.25pm: Desmond apologises to the McCanns over his papers' coverage.

"I don't wish to minimise it … and I'm not trying to win points here, but if there were 102 articles on the McCanns, and 38 bad ones … you could argue there were 68 or 70 good ones."

Desmond emphasises again that he isn't wishing to play down the effect of the bad stories.

4.28pm: Desmond tries to justify his papers' McCanns coverage because he says there was different points of view about what might have happened.

"There has been speculation that Diana was killed by the royal family," he says.
"The speculation has gone on and on. I don't know the answer."

"I apologise again to the McCanns etc etc etc, but there are views about the McCanns and what happened," he adds.

Jay points out that the logic of that argument is that the paper could write anything it liked.

Desmond says he's not advocating that.

4.33pm: Desmond tells the inquiry that if you agree that newspapers are important, then they should be allowed to report on opinions.

Jay interrupts and accuses Desmond of a "grotesque characterisation" of the way Fleet Street reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Desmond continues:

On your figure, we ran 102 articles for four months, nothing happened until a new firm of lawyers – who were on contingency – then came in to sue us.

Once again I do apologise. I am very sorry that we got it wrong … every paper was doing the same thing, which is why every paper paid money to the McCanns. But only we were scapegoated by the PCC.

4.34pm: Desmond continues with his view on the future of press regulation: "Lord Hunt of Wirral, surrounded by a couple of lawyers, a couple of grandees, not malicious people – we'd all be very happy. You've got to have people you respect. You can't have people you don't respect."

He adds: "I think RCD is a good name, isn't?"

Jay gives an audible sigh.
============

I am not surprised - what a woeful display of, of whinging.....Desmond sounds as if he's about to burst into tears.

crazytony wrote:Could someone clarify something for me?
I note that on the Leveson reports at the top are the words copy to CPS. Is that the Crown Prosecution Service?

I don't actually know for sure, Tony, it may well be, as there are assorted criminal cases rumbling away in the background?

Sans may?

crazytony wrote:Could someone clarify something for me?
I note that on the Leveson reports at the top are the words copy to CPS. Is that the Crown Prosecution Service?

Yessss.

Thank you.

God, these people are disgusting:



I seem to recall that forker has made disgusting, anti-Semitic remarks before?

Messge from twitter:

BrenR1958 Bren
Message to Tony on JATYK could CP's mean Core Participants in Leveson Inquiry #mccann

Huntter8 Huntter8
@
@JBLittlemore @BrenR1958 #mccann Leveson should also include Bren Ryan & see what her real involvement is in all this



Frigging lunatic

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/2012/01/leveson-inquiry-as-it-happened-january.html

What was their reaction as it became clear to everyone with a functioning brain cell, who was leaking the insidious stories, when Amaral's book came out?
Who knows, who cares, the damage has been done and cannot be undone. Shame on all involved!

Quite, Tony.

And as has been pointed out before, the press are not 'biding their time until they can turn on the McCanns' because of all those libel payouts.

No, they know EXACTLY who cost them all that money, and he sure don't live in Rothley.

Tick tock, not long now till the tide turns on Gonc and the floodgates open - and hopefully wash him and his corrupt clique of hangers on back under the rock they crawled out from.

Thank you Brenda