Too wonder what dirt Rebekkah Brooks must have on Murdoch?

[MovingOnUpMovingOnOut]

Obviously this is nothing more than conjecture on my part but BBC have just confirmed she's going back to Newscorp on Monday.

She was not employed as a regulator, I've never been able to understand the vitriol against this woman. The jury decided she was not guilty, made up of ordinary men and women, so what is it with this mumsnet jury?

Whether she was cleared or not was irrelevant. Any decent defence barrister can stack the evidence so she looked whiter than white. She was never going to go down for what happened.

The fact that such a huge amount of illegal activity took place under her watch and she knew nothing about it makes her shit at her job and worthy of derision alone.

And fwiw I don't think for one moment she didn't know. Her job was to sell as many papers as possible and make Murdoch even richer. She didn’t give a shit how she got there.

Two of a kind?

"Her job was to sell as many papers as possible" Yes, she did that, and the good citizens of our country bought them - no one forced them. Ipso facto she was very good at her job. It is the nature of commerce to want to sell lots of your goods, so Murdoch can't be criticised for that.

What's with the MN jury?

Well for one thing, not being in a criminal court I'm not required to set the bar at "beyond reasonable doubt". I can chose my own standards, and "on the balance of probabilities" is fine by me.

For another thing, I can take account of Brooks' performance in front of the select committee in which she and then weaselled out of it with the help of Andy Coulsen. This was not allowed to be submitted to the court, because IIRC of parliamentary privilege.

And I've just reread some of her other select committee testimony, and remember her Leveson testimony. Rebekah Brooks couldn't lie straight in bed. She continually misdirects, talks but doesn't answer the question, and on one occasion starts interrogating the QC.

You may admire her for all of that. Rupert Murdoch may admire her for that.

I don't.

(And before you ask, when I'm on a jury in a criminal case then of course I'll apply "beyond reasonable doubt". But I don't feel the need to apply it to my personal opinion of someone.)

I was surprised that she's going back but I can see why. RM knows that she will do the job he gives her and do it well - namely sell his papers by whatever means necessary. Bringing in the money.

RB is a deeply ambitious woman (nowt wrong with that) but she has shown that she will do whatever it takes to further her own position. And it doesn't matter who she hurts along the way (including her then partners, husbands and the wife of AC).

ExConstance - if she was really completely innocent and had no knowledge of the large-scale corruption going on under her watch, then she was incompetent. She was unable to detect such horrible practices going on even though she had ample means to do so. She basically claimed that she was stupid and naive. That would make her unsuitable for her post. Claiming you're stupid and naive does not usually help in job interviews for high-level posts.

Yes, but this is the world of commerce, not a Local Authority department. I'm sure if there are concerns they can put in a compliance officer or two to support her.

Apropos to nothing I do wish I had hair like hers, but sadly mine is straight and brown.

I am furious about her return but hardly surprised.

In any company, the person in charge holds ultimate responsibility and would resign/be sacked immediately for wrongdoing. Not RB. She's far too powerful, friend to politicians etc, to get a smack on her hand let alone go to prison.

Hacking into anyone's phone isn't just illegal, it's immoral. (And it's laughable to think she didn't know. She used to be one of those journalists remember)

As someone said, it's two fingers up at those whose privacy was violated and lives devastated.

Why shouldn't she get her job back? The more women in power the better.

Ruthless media proprietor in shock appointment of ruthless leader (who has demonstrated amazing teflon skills) shock. If she can emerge unscathed from all that. imagine what the new incarnation of the News of the Screws will be able to get up to - and who better to run it than someone who will continue to have no idea what is going on, despite getting a fat sum for running it. The only surprise to me is that she's not been appointed to run the BBC.

JanetBlyton Congratulations! That is the stupidest comment I have ever read on MN ever. Well done!

YANBU to wonder this.
But I suspect the truth is that we haven't got a clue what's going on with this whole case. "Suspicious" doesn't even touch it. Murdoch and associates essentially run the country. Power over the media and power over the population go hand in hand. I'd have thought that keeping people "in the club" when they have as much knowledge of the system as Rebecca Brooks has is advantageous. What, exactly, specific bits of "dirt" might be is way beyond the information we're privy to.

RB beat up Grant Mitchell.

She's so well 'ard that an old man has no power against her. Resistance is futile.

She knows too much about other public figures.
She is as ruthless as her cruel boss

The premise of her defence was that she was incompetent at her job as opposed to criminal. I assume that, if they could have spun it any other way then they would have done so.

I assume that, if they could have spun it any other way then they would have done so.

I disagree. "Bumbling and a bit clueless" is infinitely preferable to admitting to ruthless, greedy, power-hungry disregard for the public.

I wasn't criticising Murdoch although I would be happy to. My point was she did what he asked her to do, very successfully. A man like that does not keep incompetent people around him. So therefore her defence was bullshit.

She did what he asked even

Of course it was bullshit. She did whatever it took to get her off.

Does she have children?

I only ask because I'd love her to get head lice in that bush.

I suspect that she knows where the bodies are buried and she kept schtum when all hell broke loose around her. He was said to be fascinated with her anyway.

If people object to her reinstatement then the obvious course of action would be to stop consuming Murdoch's products. But I doubt that everyone will be rushing to cancel their Sky tv! And that is why stuff like this happens - because nobody is quite cross enough.

I don't have Sky TV thank you very much. Or consume any other Murdoch product.

But that's not really relevant. I'm more interested in the scurrilous rumours than unfounded allegations of hypocrisy.