JOURNOS GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT COVERAGE OF MADELEINE ABDUCTION

And here we go:

11.45am: Pilditch says in the absence of direct police information, he befriended local journalists who had good contacts with the local police.

He identifies three best sources - two Portuguese journalists who were in daily contact with the senior investigating officers; the third source was a translator.

11.52am: Due to the secrecy of Portuguese justice laws Pilditch says it was impossible to report the story to a legally sound standard normally expected of reporters.

I knew that the reports were correct but I also knew that because there was no confirmation there were going to be difficulties if any complaints were made.


Oh boy - he has just confirmed all the rubbish was coming from Gonc.

Oh my very dear.....

11.55am: Pilditch says he shared his discomfiture with his newsdesk

We may not be able to defend these things because we may not be able to get confirmation. They took that on board.

He added:


I am not a legal expert, but I felt that the situation as it presented itself, that was the case. I'm certain the newsdesk would have conversations with lawyers about this.

There would have been discussions - that was the situation we were in and there was no way around it.


So, the Express printed Gonc's garbage knowing it couldn't be confirmed - and indeed, in the fullness of time, was shown to be complete garbage?

No wonder they settled so quickly!

12.01pm: Pilditch says this was an important development in the story.


This was a very big story, obviously there would be discussions on the newspapers from lawyers, all sorts of parties involved. The actual legal aspects would be something that the lawyers would be discussing.

If you put it into context of the story. The story was such a huge story

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

Is he trying to shift the blame onto the lawyers, when it was him who was on the ground in Portugal repeating Gonc's trash as True Facts From Police Sources?

Bingo!

12.03pm: Pilditch explains that the McCanns engaged a PR man, Clarence Mitchell, who commented on every story, that this was "a black propaganda" campaign and there was no evidence to back up the claim [that the McCanns were suspects].

He says that senior detectives in the Portuguese police were briefing "off the record".

Thank you Mr Pilditch!

bb1 wrote:Bingo!

12.03pm: Pilditch explains that the McCanns engaged a PR man, Clarence Mitchell, who commented on every story, that this was "a black propaganda" campaign and there was no evidence to back up the claim [that the McCanns were suspects].

He says that senior detectives in the Portuguese police were briefing "off the record".

Thank you Mr Pilditch!

OMG - just as suspected. This is going to be a bad day for some in the Portimao area.....

12.13pm: The inquiry is discussing the mundanities of newsgathering and hearing how reporters may have "filed" some copy for a story but may not make the final cut. However their byline may still appear on the story.

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

So, he listened to smears, lies and general bollox from 'senior police officers' and a translator in Portugal, passed the trash onto London, who then put feet, legs and a tail on material that had been untrue to begin with?

I see.

Oh boy.

12.16pm: Jay is now quizzing Pilditch about the language used in a story that referred to the "10 fingers of suspicion".

The story also reports that "Portuguese detectives could fly to Britain for make or break interviews".

Jay puts it to him that the language is "quite heightened" and Pilditch is making it sound like guilt or innocence would turn on these interviews.

Pilditch says he can't remember if he wrote the exact words - the article was written four years ago.

Leveson now asks whether he reads his own stories?

Leveson doesn't sound amused by these awful stories, does he?

I am going cross-eyed trying to watch several different feeds.

The Sky feed:

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16134699

Pilditch says they had to use Portuguese police interpreter and local journos as sources in absence of official briefings re McCanns


Jesus H. Christ, so much for their accursed 'secrecy of justice - I wonder what hate site the police translator joined to drip more poison?

Oh. My. God.

12.19pm: Jay says a further story reporting DNA "findings" that Madeleine's body had been in the spare tyre-well in the boot did not actually conclude that.

The DNA evidence was "at best inconclusive", says Jay. He refers to the testimony of the McCann's four weeks ago who said it was "simply untrue" .

"Madeleine's DNA was not uncovered in the hire car," Jay points out.


Pilditch says "we know that now, but we didn't know that then" adding the local police were briefing that there were links.

Some of the haters still use that Express front page as an avatar...

lily wrote:Leveson doesn't sound amused by these awful stories, does he?

He certainly doesn't, Lily - I am not surprised the Express paid compensation without any argument, this is disgraceful.

Just think how many of the morons still believe this trash, and use it as an excuse for their hate campaign, when there was never a word of truth in it.

Just look at this idiot on bennett's forum parrotting rubbish:

On the issue of DNA.....Why does he not say that there were 15 out of 19 markers found. In Portugal 16 is needed for court, in the UK 14 is needed for court! The chance of 2 DNA samples belonging to different people if the results of the forensic analysis shows a 15:19 match is miniscule!

For the millionth time, there were 15 markers out of 37!

They were NOT exclusive to Madeleine McCann, as has been explained over, and over, and over again.

Gonc couldn't or wouldn't grasp that either.

Madeleine was never anywhere near that car.

This, though, is a prime example of the damage the Express did by repeating all those smears and lies from Team Gonc.

This is totally shocking, Bonny. Look at all the distress the McCanns have gone through because of this. Unbelievably unnecessary...... words fail.

Back to Leveson - and it gets even worse. Pilditch is now being asked about the junk he made up about the priest:

12.29pm: The inquiry is now talking about the priest who helped comfort the McCanns in Portugal in the wake of their daughter's disappearance.

Referring to a story about the "tormented police", Jay observes "this is rather a loaded story".

The priest, it says, felt under tremendous emotional strain because of some sort of confession had been given to him by Dr Kate McCann. The story says 'The tormented priest insisted he would stand by his vows and take his secrets to the grave'.

Jay says it was "journalistic licence" to assert "that the priest not merely stands by his religious obligation but that he would be taking the secret to his grave because he was given a confession by Dr McCann".

He says everything in this last sentence about the grave is an "inference".

"You weren't told that by anyone were you?

lily wrote:This is totally shocking, Bonny. Look at all the distress the McCanns have gone through because of this. Unbelievably unnecessary...... words fail.

It's appalling, Lily.

I wonder how the Truthseekers feel, knowing they were played for fools? And how stupid do they look now, that the pitchforkers are still parrotting rubbish made up by Express subs?

Oh well, they were told often enough.

12.38pm: Jay asks if "people like you" are writing stories which imply that the child has not been abducted "something far more sinister has happened".

Jay asks if Pilditch does not consider if this would add "to the emotional turmoil" of the parents who already at their wit's end over the disappearance of their child.

Pilditch says:

I think I explained, there is emotional turmoil, but I'm reporting what's happening on the ground, that particular day.

----------

Yeah, and he was only obeying orders

Oh my!

12.42pm: Leveson puts it to Pilditch that he was repackaging "tittle tattle" that exposed newspapers exposed to massive damage claims.

Leveson asks did Pilditch make the paper aware of the "extreme fragility" of the information?

All the things that are being written, about the priest... it's all fluff, there's nothing to it

Pilditch says:

It's not tittle tattle, because it was information coming from senior detectives who were investigating the case.

Gotcha, Gonc!

bb1 wrote:Oh my!

12.42pm: Leveson puts it to Pilditch that he was repackaging "tittle tattle" that exposed newspapers exposed to massive damage claims.

Leveson asks did Pilditch make the paper aware of the "extreme fragility" of the information?

All the things that are being written, about the priest... it's all fluff, there's nothing to it

Pilditch says:

It's not tittle tattle, because it was information coming from senior detectives who were investigating the case.

Gotcha, Gonc!

12.50pm: James Dingemans, for Northern and Shell is objecting to questions being raised by David Sherborne with no prior notice

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16134699

Sherborne quoting from Pilditch #McCann articles in attempt to show they contained material known to be inaccurate at time of writing.
by skyfixer69 via twitter 1:01 PM
There's now a debate going on as to whether this is appropriate and within the scope of the #LevesonInquiry
by skyfixer69 via twitter 12:51 PM
Sherborne wants to hit Pilditch with some questions which have come straight from Kate and Gerry McCann. #Leveson

Name and shame the Portuguese liars!