Andy Coulson - Cameron's Alastair Campbell?

[Hatter The Mad]

It has? Because the NYT have alleged otherwise and there seems to be growing evidence that the police didn't investigate the matter properly.

http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/09/metgate-these-invoices-mentioning-john.html

http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/06/mark-lewis-libel-claim.html

The Daily Express say that the death of Diana was not properly investigated either, and that new "witnesses" have some new anecdotes, but no tangible evidence. Should we revisit that, too?

Because the two are identical - a reporter has come out saying that Andy did know about the phone hacks. I also wonder if his story was one that was sold. Unfortunately, he cant prove it, and it is merely anecdote.

I am more than happy to change my position IF new evidence came to light, frankly I do not trust tabloid editors full stop. However, I am also a reasonable person.

 

[Tefal]

To be fair, the allegation is that he committed a crime for which one of his subordinates at the NOTW was sent to prison for. If it's true I imagine he too will face criminal charges and I think people that close to the PM have to be squeaky clean. This isn't just a job, it's public life.

Whatever you might think about Alistair Campbell I don't recall any allegations that committed a serious crime as an aide to Blair.

Ahhh Innocent until speculated upon.

 

[Rich_L]

Tbh Coulsons position is a bit of a joke anyway, after the amount of lambasting that Labour got from the Tories about Alistair Campbell's role in government during their time in power, and that apparently the 'era of spin' was over, the fact that Cameron appointed an IdentiKit Campbell-a-like gutter press ex-editor who presided over a shamefully immoral episode to do an identical role is baffling if not laughably hypocritical.

 

[stockhausen]

The Daily Express say that the death of Diana was not properly investigated either, and that new "witnesses" have some new anecdotes, but no tangible evidence. Should we revisit that, too?

Because the two are identical - a reporter has come out saying that Andy did know about the phone hacks. I also wonder if his story was one that was sold. Unfortunately, he cant prove it, and it is merely anecdote.

I am more than happy to change my position IF new evidence came to light, frankly I do not trust tabloid editors full stop. However, I am also a reasonable person.

New evidence is only likely to come to light if the police are forced to reveal all the information that they have uncovered.

It appears that although the police claim only to know of about ten people whose 'phone messages were intercepted, the CPS are aware of thousands of names that were "of interest" to the News of the Screws - by "of interest" I mean that names and 'phone numbers were mentioned in documents. In addition to this, mobile 'phone companies are alleged to have passed to the police the details of over 100 people whose phone messages were hacked. For some reason, the police chose not to pursue these further lines of enquiry - it ha been suggested that this may be because some of the targets were senior police officers.

Whatever the truth of the allegations, you do have to wonder why Coulson hasn't sued the New York Times and Sean Hoare for libel

I suspect that more will come out in relation to this and that Cameron will eventually have to give Coulson the heave-ho, much to the annoyance of Murdoch & Co. who will be forced to put someone else in charge of Cameron

 

[Hatter The Mad]

lol stockhausen

 

[KNiVES]

lol stockhausen

He's right to an extent that Murdoch has an irritatingly high level of power in politics, on both sides of the pond to boot.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

He's right to an extent that Murdoch has an irritatingly high level of power in politics, on both sides of the pond to boot.

And the same with many other people in this world, but is entirely besides the point.

 

[stockhausen]

And the same with many other people in this world, but is entirely besides the point.

I take it then that you aren't bothered about the extent of the influence of Murdoch in the politics of the UK

For my part, I am not at all happy with the extent of the influence of Murdoch in the politics of the UK. Coulson (an alleged liar) is a Murdoch lackey and that is precisely the point.


I would agree that the behaviour and influence of "many other people in this world" is entirely besides the point.

 

[scorza]

Ahhh Innocent until speculated upon.

Bit more than speculation, a serious accusation has been made against him by someone incriminating themselves in the process. Innocent until proven guilty is a feature of criminal law only, not of whether someone is fit to hold a public position.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

I take it then that you aren't bothered about the extent of the influence of Murdoch in the politics of the UK

For my part, I am not at all happy with the extent of the influence of Murdoch in the politics of the UK. Coulson (an alleged liar) is a Murdoch lackey and that is precisely the point.


I would agree that the behaviour and influence of "many other people in this world" is entirely besides the point.

Your thread was about the accusation against Coulson. You then made an allusion to the "Murdoch press" not covering the story, which I showed very clearly to be complete crap.

That is why it is besides the point of your OP.

lolstockhausen

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Bit more than speculation, a serious accusation has been made against him by someone incriminating themselves in the process. Innocent until proven guilty is a feature of criminal law only, not of whether someone is fit to hold a public position.

It is an ex reporter who went to a competing newspaper with his story. He has no evidence, just an anecdote (and then with no compelling details).

If he knew what he claims to at the time of the original investigations, then he was perverting the course of justice.

 

[stockhausen]

John Yates is talking now. He says the Met has always said that, if new evidence emerges, it will consider it. He says the New York Times information counts as "new" information, and that Scotland Yard will now be looking at it.

Asked about Sean Hoare, the former News of the World journalist who spoke to the New York Times and who gave an interview at the end of last week accusing Andy Coulson of lying, Yates says he was not interviewed as part of the Met's original inquiry.

No doubt the Metropolitan police will now reopen the investigation and will interview Sean Hoare as well as other News of the Screws journalists under caution whilst Andy Colon will issue writs against the New York Times, the BBC & Sean Hoare - yeah, right, sure

 

[Hatter The Mad]

The Met have asked the NYT to provide their evidence. Thus endeth the story.

 

[stockhausen]

Downing Street communications chief Andy Coulson has told the Metropolitan Police he is happy to meet them voluntarily about phone-hacking claims.

Former News of the World reporter Sean Hoare has alleged former editor Mr Coulson asked him to hack into phones, a claim Mr Coulson denies. (BBC on0line)

I still wonder why Andy Colon isn't suing the NYT, the BBC & Sean Hoare

Perhaps since despite being the alleged editor, he seems not to have known what was going on at the News of the Screws he hasn't heard of the libel laws either

 

[Hatter The Mad]

The New York Times has refused a demand by the Metropolitan Police to provide evidence after alleging that the News of the World

http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/8935/

 

[RDM]

I still wonder why Andy Colon isn't suing the NYT, the BBC & Sean Hoare

Possibly because, being the media man he is, that he is well aware that a libel case is possibly one of the worst ways of making a story such as this go away. Not to mention proving you are innocent can be awfully difficult so there is no guarantee of a win.

 

[stockhausen]

Ah, that'll be on PoliticsHome.com, owned by Stephan Shakespeare who coincidentally also happens to own the website ConservativeHome

Strange that there is no mention of this anywhere else, not even on the New York Times website

I still wonder why Andy Colon isn't suing the NYT, the BBC & Sean Hoare

 

[Tefal]

http://www.politicshome.com/uk/story/8935/

Ah, that'll be on PoliticsHome.com, owned by Stephan Shakespeare who coincidentally also happens to own the website ConservativeHome

Strange that there is no mention of this anywhere else, not even on the New York Times website

I still wonder why Andy Colon isn't suing the NYT, the BBC & Sean Hoare

"The newspaper produced no new evidence for us to consider reopening the case - a position endorsed separately by the Director of Public Prosecutions and leading counsel. We have always said that this position could change if new evidence was produced.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=45950&c=1

I still wonder why Andy Colon isn't suing the NYT, the BBC & Sean Hoare

Possibly because, being the media man he is, that he is well aware that a libel case is possibly one of the worst ways of making a story such as this go away. Not to mention proving you are innocent can be awfully difficult so there is no guarantee of a win.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

lolstockhausen

 

[stockhausen]

Further on in your linked article:

We [Yates of the Yard] have sought additional information from [the New York Times] and will consider this material, along with Sean Hoare's recent BBC radio interview, and will consult the Crown Prosecution Service on how best to progress it. (the Press Gazette)

As it happens, I believe that the New York Times have refused to hand over full details of their investigation to the Met in order to protect their sources - a fairly common stance by the press - perhaps they have spoken to existing Murdoch employees who don't want to get the sack


As to Andy Colon's reluctance to visit Sue, Grabbit & Run, I agree with your and RDM's analysis that it might well all go horribly wrong for him and he, Cameron, Murdoch (Cameron's boss) and the News of the Screws are hoping that media self-preservation will allow all these most unfortunate claims to be swept quietly back under the carpet