MPs vote not to not recall James Murdoch over hacking

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

MPs have voted against recalling News International chairman James Murdoch to give more evidence on phone hacking.

Labour MP Tom Watson had wanted Mr Murdoch, ex-News of the World editor Colin Myler and the paper's ex-legal manager Tom Crone to appear before MPs.

But the culture committee instead voted to write to the men for more details.

>

Commons culture, media and sport committee chairman John Whittingdale said it would also write to law firm Harbottle and Lewis, who investigated the phone hacking claims on behalf of News International.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14336691

---

Some details on Guardian blog here :

12.51pm: John Whittingdale, the chairman of the Commons culture committee, said:

We have considered this morning the evidence we received last week from Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks and subsequent statements by certain individuals have raised questions about some of the evidence we have received.

As a result of that, we are going to write to ask for further details from various areas where evidence is disputed.

We are writing to Colin Myler, Tom Crone, John Chapman. We are also writing to James Murdoch to follow up on a number of questions which he promised us further information last week.

12.40pm: Labour MP Tom Watson has said that his attempt to recall Rupert Murdoch and his son James to give more evidence to the Commons culture, media and sport committee over phone-hacking has been voted down.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2011/jul/29/phone-hacking-scandal-live-coverage

[marions ghost]

1. Buying time, sounds like

"Because we haven't got the information yet. What I want to have is a detailed submission from those individuals who dispute part of James Murdoch's evidence … If we are to reexamine James Murdoch we need to know much more about the areas where they say he is wrong."

They're not ruling out re-examination. Giving those who dispute time to come up with a cohesive case.

[beac]

2. I certainly hope you are right. n/t

[marions ghost]

3. ur reflecting the American perspective...

--understandably --ie. pessimistic about motives (are they just shoving it down and covering it over like is done here?) We see things from a downtrodden mentality over here.

I'm thinking that in England, the people are so appalled they might not have such a short-term memory.
And they might have more of a chance to get to the bottom of it.

I could be wrong. Maybe Dipsydoodle has an opinion.

[dipsydoodle]

4. I think future events will be determined by the written repsonses received back

Broadly speaking I'd say the English do tend to forget news quite quickly and just move on to a passing interest in whatever replaces it. A lot of the stuff the Guardian are gradually feeding out, in the hope of sustaining interest, by their own confession they've been sitting on for a while.

Yesterday's news concerning Sarah Payne's mother's 'phone was a bit of a mystery because it was qualified by so many ifs, but and maybes. In this particular case there wouldn't have been any point in that 'phone being hacked because the closeness of her relationship with the NOWT was such that they everything anyway. Given that Rebekah Brooks' number was in the same list it could even have been a list of numbers not to bother with. :shrug: The answers to all of this I guess must lie with Glen Mulcaire himself.

[beac]

5. Now that the Murdochs are no longer paying his legal bills

(and I'm surprised it wasn't more shocking that they HAD been all this time), it will be interesting to see what, if anything, changes in Mulcaire's version of events.

Do you think Mulcaire could be charged with additional counts (i.e. provided with motivation in the form of imunity therefrom to inform on the higher-ups at NI)?

[dipsydoodle]

6. At the moment he's keeping schtum completely

because of the ongoing police enquiry and on that basis has apparently refused to comment on anything whatsoever.

NI paying his legal bills may have been contractual and was most probably a matter of record anyway. It will however be interesting to see which other papers he was supplying information for too.

:hi:

[non sociopath skin]

9. Looks like he just got more talkative ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/29/glenn-mulcaire-news-of-the-world

US friends who are interested in following this story will find the Guardian website an invaluable source of information.

The Skin

[dipsydoodle]

10. So it would appear

The private investigator at the centre of the News of the World phone-hacking claims "acted on the instructions of others", his lawyers have said.

In a statement Glenn Mulcaire's legal team said any suggestion he acted unilaterally was "untrue".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14346083

although he's stopped short of saying which others. :shrug:

[marions ghost]

7. re Sarah Payne

the media certainly are playing it up as "the worst yet." Yet you are giving Rebekah a lot of leeway. I wonder why they would give Payne a phone tho. Seems an unusually cosy relationship that Brooks took every advantage of. Yes, it seems that Glen Mulcaire is the key to what really happened.

Keep us posted!

[dipsydoodle]

8. The phone wasn't a gift

It was provided so's she could communicate easily with those supporting the Phoenix Charity - NI have paid the 'phone bills for the past 8 years as far as I'm aware.

[marions ghost]

11. Interesting...8 years

WHY would they do that? Is this Murdoch's idea of charity (beginning at home)? Philanthropy--does NI support the charity in other ways?

I think that would be just about unheard of over here.

[dipsydoodle]

12. Was associated with the campaign spearheaded by the NOTW

Sarah's Law

The campaign for Sarah's Law was spearheaded by the News of the World newspaper, which began in July 2000 in response to the murder of Sarah Payne. Sarah Payne's parents backed up the campaign as they were sure that a child sex offender had been responsible for their daughter's death. Their belief was proved correct 17 months later when Roy Whiting was found guilty of killing Sarah Payne, and it was revealed that he already had a conviction for abducting and indecently assaulting an eight-year-old girl.

The aim of the campaign was for the government to allow controlled access to the Sex Offenders Register, so parents with young children could know if a child sex-offender was living in their area. Sarah Payne's mother has always insisted that such a law would have saved her daughter's life.

The scheme was introduced in four pilot areas of England and Wales in September 2008. In August 2010 the Home Office announced that after proving successful, Sarah's Law would be extended to cover the whole of England and Wales by spring 2011.<33>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sarah_Payne

[marions ghost]

13. thanks

it still seems odd to me that a newspaper would spearhead this campaign. I wonder who was behind that--mainly Rebekah?

[non sociopath skin]

14. Call me a cynic, but I suspect it was mainly to give a veneer of Good Works ...

... to a seedy scandal sheet.

It will be interesting, as the Case of Rebekah's Telephone unfolds, to see whether there was any further hidden curriculum.

The Skin

[dipsydoodle]

15. Yes

I think it was Rebekah Brooks. Aside from sympathy newspapers do things like that - sells print.

[marions ghost]

17. Not sure they do that here

It seems unusual to me. Somebody correct me if they know of a case where an American media outlet gets overtly involved in promoting a charity in order to garner sympathy and sell the paper (or content). It might be seen as some kind of suspicious ulterior motive here.

Am I correct? Just throwing it out...

[dipsydoodle]

18. Just for clarity

The creation of the charity followed the issue of Sarah's Law which the NOWT were instrumental in getting passed into law but not sure how long by. It wasn't that NOWT were promoting the charity.

[marions ghost]

19. thanks

I see. They supported it editorially speaking, not in actuality. Thanks for clarifying.

[WhiteTara]

16. Does this mean the bastards are going to escape? n/t