After quite a search last year, Baroness Betty Buxom turned out to be the only individual desperate enough to take on the chairmanship of the tainted Press Complaints Commission, from erratic wind & waffle wallah, Sir Christopher Meyer. She has done little since to dispel the sense of toothless futility which prevailed under her predecessor.
In one of her first big public pronouncements, to the Society of Editors Annual Conference last November, she told them that in the light of new evidence recently presented to the Commons Culture Media & Sport Committee, the PCC had re-examined the facts relating to the News of the World phone-hacking scandal. They had concluded, she said, that none of this evidence altered their previous conclusion – that Clive Goodman (Royal editor, jailed for his admitted phone-hacking) was a one-off, a rogue reporter and that only he, of all the other hacks on the Screws, had used this illegal method to invade privacy and acquire stories.
Nick Davies of the Guardian (who unearthed fresh evidence last year) had presented irrefutable evidence that the Screws’ senior Shag’n’Brag reporter, Neville “Onan the Barbarian” Thurlbeck had been using Mulcaire’s phone hacking services.
On 2 September 2009 Mark Lewis, the solicitor acting for Gordon Taylor whose extraction of some £700,000 in damages from the paper had sparked the story, was questioned by the committee. He told them that whilst conducting Mr Taylor’s claim he had attended court in order to make an application for the disclosure of documents from the police. Outside court he had spoken to DS Mark Maberly.
Lewis told the committee, “DS Mark Maberly said to me: “You are not having everything but we will give you enough on Taylor to hang them.” Those were his words: “to hang them”. . . He also mentioned the number of people whose phones had been hacked. Whether that was an aside . . . but they said that there was evidence about, or they had found there were something like 6,000 people who were involved. It was not clear to me whether that was 6,000 phones which had been hacked or 6,000 people including the people who had left messages.”
This evidence and the blatantly mendacious delivery of Screws management when trying to explain away these inconvenient facts, left no one in doubt that phone-hacking had been systemic within the paper across a wide range of reporters, and that it was very unlikely that any members of the management would not have known of the practice.
In her statement to the editors, however, Baroness Buxom claimed new further contrary evidence had come to light.
“Those of you who are familiar with the case will recall the significance that was attached to the apparent evidence of a then Detective Sergeant from the Metropolitan Police called Mark Maberly. It was he who was alleged to have said that around 6,000 people had had their phone messages hacked or intercepted.
The allegation was made in oral evidence to the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, and has also been published in the press. It was repeated just last Monday in some coverage questioning our report.
Since the publication of our report last Monday, the PCC has heard from Detective Inspector (as he now is) Maberly through lawyers for the Metropolitan Police.
This letter says that Mr Maberly has in fact been wrongly quoted on the 6,000 figure. The reliable evidence, we were told in an e-mail confirming the contents of the letter, is that given by Assistant Commissioner John Yates to the Select Committee, who referred to only a “handful” of people being potential victims.
In light of this, I am doing two things.
First, I am of course putting this new evidence to my colleagues in the Press Complaints Commission, because they will want to update our report to take account of this development.
Second, I have just spoken to the Chairman of the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, John Whittingdale, to draw this to his attention. Any suggestion that a Parliamentary Inquiry has been misled is of course an extremely serious matter.”

When Guardian reporter Chris Tryhorn asked whether the letter from the police “had effectively withdrawn Maberly’s evidence”, she replied:
“Maberly has been wrongly quoted in saying that 6,000 people were involved. He didn’t say it. He is said to have said it.”

This claim by the baroness was widely reported and, not surprisingly, Mark Lewis was incensed. He’d nothing to gain by appearing before the Culture Media & Sport Committee, other than the satisfaction of doing a public service, and now he had been widely branded a liar. He has now issued a claim against the Baroness, the PCC and the MPS for damages inrespect of a clear libel. 
The PCC, in response to a critical reference in the Committee’s report last February, decided to backtrack from this clearly articulated position by issuing a statement in April in which they attempt to eat the Baroness’s words…..
“Baroness Buscombe has never suggested – and does not believe – that Mr Lewis misled the Select Committee and her statement, which made no reference to Mr Lewis, was not intended as a criticism of him or the evidence which he gave to the Select Committee. Baroness Buscombe regrets that her statement may have been misunderstood and that this has been of concern to Mr Lewis. Baroness Buscombe and the Commission therefore wish to make the position entirely clear.”
Oh dear. That’s very clear – she said it, but then she didn’t say it.
I think Mark Lewis may succeed in his suit.

Popularity: 6% [?]

A curious, alarming anomaly was revealed last Wednesday during a session of the Commons Culture, Media, Sport Committee. A very senior police officer told the committee that while investigating the News of the World phone-tapping incident, an unequivocal piece of evidence had not convinced his officers that it required further investigation.

       This evidence was the now infamous email sent from junior screws hack, Ross Hall (AKA Hindley) to contract private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, which said: ‘This is the transcript for Neville,’ with the transcript of a message left on the voicemail of Gordon Taylor, boss of the PFA, intercepted and recorded by Mulcaire.

       Mulcaire pleaded guilty to hacking into Taylor’s voicemail after he’d also admitted to hacking into the voicemails  of  members of the Clarence House staff. He was jailed for these offences (which the News of the World encouraged him to commit by giving him a special contract signed by former Screws news editor, Greg Miskiw), and he served his sentence.

The Metropolitan Police investigation, headed by Detective Chief Superintendent Philip Williams, decided that despite the email’s clear reference to senior Screws hack, Neville Thurlbeck, clearly connecting him to an illegally acquired phone message, there was no basis for questioning Thurlbeck. There was, they said, no evidence to put to him or any other News of the World staff whose names had cropped in connection with this entirely unroyal-related hacking.

If this seems strangely lacking in diligence on their part, it seems even more so after hearing evidence given to the committee, after the police had appeared, by Mark Lewis, the lawyer who successfully sued the News of the World on behalf of Gordon Taylor. We learned from him that after he had acquired a court order requesting documentary evidence of Taylor’s complaint from the Metropolitan Police, Detective Sergeant Mark Maberly told Lewis that he “wasn’t having everything, but we’ll give you enough to hang the News of the World over Gordon Taylor”.

This statement, as reported by Lewis is unequivocal, and it’s out of the question that he would dissemble in front of a Parliamentary Committee. Besides, the Screws offered a £1m to shut Taylor up before the case got to court, so the evidence clearly was damning (for they had denied any knowledge of the offence until Lewis produced the Met’s evidence).

Why on earth didn’t the Met choose to prosecute the paper themselves when they had such a clear case? Lewis’s evidence makes a nonsense of what Asst Com Yates had told the committee only half and hour before. He should be called in again to explain himself.

The police had been asked by one of the MPs about their relationship with the News of the World. Not surprisingly Yates offered some weasel stuff about needing to a have a relationship with such an “important newspaper”.

If the MPs had asked Yates if he knew who sponsored the Annual Police Bravery awards, I wonder if they would have been surprised to hear that it is in fact the Screws  stable-mate, the Sun, and the News International top brass all attend this lavish ceremony each year, including of course Rebekah (née Wade) Brooks now CEO of News International, and, no doubt, a good friend of the Met brass-hats. [see: http://www.peterburden.net/archives/280 ] And I’ve long wondered why the Met have so often gone along with some of the absurdly fanciful ‘criminal investigations’ spun out of nowhere by Screws star, Mazher Mahmood.

Popularity: 1% [?]