Culture, Media and Sport CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by James Murdoch, Deputy Chief Operating Officer and Chairman and CEO, International, News Corporation
Many thanks for your letter of 29 July, further to my oral evidence to your Committee on 19 July. I am grateful to have the opportunity to be of further assistance to you. I am committed to ensuring that News Corporation and its subsidiary, News International, will cooperate fully with you. In my responses below I have sought to provide further information in a number of areas, where this is available. It is worth highlighting at this point that a number of your specific questions concern matters which are not within my own personal knowledge. Where that is the case I have made it clear that my answers are based on information obtained from my colleagues. I do that by prefacing my answers with a statement such as “I am informed”. Specifically, this applies in relation to the answers to questions 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19.
I would like to remind the Committee that I rejoined News Corporation in December 2007 and that News International was one of the companies in Europe and Asia for which I was responsible and that many of the underlying facts to the answers below pre-date my joining.
1. You promised to explain why News International did not disclose internal e-mails that would have aided the appeal of Mr Tommy Sheridan? [Q236]
I am informed that this matter is being looked into by Scottish police. We are co-operating with the Scottish and Metropolitan Police on this matter.
2. Please supply the News Corporation code of conduct document and indicate whether you require your executives to make annual statements that they have abided by your codes of conduct and ethics. [Q20]
I enclose the News Corporation Standards of Business Conduct. This is a comprehensive Code of Conduct which I understand was introduced in February 1996. It covers matters such as integrity and transparency of conduct, corporate recordkeeping and accounting, compliance with applicable laws and the prevention of corruption and bribery. It is reviewed periodically and was updated in 2004, 2006 and 2011. In addition to these standards the company has adopted an additional code of ethics for chief executives and senior financial officers. A copy of that document is enclosed. News Corporation currently does not require annual employee certifications with respect to receipt or review of its Standards of Business Conduct. All new employees are given the Standards and each employee has received an email of the recently updated version. Rather than undertaking the massive task of tracking certifications from each individual employee, the Company has been considering obtaining a certification from the head human resources person at each business unit that he or she distributed the Standards to the employees in their business unit, an approach we believe strikes an appropriate middle-ground.
3. Were the settlements to Gordon Taylor and Max Clifford paid by News International, News Corporation or News Group Newspapers? [Q256]
I am informed that payments to Mr Taylor and Mr Clifford were made by News International Services Company Limited (“NISCO”), a subsidiary of News International Limited (“News International”). These payments were made on behalf of, and charged back to, News Group Newspapers Limited (“NGN”). NGN is the entity which published the News of the World.
4. Please supply details of the contract with Mr Max Clifford, which was cancelled by Mr Andy Coulson. [Q285 & Q286]
Searches have been made and my colleagues have not yet been able to find a copy of any contract with Mr Max Clifford or his company, although we will continue our searches. I am unable to confirm that there was a written contract with Mr Clifford. I am informed that the arrangement between Mr Clifford and News International was terminated by Andy Coulson. I am informed that Mr Clifford’s company was, thereafter, paid from time to time for exclusive news stories.
5. Please supply details of payments made to Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire subsequent to their guilty plea, and tell us who signed them off. [Q294 & Q295 & Q321]
I am informed that Mr Goodman was paid £90,502.08 in April 2007 and £153,000 (£13,000 of which was to pay for his legal fees) between October and December 2007. The first payment was approved by Mr Daniel Cloke, Director of Human Resources for News International. The second was approved by Mr Cloke and Mr Jon Chapman, Director of Legal Affairs for News International. These payments were in the context of an unfair dismissal claim brought by Mr Goodman. Legal fees incurred by Mr Mulcaire were paid after his guilty plea — further detail of this is set out in the answer to question 6 below.
6. Please confirm what legal fees have been paid In respect of Glenn Mulcaire and the current situation regarding such payments. If his legal costs are still being paid, please provide details of the contract or other obligations assumed that oblige his legal costs to be paid. [Q320]
I am informed that approximately £246,000 was paid to Mr Mulcaire’s lawyers. Mr Mulcaire’s legal fees are no longer being paid by News International. On 20 July 2011 News International announced that it would no longer pay Mr Mulcaire’s legal fees and subsequently confirmed that in writing to Mr Mulcaire’s lawyers on 28 July 2011.
7. Please Indicate when, precisely, you first came to know about the file of emails that was discovered, allegedly in the offices of Harbottle and Lewis. [Q326]
I first heard about the existence of the Harbottle & Lewis emails on or about 20 April 2011.
8. Please provide the instructions given to Harbottle and Lewis. [Q340]
I enclose copies of the documents which I am informed constitute the correspondence (both hard copy and email) between the company and Harbottle & Lewis in relation to the review conducted by Harbottle & Lewis in May 2007 which led to their letter dated 29 May 2007, Redactions have been made after discussion with the Metropolitan Police Service.
I do not know what other oral instructions were given, if any.
9. Could you tell the Committee the extent of the information that was given to Harbottle and Lewis out of the totality of information that was available? [Q340]
In addition to the documents referred to in answer to question 8 above, I am told that Harbottle & Lewis appear to have been given online access to emails from six email accounts, namely the email accounts of individuals whose names arose in the context of employment proceedings brought by Mr Goodman following his dismissal. I do not know what else, if anything, was given to them.
10. Please indicate whether you would like to reconsider the Harbottle and Lewis letter provided to the Committee during its 2009 inquiry, and, if so, why. [Q347]
I was asked during my appearance before the Select Committee whether I would like to withdraw the Harbottle & Lewis letter from the record “as an accurate portrayal of what really went on at the News of the World” [Q345]. In my evidence I explained that it was a relevant document in terms of the reliance placed on it by News International at the time. I did not suggest, however, that it should still be relied upon. As we now know, the facts show that the wrongdoing at the News of the World did spread beyond Mr Goodman. The letter cannot, therefore, be relied upon any more.
Based on Qq 242, 243, 244 and 247
11. Before authorising the Gordon Taylor settlement, what did you know of the interception and other facts surrounding it including: by whom it was carried out; and on whose instruction or behalf? How, when and by whom were you told; and what evidence did you see or ask for regarding the interception?
I was briefed by Mr Crone and Mr Myler on the status of the case on 10 June 2008 at a meeting in my offices in Wapping. My recollection is that the meeting was relatively short (certainly less than 30 minutes). I explained my understanding of the case after that briefing in my answer to Q242. Prior to the meeting of 10 June 2008, I do not recall being given any briefing nor do I recall either Mr Crone or Mr Myler referring to, or showing me, any documents during the meeting. I recall being told by them when we met that the civil litigation related to the interception of Mr Taylor’s voicemails to which Mulcaire had pleaded guilty the previous year and that there was evidence that Mulcaire had carried out this interception on behalf of the News of the World. It was for this reason that Mr Crone and Mr Myler recommended settlement. I was told that external counsel agreed with this. I was advised that there was no benefit in continuing to litigate the case and that we would lose. I did not ask for any evidence — I was content to rely upon Mr Myler and Mr Crone. Let me reiterate that I have no recollection of any mention of “Thurlbeck” or a “for Neville” email. Neither Mr Myler nor Mr Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr Goodman or Mr Mulcaire. There was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary.
As far as I can recall, I authorised Messrs Crone and Myler at the meeting of 10 June to go ahead and negotiate a settlement. There were no further meetings and I do not recall any further discussion on the subject. However, it is possible, although I do not recall it, that someone may have given me a brief update subsequently as to the amount of the final settlement.
I would like to clarify what I said to the Committee about how the amount of the Taylor settlement was reached. In my answers to Q264 and Q392 I explained that I had understood that the amount was based on a judgement of the likely damages that could be awarded, and the costs and expenses associated with litigation. However, I did not know at the time or when I gave my evidence that any part of the amount of the Taylor settlement specifically related to the confidentiality aspect of the settlement. Since I gave this response, I have been informed that confidentiality was a factor in determining the amount of the settlement payment; however, I was not party to those discussions nor was it my motivation in agreeing to settle the case which, as described above, was to avoid continuing to litigate a case which I understood we were bound to lose.
12. What did you know of the interception and other ‘facts’ surrounding it, including by whom it was carried out and on whose What are the financial thresholds for payments that would have required the approval of the Editor or of any of the other editorial postholders?
There is an incomplete sentence at the beginning of this question. I believe that my answer to question 11 deals with what appears to be the gist of that question. The second sentence of this question is repeated as question 13. I will deal with that question in my answer 13 below.
13. What are the financial thresholds for payments that would have required the approval of the Editor or of any of the other editorial postholders?
I have been informed that the Editor of the News of the World had authority to approve payments of £50,000. The following maximum approval limits were in place for other editorial postholders at the News of the World:
|
Desk heads |
£2,000 |
|
Scottish and Irish Editors |
£5,000 |
|
Senior Associate Editor |
£5,000 |
|
Deputy Editor |
£10,000 |
|
Deputy Managing Editor |
£20,000 |
|
Managing Editor |
£50,000 |
14. What is the maximum amount that could have been paid out by a single journalist without requiring approval a) in one transaction; b) in one year; b) to one person?
I am informed that some senior journalists on the News of the World (desk heads) were able to approve payments up to £2000. I am not aware of any aggregate limits whether over one year or to one individual person. For all other journalists, and for payments above that level, the approval of the Managing Editor was required (cash payments also required the approval of the Editor or Deputy Editor).
15. Please describe the accounting process for petty cash transactions, including an indication of how long these records are kept for.
I am informed that until 2007 there was a cash desk which held cash for use across all of the titles published by NGN. Any member of staff requiring petty cash was required to submit a document countersigned by the relevant Editor or Managing Editor. That document was required to identify the purpose of the payment. The document would then be presented to the cash desk and the cash handed over. After 2007 this system changed. Now a sum of cash is retained by each of the Managing Editors. Any member of staff requiring petty cash is required to submit a document to the Managing Editor identifying the purpose of the payment. If the Managing Editor is satisfied the cash is handed over to the applicant. The petty cash records are kept for at least 7 years.
16. Please give an indication of whether any of the records have been examined to look for payments to people who are neither employed by News International nor by approved suppliers and, if they have, details of who these people are.
I am informed that the company has examined likely relevant cash payments made in relation to the News of the World and has handed all relevant documentation to the Metropolitan Police Service. However, News International has not yet undertaken an examination as broad as that suggested by this question.
Based on Q249
17. How many people have been disciplined or dismissed for violation of News International’s Corporate Code of Conduct each year since 2000?
I am informed that our human resources department has records of those dismissed for misconduct although I have been asked to point out that it is not clear that all of this misconduct was such that it would constitute a breach of the News Corporation Standards of Business Conduct. These may also have included cases where there were appeals against dismissal which were compromised. However, I do not currently have any figures for these cases. The numbers dismissed over the period in question are as follows:
|
2000 |
6 |
|
2001 |
5 |
|
2002 |
3 |
|
2003 |
6 |
|
2004 |
5 |
|
2005 |
6 |
|
2006 |
5 |
|
2007 |
7 |
|
2008 |
2 |
|
2009 |
5 |
|
2010 |
1 |
|
2011 |
3 |
|
Total |
54 |
18. What mechanisms and processes does News Corporation have in place to ensure that It will find out about any criminal or fraudulent activity that has been committed within the company or any of its subsidiaries?
News Corporation has an internal audit function which conducts audits of our business units and seeks to identify any improper conduct. News Corporation encourages employees to report violations and has a strict policy that no employee making a complaint will be the subject of any criticism. News Corporation maintains an Alertline, which allows employees to make anonymous reports. News Corporation also has a complaint handling committee which includes representatives from the audit, legal and compliance functions. This committee reviews and responds to all complaints made about conduct in the company. Finally, as the Committee is aware, training programmes are regularly run to seek to ensure that the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice is understood and adhered to.
Based on Qq 539 and 540 (originally directed at Rebekah Books)
19. Please tell us which Editor, Night Editor, News Editor and lawyer were on duty reviewing the stories for the paper published on 14 April 2002, including the story that makes reference to a voicemail in the Milly Dowler case?
I am informed that at the date you specify, the positions at the News of the World to which you refer were held by the following individuals:
|
Editor: |
Rebekah Brooks |
|
Night Editor: |
Peter Smith |
|
News Editor: |
Neville Thurlbeck |
|
Legal Manager: |
Tom Crone |
Of those, our records show that Ms Brooks was on paid holiday from Tuesday, 9 April 2002 until Saturday, 13 April 2002 inclusive. We no longer have records dating back to 2002 showing who deputised for Ms Brooks while she was on holiday; nor do we still hold records for who was the on-duty lawyer on this date.
I trust this information is helpful to the Committee.
11 August 2011
Documents referred to in the answer to Question 8 – (See below)
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Chapman, Jon
Sent: 10 May 2007 15:43
To: Lawrence Abramson
Cc: Cloke, Daniel
Subject: Our conversation
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
Lawrence
On 5 February 2007, we terminated the employment of Clive Goodman, the Royal Correspondent of the News of the World, following his imprisonment for conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages. This Interception was carried out through a private investigator, Glen Mulcaire, who was also imprisoned.
I have faxed you the termination letter and letters of 2 March, 12 March and 14 March relating to an appeal against dismissal.
The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii - ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.
We will make available to you access to the emails in question as soon as possible.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me for any further clarification.
Thanks and best wishes.
Jon Chapman
Director of Legal Affairs
News International Limited
_________________________________________________________________________________________
News International Limited
[Facsimile Message from Corporate Legal Affairs]
To: Lawrence Abramson
From: Jon Chapman
Date: 10 May 2007
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
BY COURIER
Clive Goodman Esq
5 February 2007
Dear Clive
I am sorry to have to be writing this letter, but am afraid that events of the last few days and months provide us no choice but to terminate your employment with News Group Newspapers Limited.
This action, I know you understand, is the consequence of your plea of guilty, and subsequent imprisonment on 26 January, in relation to conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages. This obviously constitutes a very serious breach of your obligations as an employee, such as to warrant dismissal without any warnings. In the circumstances of your plea and the court’s sentence, it is reasonable for us to dismiss you without any further enquiries.
I recognise this episode followed many unblemished, and frequently distinguished, years of service to the News of the World. In view of this, and in recognition of the pressures on your family, it has been decided that upon your termination you will receive one year’s salary. In all the circumstances, we would of course be entitled to make no payment whatever.
To summarise, in formal language, the following arrangements apply with immediate effect (but may be varied or revoked in the event of a successful disciplinary appeal);
(a) Your dismissal takes effect immediately and your final day of employment is therefore today.
(b) You will be paid, through payroll, on 6 February 2007, 12 months’ base salary, subject to normal deductions of tax and national insurance.
(c) You must arrange for the return of any property, such as any laptop computer or mobile phone, belonging to us, in good condition, by 28 February.
(d) We shall forward your P45 to you in due course.
Again, Clive, I am deeply sorry we have found it necessary to take this measure, but we have no other choice.
Of course, you have the right to appeal against your dismissal. If you wish to appeal, you (or your legal representative) must do so in writing to Stuart Kuttner within two weeks of the date of this letter. You would then have the opportunity to present your case at an appeal hearing in accordance with our disciplinary procedure. You may be accompanied at the hearing by a fellow employee or a NISA representative. Lodging an appeal will not delay the dismissal taking effect.
If you have any questions, please contact Stuart Kuttner.
Yours sincerely,
Les Hinton
Executive Chairman
News International Limited
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Cloke Esq
Group Human Resources Director
News International
2 March 2007
Dear Mr Cloke,
Re: Notice of termination of employment
I refer to Les Hinton’s letter of February 5, 2007 Informing me of my dismissal for alleged gross misconduct.
The letter identifies the reason for the dismissal as “recent events”. I take this to mean my plea of guilty to conspiracy to intercept the voicemail messages of three employees of the royal family.
I am appealing against this decision on the following grounds:
(i)
(ii)
(iii-iv)
(v)
Yours sincerely,
Clive Goodman
cc Stuart Kuttner, Managing Editor, News of the World
Les Hinton, Executive Chairman, News International Ltd
_________________________________________________________________________________________
News International Newspapers Limited
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
12 March 2007
Mr Clive Goodman
Dear Mr Goodman,
Thank you for your letter of 2nd March 2007.
I would like to request your attendance at an appeal hearing on Tuesday, 20th March 2007 at 10.00 am at the offices of News Magazines Limited at 2 Chelsea Manor Gardens, London SW3 5PN (when you arrive there, please ask for me at Reception). The purpose of the hearing is to consider, under the News International disciplinary procedure, your appeal against your dismissal on 5th February, on the grounds raised in your letter of 2nd March.
The appeal will be heard by Colin Myler, Editor of the News of the World, and I will also be in attendance. In addition, there will be a note taker present. You are entitled to be accompanied as specified in the Company’s Disciplinary procedure. Please let me know in advance if you decide to bring a companion and their name and contact details.
If there are any documents you wish to be considered at the appeal hearing, please provide copies as soon as possible, If you do not have those documents, please provide details so that they can be obtained.
I should point out that appeals against dismissal under our disciplinary procedure would generally be considered by the Dismissal Appeals Panel, which consists of employee and management representatives. However, News International has the right to disregard or disapply any part of this procedure on a case-by-case basis in exceptional circumstances and where there are reasonable grounds for doing so. Given that your notice of appeal makes extremely serious allegations against a number of employees, it is clearly inappropriate for your appeal to be considered by this Panel.
I would be grateful if you could confirm that you have received this letter and that you will attend at the time stated above. If, for any unavoidable reason, you or your companion cannot attend at that time, please contact me by telephone.
If you have any other questions, please contact me as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely,
Daniel Cloke
Group Human Resources Director
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Cloke Esq
Group Human Resources Director
News International
14 March, 2007
Dear Mr Cloke,
Thank you for your letter of March 12. Although I can confirm that I will be able to attend the planned appeal hearing on March 20, for the reasons set out below, I believe it would be sensible and reasonable to postpone the hearing.
I note that you are proposing to alter substantially the normal procedure for such a hearing. I am not convinced that the proposed alterations are necessary. However, in light of the exceptional circumstances you identify in your letter, I think It would be sensible for me to be accompanied by my legal representative rather than a work colleague. Please confirm to me you ore happy to proceed on this basis.
I will let you have copies of relevant documents in my possession as soon as possible.
In the meantime, I would be grateful if you could provide the following documents:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
(ix)
(x)
(xi)
In view of the additional documents that are essential in order for me to prepare properly for the appeal hearing, I think it sensible and reasonable to reschedule Tuesday’s meeting until I have been given reasonable time to consider these further documents.
I look forward to your response as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely,
Clive Goodman
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Evette Duncan
Sent: 14 May 2007 10:09
To: Ros Silver
Subject: FW: Our conversation
From: Evette Duncan On Behalf Of Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 11 May 2007 14:42
To: Jon Chapman
Cc: Daniel Cloke
Subject: FW: Our conversation
That is fine Jon.
I have read your email and the letters you sent by fax and we can start pretty much whenever you want us to. Is the first step to put our respective IT departments In contact to see how we are best able to access the relevant email accounts?
Kind regards,
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 11 May 2007 11:47
To: Evette Duncan
Subject: FW: Our conversation
From: Jon Chapman
Sent: 10 May 2007 15:43
To: Lawrence Abramson
Cc: Daniel Cloke
Subject: Our conversation
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
Lawrence
On 5 February 2007, we terminated the employment of Clive Goodman, the Royal Correspondent of the News of the World, following his imprisonment for conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages. This interception was carried out through a private investigator, Glen Mulcaire, who was also imprisoned.
I have faxed you the termination letter and letters of 2 March, 12 March and 14 March relating to an appeal against dismissal.
The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii - ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.
We will make available to you access to the emails in question as soon as possible.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me for any further clarification.
Thanks and best wishes.
Jon Chapman
Director of Legal Affairs
News International Limited
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 14 May 2007 10:42
To: Ros Silver
Subject: FW: Our conversation
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Daniel Cloke
Sent: 14 May 2007 07:34
To: Lawrence Abramson
Subject: RE: Our conversation
Hi Lawrence,
Do you now have the emails? If not could you let me know please. My number is [REDACTED] or mobile is [REDACTED].
Thanks
Daniel
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 11 May 2007 14:42
To: Jon Chapman
Cc: Daniel Cloke
Subject: FW: Our conversation
That is fine Jon.
I have read your email and the letters you sent by fax and we can start pretty much whenever you want us to. Is the first step to put our respective IT departments in contact to see how we are best able to access the relevant email accounts?
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 11 May 2007 11:47
To: Evette Duncan
Subject: FW: Our conversation
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Jon Chapman
Sent: 10 May 2007 15:43
To: Lawrence Abramson
Cc: Daniel Cloke
Subject: Our conversation
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
Lawrence
On 5 February 2007, we terminated the employment of Clive Goodman, the Royal Correspondent of the News of the World, following his imprisonment for conspiracy to intercept voicemail messages. This interception was carried out through a private Investigator, Glen Mulcaire, who was also imprisoned.
I have faxed you the termination letter and letters of 2 March, 12 March and 14 March relating to an appeal against dismissal.
The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii - ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.
We will make available to you access to the emails in question as soon as possible.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me for any further clarification.
Thanks and best wishes.
Jon Chapman
Director of Legal Affairs
News International Limited
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Simon Avery
Sent: 14 May 2007 11:39
To: Lawrence Abramson
Subject: FW: Webmail Access
See below from News International. It’s quite straight forward, do you want me to pop down and go through it with you?
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Lowndes
Sent: 14 May 2007 11:27
To: Simon Avery
Subject: Webmail Access
Simon,
As per our telephone conversation, instructions below to access the Public Folder within our MS Exchange e-mail system :
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Any issues, please give me a call.
Simon Lowndes
Head of Managed Services
Information Technology
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Yun Chan on behalf of Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 13:13
To: Jon Chapman and Daniel Cloke
Subject: News International
Importance: High
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION THIS PM
We have on your Instructions searched the emails that you were able to let us have access to from the accounts of:-
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
I can confirm that we did not find any evidence that proved that either [REDACTED], [REDACTED], or [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other journalists at the News of the World were engaged in illegal activities prior to their arrest.
Please let me know If we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Jon Chapman
Sent: 29 May 2007 12:50
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Subject: RE: News International
Lawrence
After discussing this further, Daniel and I would like to try to get slightly closer to the wording of my original instruction email which stated:
“The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii - ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar Illegal procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.”
I would suggest the following:
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of.
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
I can confirm that we did not find anything in those emails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman’s illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and/or that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance. Thanks and best wishes.
PS Did you have any further thoughts on getting the transcript of the Old Bailey proceedings?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 17:53
To: Jon Chapman, Daniel Cloke
Subject: Re: News International
I can’t say the last sentence in the penultimate para, I’m afraid. Can we discuss next week?
-----Original Message----
From: Jon Chapman
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Sent: Fri May 25 16:12:39 2007
Subject: RE: News International
A few suggestions:
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
I can confirm that we did not find anything which appeared to us to prove that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other person employed or engaged by the News of the World was involved in illegal activities prior to the arrest of Messrs. Goodman and Mulcaire. Equally, having seen a copy of Clive Goodman’s notice of appeal of 2 March 2007, we did not find anything that we consider to be directly relevant to the grounds of appeal put forward by him.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 13:13
To: Jon Chapman, Daniel Cloke
Subject: News International
Importance: High
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION THIS PM
We have on your instructions searched the emails that you were able to let us have access to from the accounts of:-
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
I can confirm that we did not find any evidence that proved that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other journalists at the News of the World were engaged in illegal activities prior to their arrest.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 29 May 2007 13:03
To: Jon Chapman
Subject: Re: News International
I think I can say this. I’ll get it finalised. Would you prefer a letter or an email?
You need permission from the judge to get a transcript from the crown court. We’ve asked but haven’t heard back yet. We should hear this week, I hope.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Chapman
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Sent: Tue May 29 12:49:38 2007
Subject: RE: News International
Lawrence
After discussing this further, Daniel and I would like to try to get slightly closer to the wording of my original instruction email which stated:-
“The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii – ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.”
I would suggest the following:
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
I can confirm that we did not find anything in those emails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman’s illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and/or that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance. Thanks and best wishes.
PS Did you have any further thoughts on getting the transcript of the Old Bailey proceedings?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 17:53
To: Jon Chapman; Daniel Cloke
Subject: Re: News International
I can’t say the last sentence in the penultimate pare, I’m afraid. Can we discuss next week?
-----Original Message------
From: Jon Chapman
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Sent: Fri May 25 16:12:39 2007
Subject: RE: News International
A few suggestions:
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
I can confirm that we did not find anything which appeared to us to prove that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other person employed or engaged by the News of the World was involved in illegal activities prior to the arrest of Messrs. Goodman and Mulcaire. Equally, having seen a copy of Clive Goodman’s notice of appeal of 2 March 2007, we did not find anything that we consider to be directly relevant to the grounds of appeal put forward by him.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 13:13
To: John Chapman; Daniel Cloke
Subject: News International
Importance: High
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION THIS PM
We have on your instructions searched the emails that you were able to let us have access to from the accounts of:-
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
I can confirm that we did not find any evidence that proved that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other journalists at the News of the World wer engaged in illegal activities prior to their arrest.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Jon Chapman
Sent: 29 May 2007 13:54
To: Lawrence Abramson
Subject: RE: News International
Lawrence
Great. Would be good to have it on letterhead.
Can you please drop the sentence which reads These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
Thanks and best wishes.
Jon
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 29 May 2007 13:03
To: Jon Chapman
Subject: Re: News International
I think I can say this. I’ll get it finalised. Would you prefer a letter or an email?
You need permission from the judge to get a transcript from the crown court. We’ve asked but haven’t heard back yet. We should hear this week, I hope.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Chapman
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Sent: Tue May 29 12:49:38 2007
Subject: RE: News International
Lawrence
After discussing this further, Daniel and I would like to try to get slightly closer to the wording of my original instruction email which stated:
“The letter of 14 March requests, at paragraphs iv, v, vi, vii and viii, certain emails which Goodman believed to be potentially relevant to his appeal. This request was refused. However, both myself and Daniel Cloke, our head of HR, went through all the emails fitting into the above categories which our IT department were able to recover from archive.
The purpose of this exercise was to find any evidence in such emails to support the contentions made by Goodman in his letter of 2 March, paragraphs i and ii - ie that his illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED], and that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
We found nothing that amounted to reasonable evidence of either of the above contentions.
Because of the bad publicity that could result in an allegation in an employment tribunal that we had covered up potentially damaging evidence found on our email trawl, I would ask that you, or a colleague, carry out an independent review of the emails in question and report back to me with any findings of material that could possibly tend to support either of Goodman’s contentions.”
I would suggest the following:-
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ].
I can confirm that we did not find anything in those emails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman’s illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED], and/or that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Thanks and best wishes.
Jon
PS Did you have any further thoughts on getting the transcript of the Old Bailey proceedings?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 17:53
To: Jon Chapman; Daniel Cloke
Subject: Re: News International
I can’t say the last sentence in the penultimate para, I’m afraid. Can we discuss next week?
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Chapman
To: Lawrence Abramson; Daniel Cloke
Sent: Fri May 25 16:12:39 2007
Subject: RE: News International
A few suggestions:
We have on your instructions reviewed the emails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
These emails cover the period from [ ] to [ ]
I can confirm that we did not find anything which appeared to us to prove that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other person employed or engaged by the News of the World was involved in illegal activities prior to the arrest of Messrs. Goodman and Mulcaire. Equally, having seen a copy of Clive Goodman’s notice of appeal of 2 March 2007, we did not find anything that we consider to be directly relevant to the grounds of appeal put forward by him.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 25 May 2007 13:13
To: Jon Chapman; Daniel Cloke
Subject: News International
Importance: High
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION THIS PM
We have on your instructions searched the emails that you were able to let us have access to from the accounts of:-
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
I can confirm that we did not find any evidence that proved that either [REDACTED] knew that Clive Goodman, Glen Mulcaire or any other journalists at the News of the World were engaged in illegal activities prior to their arrest.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Kind regards.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
_________________________________________________________________________________________
EMAIL:
From: Lawrence Abramson
Sent: 29 May 2007 17:44
To: Jon Chapman
Subject Clive Goodman
Attachments: 20070428173551675.pdf
Please see attached sent by post and email.
Kind regards
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
Harbottle & Lewis LLP
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Jon Chapman
News International Limited
VIA POST AND EMAIL
29 May 2007
Dear Jon
Re: Clive Goodman
We have on your instructions reviewed the mails to which you have provided access from the accounts of:
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
I can confirm that we did not find anything in those emails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman’s illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] and/or that [REDACTED] and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.
Please let me know if we can be of any further assistance.
Thanks and best wishes.
Yours sincerely
Lawrence Abramson