Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
1400-1419)
MR TOM
CRONE AND
MR COLIN
MYLER
21 JULY 2009
Q1400 Paul Farrelly: So the judge's
summary is wrong?
Mr Crone: I cannot remember hearing
anything in court from the prosecution to justify that.
Q1401 Paul Farrelly: One final question.
Clive Goodman, Mr Myler, he pleaded guilty in August 2006 and
he was convicted on 26 January 2007. Was he still employed by
the News of the World when you arrived?
Mr Myler: He has been suspended.
His contract allowed him to appeal against his summary dismissal
when he was released, and that is what happened.
Q1402 Paul Farrelly: He was summarily
dismissed when he was released?
Mr Myler: No, he was summarily
dismissed I think on conviction; but his contract allowed him
to appeal once he was released from prison and that appeal took
place.
Q1403 Paul Farrelly: Why was he not
dismissed when he pleaded guilty, Mr Crone?
Mr Myler: I was not there, Mr
Farrelly.
Mr Crone: Does it make any difference?
I am asking a rhetorical question. He was in the middle of a process;
he was independently represented so we were not privy really to
how he was going to give his mitigation or whatever else. At the
end of the process, it seemed to us—and I was not part of
that dismissal process, by the way—it seemed to News International
and News Group Newspapers to be the appropriate time to take that
step.
Mr Myler: I think that was an
HR legal situation.
Q1404 Paul Farrelly: It raises the
question of what actually constitutes gross misconduct for News
International; that a journalist who pleads guilty was not dismissed
at the time?
Mr Myler: I do not think you will
find that that is a News International contract. I think you will
find that is a contract with almost any employer and employee.
Mr Crone: The fact is he was dismissed
and he was dismissed for this. Your question suggests we
were not going to dismiss him for this but we did dismiss him
for this.
Mr Myler: He failed in his appeal
process.
Q1405 Philip Davies: Can I just explore
a bit further the idea about how many people at News International
were involved in what was going on because, coming back to the
point that Paul made, the idea that it was one rogue maverick
journalist appears now to be a somewhat discredited theory. Given
that the people who have been the victims of this—people
like Gordon Taylor, Elle Macpherson—have nothing to do with
the Royal Family, as Paul mentioned, surely that in itself would
indicate to people that this must be going beyond Clive Goodman
who was the Royal Editor; because why on earth would Clive Goodman
be interested in the taped conversations of Gordon Taylor and
Elle Macpherson?
Mr Myler: No evidence, Mr Davies,
has been produced internally or externally by the police, by any
lawyers, to suggest that what you have said is the truth, is the
case. Can I just make the point that Mr Farrelly touched upon.
In the course of talking to executives when I arrived to go through
obviously what had happened—as I said, I conducted this
inquiry with Daniel Cloke our Director of Human Resources—over
2,500 emails were accessed because we were exploring whether or
not there was any other evidence to suggest essentially what you
are hinting at. No evidence was found; that is up to 2,500 emails.
Q1406 Philip Davies: Although there
may not have been any evidence that you came across that fingered
a particular individual or individuals involved in this, would
you at least acknowledge that the circumstantial evidence would
suggest that more people than Clive Goodman at News International
were involved in this particular practice?
Mr Myler: Mr Crone said earlier,
how can we speculate on something like this? For an investigative
newspaper I do not know of any newspaper—and this is the
fourth national newspaper that I have had the privilege of editing—or
broadcasting organisation that has been so forensically investigated
over the past four years—none.
Q1407 Philip Davies: The theory I
advanced, would you accept that that would be a perfectly reasonable
theory?
Mr Myler: No, I am sorry, how
much more do the News of the World staff, who have been
accused of systematic illegality, have to continue—Where
is the evidence?
Q1408 Philip Davies: You would say
it is perfectly reasonable and perfectly logical that the Royal
Editor—the Royal Editor—was involved with somebody
in the tapping of phones of people—
Mr Myler: No, I do not.
Q1409 Philip Davies: — who
had nothing to do with—
Mr Myler: No, I do not; but I
think, Mr Davies, with respect you know full well that is not
condoned either by me personally or anybody else on the staff
of the News of the World. You know that.
Q1410 Philip Davies: I am not saying
you condone it; I am just saying you think it is perfectly believable
that the person at News International who was behind the tapping
of the phones was Clive Goodman, and people who were nothing to
do with Royal Family; you think that is perfectly believable?
Mr Myler: Mr Goodman has paid
the price for the illegal conduct that he engaged in. It seems
that Mr Mulcaire was the person who was perhaps engaged in more
tapping of phones than other people on the News of the World.
I cannot answer for Mr Mulcaire; I have not got an idea what was
in his mind. I have never met the man; I do not know the man.
He worked for the News of the World as far back as I think
the late 90s in fact.
Q1411 Philip Davies: We heard in
a previous session that an allegation was made, I believe in Private
Eye, that Mr Mulcaire had been paid, and I think the figure
and this is from memory, was £200,000, in order to remain
quiet about what had happened and who might have been involved.
Was that report true, that he has been paid by News International
to keep quiet about what happened?
Mr Myler: I am not aware of any
payment that has been made.
Mr Crone: I had nothing to do
with that area, because if there is any sort of payment or dealings
with Mulcaire it is not going to be in my area.
Q1412 Philip Davies: Who at News
International would have been? If that did take place who at News
International would have been involved?
Mr Crone: It did not take place,
I do know that.
Q1413 Philip Davies: It did not take
place?
Mr Crone: No. I am not saying
no payment, but that is an inaccurate report.
Q1414 Philip Davies: Has a payment
been made.
Mr Crone: I am about to tell you.
Mr Mulcaire raised legal issues over his status, I think probably
after he came out of prison. The employment laws as they stand
as I understand it, and I am certainly not an expert in this area,
mean that if someone works for you for X hours a week it does
not matter whether he is staff, he is freelance, he is on a contract,
whatever, he has certain employment rights. Given those employment
rights there is a process that has to be followed when that relationship
comes to an end. Because of failures, and we can possibly check
it out—I do not have the information in detail—I believe
that as a result of failures in the process there was a sum of
money paid to him. I do not know exactly what it is but it bears
no relation to the figure you have given us.
Q1415 Philip Davies: Just to clarify
this point. I understand you do not know the figure, but you were
saying that payment may have been made because of the contractual
obligations that News International had to him as an employee
of one form or another. The question I was asking was: has he
been paid to keep quiet, which is a different issue from any employment?
Mr Crone: Absolutely not.
Q1416 Philip Davies: Just while we
are on the theme, has any payment been subsequently made to Clive
Goodman?
Mr Crone: I am certainly not aware
of it.
Mr Myler: Again, likewise, I am
not aware of any payment.
Q1417 Philip Davies: If a payment
had been made, would you be aware of it?
Mr Crone: Not necessarily. Mr
Kuttner would.
Q1418 Philip Davies: So this is a
question for Mr Kuttner?
Mr Crone: I would say so.
Q1419 Philip Davies: Okay, thank
you for that. If I might just ask briefly, Mr Myler, and this
is a general question because I appreciate you were not there
at the time, but I am just asking a general question. The fact
that Mr Mulcaire was paid a retainer of £100,000—and
you indicated earlier the stuff he was doing was legitimate which
was included within it, in terms of looking at electoral rolls
and things—as an editor of a newspaper, and this is what
I am asking you generally, if somebody was on a retainer of £100,000
plus bonuses, as we have seen in the contracts, simply to do things
like look at electoral rolls, would you as an editor, first of
all, know about that; that that person was being paid that amount
of money?
Mr Myler: I would expect to. I
think so perhaps, yes.
| 
