Harry v NGN 2

[mainecooncatonahottinroof]

I don't think we're done talking - and I never start threads!

As you were!

However, the case prepared against NGN I believe included statements from those who committed such wrongdoing ,(who served time), who are now supportive of Harry's case....which would be convincing evidence if a criminal case was brought

Are you talking about the Byline Times chap? What has stopped him from going directly to the police with his evidence long before now?

Yes I agree about Leveson II, a huge missed opportunity to have a proper public airing and accountability regarding police complicity. The Tories were a disgrace on this, and I doubt Labour will do anything about it either.

Yep, it looks like Lisa Nandy (current Culture Sec) has indicated she* does to wish to revisit Leveson II.

*in the sense that she has any independent agency or is representing the set view of Starmer - she could well be over-ruled by the shifting sands of Labour policy at some point in the future, and/or it could be converted into one of Cooper's 'national reviews'.

As for Rebekah 'clean ship' Brooks, I suppose perjury charges are possible?

(Personally I have always believed that Rebekah Brooks lied through her teeth to get out of her initial criminal prosecution) BUT no new evidential findings about her conduct have been made by the civil judge because there was no civil trial. Hence her position has not changed. Harry’s settlement and NGN’s careful statement does not prove anything she previously said was false.

Considering the current government last week flat out told the head of the FCA that he has to back off the banks and compensate customers less in aid of Labour’s growth objective, I would have no confidence they'll have the stomach to go to war against the press.

It would be something of an understatement to say I was surprised and disappointed at the Brooks verdict in 2014. I thought she was one of metaphorical dragons that Harry was now determined to expose, whatever the cost, because 'only he could'.

@Daddybegood

As it was Harry who approached NGN in the last couple of days about a settlement offer, I'm not sure how far NGN "capitulated". Their offer had been on the table all along, it may not have substantially changed (up or down) from what was already there. The public apology IMO was what Harry "won" on, even then it says less than it appears to.

A source says Harry approached NGN. A source could also say it was Prince Phil driving the Fiat Uno in the Parisian tunnel that day; doesn’t make it true.

I wasn’t making any particular suggestion about Camilla, Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson back when the phone hacking offences were committed in that particular post. I was referencing Camilla mingling with Clarkson and Morgan at
the famous lunch after which Clarkson wrote his famous vile piece about Meghan for which he had to apologise.

However, I know Clarkson is a long-time friend of Camilla’s son, Tom Parker Bowles, and that’s how Jeremy and Camilla were introduced.

However, Jeremy Clarkson is also a member of the so-called Chipping Norton Set, see Wikipedia which included;

Racehorse trainer Charlie Brooks and his wife Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), former editor editor of The Sun and News of the World, now CEO of News UK. Charlie was introduced to Rebekah by Jeremy Clarkson.

Btw I think notable other members were Elisabeth Murdoch and it was reported that David Cameron was also a friend of the group.

So there is the connection above.

So funny you should ask those questions mainecooncatonahottinroof

And 😀 that posters have been laughing about the Ross Kemp connection but he was a childhood friend of Guy Black (then Chairman of the Press Complaints Commission) whose partner was Mark Bolland.

Mark Bolland was the PR guru who was responsible for rehabilitating Camilla’s image around that time.

This Guardian article explains more:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/jan/17/pressandpublishing.themonarchy

Mark Bolland and Guy Black (friend of Kemp) were both allegedly friends of Rebekah Wade and the three used to holiday together.

“The fact that could cause most problems is that the two have holidayed with the News of the World editor, Rebekah Wade, and her partner, Ross Kemp. The actor and Mr Black were childhood friends.”

Yes you read that right; Kemp, then married to Wade, was a childhood friend of the then chairman of the Press Complaints Commission, Guy Black, who is the husband of Charles & Camilla’s former PR guru, Mark Bolland.

And funnily enough, at that time, Kemp was an ambassador for Camilla’s Royal Osteoporosis Society.

There are lots of photos of Camilla & Charles greeting Rebekah Wade and Ross Kemp at various events if you Google.

According to Wikipedia:
In 1999 … actor Ross Kemp lent his support in launching the charity's Bone Friendly Logo, raising awareness of products beneficial to bone health.

So you can all laugh about this but the connections are there. Make of them what you will.

Btw interesting that posters below refer to an alleged police cover up.

I doubt it’s directly connected, but its reminded me of an article I read way back about Rebekah Wade being loaned a police horse by the Met, which came to light because it was returned in poor condition.

Apparently, it’s quite usual for ex Police horses to be loaned out for the active part of their retirements though, so maybe nothing in it. I gather there was a lot of press chatter and joking about it.

When people ask how come Rebekah Wade was acquitted, because it was a surprise at the time, I guess it was either bc the judge was satisfied that she was innocent, there wasn’t enough direct evidence to convict her, or allegedly she had friends in very high places who allegedly protected her, or others allegedly willing to take the fall. Or an alleged combination of the above.

Who knows if we will ever know?

So you can all laugh about this but the connections are there. Make of them what you will.

It’s called the Establishment. There are very small circles in the corridor of government and media. Start to throw in the senior bar (who become judges) and the leaders of the City and they all know each other. Professionally and often personally as well.

It can be a genuine issue. The Independent Enquiry into historic sexual abuse of children (which was set up following the exposure of Jimmy Savile to look at issues arising from the. Police, the NHS, political parties, the BBC etc etc) went through 4 chairs in quick succession because they struggled to find someone who did not have social or professional links to the wide number of people whom were mentioned in the review, or relevant to past decision-making on these topics.

Baroness Butler-Sloss resigned after a week following calls to quit because her late brother, Sir Michael Havers, was attorney general in the 1980s. Her replacement, Lord Mayor of London Fiona Woolf, then quit amid concerns over her links to a former Home Secretary.The third Chair appointed was a judge from New Zealand, as they were trying to solve the problem of the Establishment circle being small!

But just because the wife of the Head of State (and whatever you think of her personally, that gives Camilla reach and status) is acquainted with, and attends the same events as very senior media figures does not mean they are in cahoots behind the scene. Correlation does not equal causation.

I guess it was either bc the judge was satisfied that she was innocent

It wasn’t the judge - it was a jury trial. So the jury decided that, after hearing the evidence against her, they were not sure she had committed the crimes she had been charged with (conspiracy to hack phones was the main one, but there were others).

It was a surprise (to me and to many) when she was acquitted because part of the trial was that despite being married to Ross Kemp she had been having an affair with Andy Coulson who also worked for the News of the World. Andy Coulson was convicted of phone hacking! But the jury acquitted Rebekah.

Juries do this by the way. You get all sorts of strange decisions from a jury in what looks like a slam dunk case. So it’s hard to see this as anything other than she must have made a positive impression on them, and she got very lucky.

When people ask how come Rebekah Wade was acquitted, because it was a surprise at the time, I guess it was either bc the judge was satisfied that she was innocent, there wasn’t enough direct evidence to convict her, or allegedly she had friends in very high places who allegedly protected her, or others allegedly willing to take the fall. Or an alleged combination of the above.
Who knows if we will ever know?

It was a jury trial, @Andtheweaselgoespop56. Details are in this succinct article of what she was charged with and acquitted of, from the BBC.

Did the judge direct the jury in any specific way, do you know? It seems like a lifetime ago now, but yet still so relevant given the ongoing Met scandals.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27997688#:~:text=Mrs%20Brooks%20was%20found%20not,pervert%20the%20course%20of%20justice

You do know it is impossible for one person to totally hold every corrupt journalist to account? If you were really expecting Prince Harry to do that, you were always going to be disappointed.

And yes the Jury found Rebekah innocent. Or was Prince Harry supposed to over turn the jury verdict as well?

Dear me.

Did the judge direct the jury in any specific way, do you know? It seems like a lifetime ago now, but yet still so relevant given the ongoing Met scandals.

I followed the case really closely at the time, but I can’t now remember the details of the judge summing up to the jury.

One thing I do remember, which would I think have played in Brook’s favour was that it came out very clearly that working in a senior role at the NOTW at the time was an absolute vipers’ nest. Brooks first learned that phone hacking was going on (she said) when she was interviewed by the police because in going through he records of the Private Investigator who was doing all the hacking for NOTW, he was also listening to her voicemails too. Because she was also a public figure, married to a public figure, and information is information….

Rebekah also said that she conscientiously destroyed all her blackberries (and she changed them all the time because she used them 24/7 and so they got damaged) and never kept paper documents because the risk of corporate espionage and snooping by rival papers was so great. Which broadly seems to have been true. So the allegations she’d been destroying evidence didn’t stick.

I also remember that everyone declined to call Piers Morgan as a witness - both prosecution and defence, presumably because no-one thought anything he said could be trusted. 🤣

Thanks, Serenster. Food for thought.

She can't really have thought the Sun was a 'clean ship' though, as she said under oath, could she? It might have been her dysfunctional version of normal, but that's not what 'clean ship' means.

But hey, what do I know. The jury went for it, and that's that.

I do know that, I think everyone on this thread, and most people in the world knew that.

It was Harry that carved himself out as being some dragon slaying knight of the truth, that only he could achieve. This isn't conjecture, it is in his own words.

As I said earlier, I was surprised she was acquitted and was frankly incredulous of her defence - that she was so completely incompetent at her role as editor, that she had no idea what was going on in the news room. It was proven to be utter rubbish immediately afterwards when this by her own account incompetent editor was appointed CEO of News International. But yes, the jury obviously had reasonable doubt…

(I’ve seen worse cases - the defendant who had literally googled “How do I commit [X] crime and get away with it” the day before the relevant events and was then acquitted of the crime. 🤣 There’s no accounting for juries, sometimes!)

@NoDragons That is a misrepresentation.

"I've been told that slaying dragons will get you burned. But in light of today's victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press - it's a worthwhile price to pay," Prince Harry's statement said.

Tell me where Prince Harry said he would take down every corrupt journalist as you allege?

Thanks for the lesson on how the upper echelons function Serenster .

I think you have just set out a fairly comprehensive argument for Republicanism right there.

It may be inevitable, but this notion of establishment with a capital E is still difficult to reconcile in the modern world; still less does it address these clear links between the Establishment and the media and vice versa.

Also, I think the connections listed below are a little more direct than circling in the same room together.

It's not only disingenuous, it's plain wrong!