The Leveson Inquiry

[Mr Pee]

It now seems to be generally accepted that the NOTW did NOT delete messages from Milly Dowler's mobile telephone.

I trust a full apology from the Guardian will be forthcoming, not least to the NOTW journalists who lost their jobs as a result of this innacurate piece of journalism.

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Police-NOTW-Did-Not-Delete-skynews-3097921275.html;_ylt=A03uoWZ84OVO0HQBAAEjsLFG;_ylu=X3oDMTFkZDJzZjdzBHBvcwM1BHNlYwNuZXdzSHViQXJ0aWNsZUxpc3QEc2xrA3BvbGljZW5vdHdkaQ--?x=0

[amateur51]

It now seems to be generally accepted that the NOTW did NOT delete messages from Milly Dowler's mobile telephone.

I trust a full apology from the Guardian will be forthcoming, not least to the NOTW journalists who lost their jobs as a result of this innacurate piece of journalism.

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Pol...5vdHdkaQ--?x=0

And the source you have offered is ..... Sky News

Where's Mandy Rice-Davies when you need her comment?

[Chris Newman]

It now seems to be generally accepted that the NOTW did NOT delete messages from Milly Dowler's mobile telephone.

I trust a full apology from the Guardian will be forthcoming, not least to the NOTW journalists who lost their jobs as a result of this innacurate piece of journalism.

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Pol...5vdHdkaQ--?x=0

Being economical with the evidence from the Levenson Inquiry methinks: so far they have heard that Mulcaire was employed by the NOTW to do the very act that friends of Roopy say the NOTW did not do. On Saturday the Guardian made this quite clear:

Subsequent investigation by Operation Weeting has confirmed the key details reported by the Guardian: that the News of the World commissioned Glenn Mulcaire to hack into Milly's phone; that he succeeded; that journalists listened to some deeply personal messages; and that Surrey police knew this at the time and took no action.

Although the investigation has found that the News of the World was not responsible for the particular deletion of voicemails which caused Milly's parents to have false hope that she was alive, the new evidence also suggests that it is likely the paper's staff were inadvertently responsible for deleting later messages.

One can think of far more serious crimes where commissioning an action does not mean you are in the clear.

[handsomefortune]

thankfully it's mr jay, and not mr bar still.

the inquiry is getting physically more and more grotesque, in terms of an ever bigger collection of smug, devious, middle aged men ...to think they're behind a constant flow of images and 'stories' about what other people are doing, and what other people look like....all supposedly in the public interest. yeh right!

thurlbeck looks like his mum dressed him .... some time in the 1940s, imo his oufit shrieks 'establishment' (yet murdoch insists they're all anti establishment and that's why they do what they do ....supposedly). thurlbeck apparently thinks it's in my interest that everyone knows about beckham's alleged affairs .... yet most/all stories, this far, are of absolutely zero interest to me at least.

coogan's still batting the idea about that decisions about the 'public interest' shouldn't be made by tabloid journalists. it's a fair point, i think. though as yet, i remain unconvinced that the inquiry will solve, or change much in the longterm.

[Serial_Apologist]

thankfully it's mr jay, and not mr bar still.

the inquiry is getting physically more and more grotesque, in terms of an ever bigger collection of smug, devious, middle aged men ...to think they're behind a constant flow of images and 'stories' about what other people are doing, and what other people look like....all supposedly in the public interest. yeh right!

thurlbeck looks like his mum dressed him .... some time in the 1940s, imo his oufit shrieks 'establishment' (yet murdoch insists they're all anti establishment and that's why they do what they do ....supposedly). thurlbeck apparently thinks it's in my interest that everyone knows about beckham's alleged affairs .... yet most/all stories, this far, are of absolutely zero interest to me at least.

coogan's still batting the idea about that decisions about the 'public interest' shouldn't be made by tabloid journalists. it's a fair point, i think. though as yet, i remain unconvinced that the inquiry will solve, or change much in the longterm.

"Anti-establishment" - that mystificatory catch-all term. I shall stop using it, from now on.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

indeed handsomefortune a string of characters from some nether region ... for me they evoke the characters in The Conformist

[Mr Pee]

Well, well.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16146527

Perhaps it is time for some Guardian journalists to consider their position. After all, their allegations led to the closure of the News of the World, throwing hundred of fellow hacks out of a job- now, it seems based on wildly innacurate reporting. And News International are the ones in the dock???

And dare I suggest that some of the more vocal posters here, who have presumed guilt long before we had heard any evidence to prove it, based on nothing more than their dislike of the Murdoch business empire, should perhaps eat a little humble pie at this point??

[John Skelton]

Well, well.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16146527

Perhaps it is time for some Guardian journalists to consider their position. After all, their allegations led to the closure of the News of the World, throwing hundred of fellow hacks out of a job- now, it seems based on wildly innacurate reporting. And News International are the ones in the dock???

And dare I suggest that some of the more vocal posters here, who have presumed guilt long before we had heard any evidence to prove it, based on nothing more than their dislike of the Murdoch business empire, should perhaps eat a little humble pie at this point??

Erm well: ""It remains unchallenged that the News of the World listened to Milly Dowler's voicemail and eavesdropped on deeply personal messages which were being left for her by her distraught friends and family." (Mark Lewis).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/dec/09/milly-dowler-voicemails-police-logs-inquiry?INTCMP=SRCH

You think that's an OK thing to do? Or is that a false allegation?

[ahinton]

Erm well: ""It remains unchallenged that the News of the World listened to Milly Dowler's voicemail and eavesdropped on deeply personal messages which were being left for her by her distraught friends and family." (Mark Lewis).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/dec/09/milly-dowler-voicemails-police-logs-inquiry?INTCMP=SRCH

You think that's an OK thing to do? Or is that a false allegation?

I don't suppose that Mr Pee thinks that this is an OK thing to do, but then I happen not to think that being selective in what one comments on for the sole purpose of supporting one's own agenda or beliefs is an OK thing to do either. There's a way to go yet and no guarantee that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth will ever emerge from this enquiry but we must all hope that it will uncover as much as possible nevertheless. In the interim, the suggestion that apologies ought to be issued by one set of journalists to another is at the very least absurdly premature at this stage.

[Mr Pee]

Erm well: ""It remains unchallenged that the News of the World listened to Milly Dowler's voicemail and eavesdropped on deeply personal messages which were being left for her by her distraught friends and family." (Mark Lewis).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/dec/09/milly-dowler-voicemails-police-logs-inquiry?INTCMP=SRCH

You think that's an OK thing to do? Or is that a false allegation?

Well, of course the Guardian will attempt to put their own spin on what remains a wrongful piece of reporting. Let's not forget that the NOTW was closed down as a direct result of the Guardian's allegations, which have now been shown to be wrong in many key areas.

And amongst other things that have emerged from the enquiry is the distinct possibility that it was not just the NOTW, and not just News International papers, that listened to voicemail messages. The "killer" fact that condemned the paper to closure was the allegation that messages had been deleted, the evidence for which now looks flimsy, to say the least.

So is it OK for a newpaper to be closed down, and many journallists thrown out of work, as a result of wrongful reporting? And before the full facts had been established?

[Nick Armstrong]

Here we go again, handbags a-whirl....

[ahinton]

Well, of course the Guardian will attempt to put their own spin on what remains a wrongful piece of reporting.

And it's the only newspaper to do such a thing, is it? (even assuming that it has done it); I mean, Newscorp ones would never do anything of the kind, would they?(!)...

Let's not forget that the NOTW was closed down as a direct result of the Guardian's allegations, which have now been shown to be wrong in many key areas.

Yes, let's do forget that - or at least put it in proportion; you surely are aware that there were plenty of accusations and allegations from - and reported in - other journalistic sources as well.

And amongst other things that have emerged from the enquiry is the distinct possibility that it was not just the NOTW, and not just News International papers, that listened to voicemail messages. The "killer" fact that condemned the paper to closure was the allegation that messages had been deleted, the evidence for which now looks flimsy, to say the least.

As I've said beore, it's far too early to determine - even if it will ever be possible to determine beyond all doubt whether or to what extent the evidence presented is "flimsy", but it's certainly premature to attempt to do so until all the available evidence that's going to be presented has been presented. I agree that not only Newscorp has gotten involved in these koinds of activity from time to time, but it's not the others being subjected to scrutiny under this enquiry; there would have to be other enquiries along similar lines for each such possible culprit.

So is it OK for a newpaper to be closed down, and many journallists thrown out of work, as a result of wrongful reporting? And before the full facts had been established?

No, it isn't, but then who actually closed NOTW down - by which I specifically mean under whose decision and what decision was it closed down?

The likelihood that other newspapers etc. might be guilty of similar activities is important but, as I've stated, not the subject of this enquiry.

[John Skelton]

Well, of course the Guardian will attempt to put their own spin on what remains a wrongful piece of reporting. Let's not forget that the NOTW was closed down as a direct result of the Guardian's allegations, which have now been shown to be wrong in many key areas.

And amongst other things that have emerged from the enquiry is the distinct possibility that it was not just the NOTW, and not just News International papers, that listened to voicemail messages. The "killer" fact that condemned the paper to closure was the allegation that messages had been deleted, the evidence for which now looks flimsy, to say the least.

So is it OK for a newpaper to be closed down, and many journallists thrown out of work, as a result of wrongful reporting? And before the full facts had been established?

So you are saying that NOTW didn't listen to Milly Dowler's voicemail and didn't eavesdrop on messages left for her? The Guardian is quoting the Dowlers' lawyer, so perhaps you are saying he is making that up and is complicit in The Guardian's "spin"? Perhaps you think they are complicit in The Guardian's "spin"? I haven't the least doubt the inquiry will establish that other papers did (do?) the sort of thing NOTW did so extensively. Surely that's part of its remit?

NOTW wasn't closed down because of "wrongful reporting." It was closed down as an attempt at preemptive action as story after story broke and as it became abundantly clear that right up to the top of NI people had attempted a cover up. The Guardian didn't close NOTW down, Rupert Murdoch did. Given that I'd guess he's a hard man to intimidate I'd also guess he had extremely good reasons for doing what he did.

People like you make me laugh. You'll happily approve of public sector workers losing their jobs and their pension rights, but when it suits you you start weeping crocodile tears over "many journalists thrown out of work." Pass the sick bag, to coin a phrase.

[Mr Pee]

The Guardian needs to offer a full apology. Just imagine if this was the other way around, and a News International paper had falsely accused the Guardian. You'd all be lining up to put the boot in.

And now it seems the Guardian journalist who broke the story is having a go at the paper over the half-hearted nature of its climbdown:-

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8951222/Phone-hacking-Guardians-Nick-Davies-accuses-bosses-of-pecking-at-climb-down-story.html

[Chris Newman]

From today's Daily Telegraph web site:

16.36 Some breaking news outside the inquiry room:
RELATED ARTICLES
Guardian blamed for vagueness of climb-down story 12 Dec 2011
No evidence Milly Dowler’s voicemails deleted by NOTW 12 Dec 2011
News Group Newspapers has agreed to pay Tessa Jowell, the former cabinet minister, £200,000 in damages over a claim of breach of privacy and harassment relating to phone hacking.
The payout was agreed after the former Culture Secretary was told by police that her mobile phone had been hacked "wholesale" by the News of The World.

Sorry. I am not up to copying the pretty pictures but here is the link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/8934976/Leveson-Inquiry-live.html

So the jury is still out (OK, there is no jury at this stage). The Daily Telegraph, not just the Guardian, seems to be continuing to report dubious activity by NI. That, I believe is, the object of the Leveson Enquiry.