Tuesday, 1 May 2012

Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee Report. My Statement

THE CULTURE, Media and Sport select committee has concluded that News of the World executives deliberately avoided disclosing information to the committee.
I provided a lengthy statement to the committee last year and gave the committee member Tom Watson MP part of my dossier of evidence to support this was the case.
I have repeatedly claimed that as early as 2009 and in the years that followed, I provided News of the World executives with evidence which showed I was not involved in commissioning Gordon Taylor’s phone to be hacked, or of personally hacking it myself.
My evidence showed that two other executives had been responsible for the events leading up to and beyond the “For Neville” email.
The News of the World executives accepted this was the case, which is why I kept my job.
But they failed to fully alert News International, in particular James Murdoch, to the fact there was hard evidence incriminating other people as it would have exploded the 'one rogue reporter' defence.
This has had enormous personal consequences for me. I was chief suspect number one. I was arrested. I was unfairly dismissed because News International were unaware of my dossier which proved my innocence. I lost my redundancy payment. All my legal funding was withdrawn.
I do not believe they took part in a willful cover-up. Under huge pressure to do something I think they panicked and didn't do enough
I think they chose a strategy of containment rather than action and exposure which left me as a chief suspect for two years, acting as the magnet for the iron filings of suspicion. It was seen as a better corporate strategy to have one suspect than two convicts.
I don't think this makes Tom Crone a bad lawyer or Colin Myler a bad editor. They just made a bad decision that day. For me, for the paper and for the company.
Nor do I believe it is fair to judge Rupert Murdoch as being unfit to lead a major international company. If senior executives chose to erect an information log-jam, I’m not sure how MPs thought he could have dealt with the problem. I think they have allowed politics to influence their decision here.
It is a major personal breakthrough to see that both Rupert Murdoch at the Leveson Inquiry  and now the select committee of investigating MPs have both concluded that my absolutely vital dossier was not passed on to News International executives.


  1. Anonymous1 May 2012 14:05

    Murdoch is unfit, because his business model corrupts Police and Politicians, and undermines democracy..

  2. Sixupman1 May 2012 14:22

    The Committee a bunch of 'whited sepulchres'!

  3. Anonymous1 May 2012 14:25

    If Murdoch ‘showed willful blindness’ to what was happening at NI then surely Gordon Brown showed willful blindness to what was happening in our banks?

  4. Anonymous1 May 2012 14:33

    When is anyone going to look at the other Media organisations, this NewsCorp witch-hunt stinks..............

  5. Ethan1 May 2012 14:33

    I am so uninterested in the never ending coverage of this story. Sheete happens, deal with it.
    If famous people want to be hypocrites it's their lookout. If they are so stupid as to be indiscrete and NOT change their pin code for voicemail it's their lookout.

  6. Anonymous1 May 2012 14:36

    watson's serial inability to prevent the political red mist from clouding his judgement; in this case by branding one of the world's most successful businessmen, as being not fit to lead a major international company, has effectively spiked this report. It's clear that pretence at objectivity was ditched in order to give watson another day in the sun.

    Has he got a book coming out soon?

    1. Anonymous2 May 2012 17:01

      Im sure you know, it came out last wednesday!

    2. Reply
  7. Anonymous1 May 2012 14:45

    @Anonymous, you really need to study the history of law enforcement and the rise of parliamentary democracy (esp. 17th, 18th and 19th) before blaming the Murdoch companies for what history tells us is a perennial problem. That a report on whether or not Parliament had been misled managed to stray into the statutory duty of OFCOM just shows the bias of some members of the committee.

  8. Anonymous1 May 2012 16:09

    I guess this is from,rather than for,Neville.

  9. Anonymous1 May 2012 17:45

    You have some nerve Nevs to spin this like you're a completely vindicated / innocent bystander, the public is not fooled.
    and while you're at it, why not add a few more comments in your favour.

    1. Neville Thurlbeck1 May 2012 22:28

      You're way off the mark. But I publish you nevertheless. Thanks for reading.

    2. Miranda2 May 2012 11:58

      Anonymous: Neville will confirm that I've been highly critical of his judgement/moral reasoning on a number of scores in this blog. But I think you are being both unfair and lazy in your comment here.

      If you take the trouble to follow the links he supplies, I think you will find plenty of material to suggest that "innocent until proven guilty" is a lot more appropriate in his case than in many others as far as the hacking scandal goes.

    3. Reply
  10. Miranda1 May 2012 17:47

    You let James Murdoch (and Rebekah Brooks) off the hook far too lightly, Neville. If they weren't told what was going on, this was almost certainly because they discouraged staff from "lumbering" them.

    The "don't tell me there's a problem - SORT it!" - style of management is all too familiar and almost always a recipe for eventual disaster.

    Do some real soul-searching on why you shrank from approaching Brooks directly with your dossier when you realised no-one else was going to, and maybe you'll see the light...

  11. Anonymous1 May 2012 17:53

    When powerful men act corruptly, and then engage in a cover-up, then according to that pillar of the community Tom Watson they are unfit for office. The exception to that rule, of course, is if they are MPs, fiddling their expenses. In that case they're allowed to repay the sums where they can be shown to have overstepped the mark, get away with it when they've acted within the rules, even when that involves blatant manipulation, and either stand again for election or be elevated to the Lords.

  12. Anonymous2 May 2012 01:56

    Louise Mensch has been hogging the media limelight all day.
    She appears to be auditioning for a News Corp. job when her pointless political career comes to an end. Her Corby seat is marginal and she has little interest in constituency affairs.
    Mensch is addicted to celebrity culture. Mensch turned down her nomination for the Rear of the Year award only because she felt Corby voters wouldn't approve.
    Only a few months ago, she did a photoshoot for GQ.

    News Corp. has been meeting privately with Conservative members of the Parliament Committee investigating the Company.‏‏

    Rupert Murdoch’s Fishy M.P. Meetings
    The mogul says that News Corp. has been meeting privately with members of the Parliament Committee investigating his empire.

    The Daily Beast. Peter Jukes Apr 28, 2012

  13. Penfold2 May 2012 12:32

    As we all recognise, actions was undertaken at N.I. by employees that were illegal.
    Such illigality needs to be punished.
    BUT, and here's the kicker, how far up the food chain do you go.
    Do you deal with the ne'erdowells, or do you say that their managers are complicit because of failings in leadership and control.
    In the latter instance the whole Board of Directors are the target.
    With N.I. we have the side bar of Gordon Brown's alleged comment to rupert that he would decalre war, following the political support switch by the Sun.
    Has McMental carried out this threat and set the dogs of war loose on the Murdoch's and N.I.? the balance is probably yes.
    Tom Watson, "TheTwat", did not have an enviable time as a Junior Minister, and was retired to the backbenches, as frankly he was useless.
    "The Twat" does not have the ability to get the ball rolling in PhoneHack, he has been very carefully groomed and briefed, which supports the thought that this has been a concerted and deliberate attack from the left aided and abetted by the Guardian and its 'ista's.
    Given the length of time that the underlining story of hacking has been around, much of that time under NuLab governance, perhaps its time for a rather searching enquiry as to the sloth and inertia during those glory days when everybody was in love with Blair, and the marriage of convenience hadn't been soured by the benign McMental.
    We might also look at "TheTwat"'s expenses, which leave a lot to be desired and certainly do allow him to adopt the sainted cap and tilt at corporates.

    Keep up yopur posting Neville.

    1. @ohthisbloodypc2 May 2012 14:01

      Are you saying It Was Brown Wot Dun It?

    2. Anonymous2 May 2012 17:06

      I second that ! and well done Neville.

    3. Miranda2 May 2012 19:12

      Brown wot done it? Good journalism done it - Nick Davis recognising that something stank to high heaven and following the the scent like any PROPER newshound should.

    4. Reply
  14. Anonymous2 May 2012 18:07

    I dipped into online video coverage of the CMS committee and was blown away by the gross ineptitude displayed by MPs during their questioning of Crone, Myler et al. A huge waste of public money. Where was the incisive and structured questioning from razor-sharp minds? How did Crone and Myler get away with being unable to recall virtually anything? It was like being mauled by the Teletubbies. Which brings me on to T'Watson - it does appear that he is relishing his moment in the spotlight, but is making a complete arse of himself in the process. Please don't buy his book.

  15. @ohthisbloodypc3 May 2012 00:50

    There was phone hacking at The Daily Mirror too.

    And a rather dubious share price ramping scam played on the readers. (yes, the salt of the earth hard working class family types that everyone pays lip service to)

    And there were faked stories about our troops being involved in torture. Stories that put many soldiers lives in danger.

    Was anyone at The Daily Mirror held to account? Was Sly Bailey condemned for being unfit to run a global corporation?

    Hang on though, they're not in Tom Watson's book though.

  16. Miranda3 May 2012 19:55

    Anomymous 10.07am: Crone and Myler didn't "get away with" anything - the committee wasn't fooled by their "amnesia" and unanimously found them guilty of misleading parliament.

    ohthisbloddypc 4.50pm: The Mirror's share price scam pair were jailed; the editor lost his job as a result of the faked pictures scandal. So, yes, people at the Mirror WERE "held to account". As for Sly Bailey ... I can think of a hundred reasons why she should be given her marching orders, but presiding over the sort of industrial-scale criminality practised at NI titles isn't one of them.

  17. Anonymous3 May 2012 22:30

    Deflect, spin. Classic Fox move in the U.S.

Add comment
Load more...