The purpose of
this site is for information and a record of Gerry McCann's Blog
Archives. As most people will appreciate GM deleted all past blogs
from the official website. Hopefully this Archive will be helpful to
anyone who is interested in Justice for Madeleine Beth McCann. Many
Thanks, Pamalam
Note: This site does not belong to the McCanns. It belongs to Pamalam. If
you wish to contact the McCanns directly, please use
the contact/email details
campaign@findmadeleine.com
Evidence given to the Leveson Inquiry by News International executives Tom Crone and Colin Myler, and
by Daniel Sanderson, the former News of the World reporter who wrote an article based on Kate McCann's diaries
11.08 Crone said yesterday his responsibility was legality, not ethics. Who was the "guardian of ethics"
at News International, if not you?
Crone says that was the chief executive - James Murdoch.
Jay [Robert
Jay QC] asks if Crone was involved in the publication of Kate McCann's diaries against her wishes. Crone says he was the
lawyer that weekend, and "played some part in clearing it up afterwards".
Did he believe there to be
a privacy issue? Crone says he believed publication had been approved by the McCann's representatives via email to the
head of the newsdesk.
Jay says he has seen documents that "broadly support" that.
By Lisa O'Carroll and Josh Halliday 14 December 2011
- Extract - 11.12am: Crone is now being asked about his
involvement in the publication of Kate MCann's diary.
"I was the lawyer on the News of the World that
weekend and I played some part in clearing it up afterwards," he says.
He adds that it was his understanding
that the McCanns had given the head of news permission to publish.
--------------------
NOTW ex-legal manager claims
James Murdoch had 'direct' evidence phone hacking extended beyond one journalist The Independent
By Sam Marsden Wednesday December 14 2011
- Extract -
Mr Crone also said he understood a representative of Madeleine McCann's family gave the News of the World permission
to publish the personal diary of the missing girl's mother.
Kate McCann told the inquiry last month that she
felt "violated" and like "climbing into a hole and not coming out" when the intensely private journal
appeared in the paper on September 14, 2008.
Mr Crone said today: "My understanding was that the representative
of the McCanns had given the OK, the permission to the head of the newsdesk at the News of the World, to run the diaries or
extracts from the diaries. I think he had emails to support that."
Mr Jay said: "I have seen some documents
which on one interpretation of them broadly support what you are saying."
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Tom
Crone's evidence, 14 December 2011
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Tom Crone's evidence
Leveson Inquiry
Wednesday 14 December 2011
- Extract -
19
Q. Was not told to him, okay. I'm going to come back to
20
the issue of culture more widely at the end, but can
21 I just pick up some
discrete points? First of all, did
22 you have any involvement in the
publication of the
23 doctored Kate McCann diary, which I think was --
24 certainly in September 2008, the exact date has
25
temporarily eluded me.
45
1 A. I was the lawyer on the News of the World that weekend
2
and I played some part in clearing it up afterwards.
3 The legal problem afterwards.
4 Q. But can we look at the possible legal or privacy problem
5
before? Did you detect there to be a privacy issue?
6 A. My understanding was that the
representative of the
7 McCanns had given the okay, the permission, to the
head
8 of the news desk at the News of the World to run the
9
diaries. Or extracts from the diaries.
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. I
think he had emails to support that.
12 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Oh?
13 MR
JAY: I've seen some documents which on one
14 interpretation of them
broadly support what you're
15 saying, but I just want to understand what
your position
- Extract - 16.14 Myler disputes that he "berated" Gerry McCann over the family's interview with Hello Magazine,
instead of News of the World. Instead, he "merely pointed out to him" that Hello's circulation was relatively
small at 300,000 against his millions. He says:
I had no cause at any stage to berate or be irate at Gerry. The relationship was such that he would call and thank
the NOTW for what we were doing, and it was a relationship that I valued
Colin Myler said he believed Kate McCann was happy for her diaries to be printed
by the News of the World. She was not. 16.19 Myler is asked about how Kate McCann's
diary appeared in the paper. Ian Edmondson said in an email to Myler that the source was a female
Portuguese journalist. Their source was the Portuguese police, who translated the diary. News of the World paid 3000 euros
for it, with a final payment of 20,000 euros for exclusive publication.
Edmondson was at that time in daily contact
with Clarence Mitchell, the family's spokesman. Myler said:
Ian Edmondson had assured me on more than one occasion Clarence was aware of what we were intending to do and said
'Good'... I think it was clear that Mr Edmondson had spelt out what he was doing
Myler says he made
his views clear in the Friday news conference "by using the phrase 'I do not want Kate to come out of church on Sunday
morning and find the diaries were there without her knowledge'... I wouldn't have published if I thought she hadn't
been made aware of it." 16.31 "I was given an absolute categoric assurance Clarence
knew what we were doing," Myler says. There is a 'transcript' of conversations between Edmondson and Mitchell.
Why then did he apologise?
"Because I felt very bad she didn't know. Why would I do something as personal
as that, no matter how much behind a shield of nailing the lies in the Portugese press", he says.
Leveson
says the transcript between Edmondson and Mitchell discussing the diary is highly ambiguous.
Myler refuses to say
what they paid for the diary in the end. They made a donation to the family's fund and printed an apology about the 'misplaced
understanding'.
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Colin Myler's
evidence, 14 December 2011
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Colin Myler's evidence
Leveson Inquiry
Wednesday 14 December 2011
- Extract -
22
Q. Fair enough. I just wanted to test that one with you
23 and
others will consider where we are in the public
24 interest.
25
Can I ask you next, please, about your third
76
1 statement, before coming on to other matters. This is
2 dealing with the McCann diaries.
3 A. Yes.
4
Q. Amongst other matters.
5 You make it clear
in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the
6 statement, 51874, Mr Myler --
7
A. Yes, I have it.
8 Q. Do you have it to hand? The newspaper was very
9
supportive of the McCanns, and you wouldn't adopt the
10 stance that other
national newspapers had taken by
11 printing malicious stories which had no
foundation and
12 emanated largely from the Portuguese press. So that
was
13 your position.
14 A. Yes.
15
Q. You had a very successful appeal, which raised
16 £1.5 million
in 48 hours. In paragraph 7 you say that
17 you spoke to Dr Gerry McCann
on a frequent basis about
18 developments in the case, "or more often
than not just
19 to catch up". About how often did you speak to
him?
20 A. Every maybe -- in the early stages, probably a little
21
bit more regularly, but weeks, perhaps, depending on
22 what was happening,
what was developing, what we were
23 aware of or what we were working on.
But as
24 I explained, the news desk in particular were in much
25
more regular contact with their spokesman.
77
1 Q. This is Mr Ian Edmondson on the one hand who was the
2
news editor?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And the spokesman was Mr Clarence Mitchell,
who we heard
5 about on the other?
6 A. Yes.
And before that, I think it was
7 Justine McGuinness, yes.
8
Q. Did you have any direct dealings with Mr Mitchell?
9 A. Not really, no.
10
Q. Not really or at all?
11 A. No, hardly at all.
12 Q. There
was evidence from the McCanns about three weeks
13 ago now that following something
published in Hello
14 magazine, there was an irate phone call between you and
15 him. Is that right, Mr Myler?
16 A. I was
surprised to hear that from Gerry. I think he
17 actually said that I
berated him. I don't recall that.
18 I've not really got a reputation
for berating people,
19 and I certainly wouldn't have any cause to berate
Gerry
20 after what -- and what they were going through.
21
I pointed out to him simply that the surprise of doing
22 something with Hello
magazine with a circulation of,
23 I don't know, I'm guessing at that
time maybe 300,000,
24 against a circulation of the News of the World which
was
25 over 3 million, and as I'd said --
78
1 There's only one mistake in this statement,
2 actually. It says we initiated discussions with
3
Vodafone about a European amber alert system. In fact,
4 they came to
us through somebody I knew at Vodafone who
5 had been thinking about this,
and proposed that we could
6 try to establish with Vodafone who would waive
all
7 frees, it would be free, a system that other
8
telecommunications firms would join in, which in many
9 cases could be of huge
importance in the case of
10 somebody going missing. So an alert would
flash up on
11 your cellphones, wherever you were, giving basic details
12 of boy, girl, size, age, what they were wearing.
13
I know that Gerry and Kate were very interested in
14 the scheme that was very
successful in America and
15 I think they'd been over to America to explore
how it
16 worked and how they could bring it back to Europe. It
17 was one of the things that they were working on.
18 Q.
That's fair enough, Mr Myler, but the context of the
19 Hello magazine
evidence was Dr McCann, in the
20 transcript:
21
"I think it would be fair to say that Mr Myler was
22 irate when he learned
of the publication which happened
23 and was berating us for not doing an interview
with the
24 News of the World."
25
So it's accepting the berating from you, but he was
79
1 irate. Maybe it's a matter of perception.
2
A. He was irate?
3 Q. Mm.
4 A. No, I don't think it --
Gerry wasn't irate.
5 Q. Sorry, it was you.
6 A. I was irate,
yes.
7 Q. And berating them.
8 A. I had no cause at all at any stage
to berate or be irate
9 with Gerry. Indeed, the relationship was such
that he
10 would call and thank me for what the News of the World
11 had been doing. It was a relationship that I valued.
12
Q. Okay.
13 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: So one understands, you can get in
14
touch with him whenever you want, if you want to, if you
15 think it's
important?
16 A. To a point. I mean I was very aware that they did enjoy
17
and protect their own privacy and space, as it were.
18 They had a lot going
on and they were dealing with a lot
19 of issues, and dealing with a lot of
-- I mean, the
20 pressure was pretty intense on them.
21
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Oh, I'm sure. I didn't quite mean
22
that. I really meant that if you had something that was
23 significant
and important, particularly if you felt it
24 might impact on that privacy
--
25 A. Yes, I --
80
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: -- you were able to pick up the
2
phone --
3 A. I know where you're heading, yes, of course, yes.
4
I know where you're going, sir, with respect. And
5 I mean respect,
as opposed to what you said the other
6 day to Mr Wallis.
7
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'm a very open person, Mr --
8 A. I like to think I am, too.
9 MR JAY: Mr Myler, did you have his mobile phone number?
10 A. I think
I did, yes. The point I'm making, Mr Jay, is
11 that I didn't
abuse that. I was aware of what they were
12 dealing with, and unless
there was a reason specifically
13 to discuss, I didn't want to waste their
time.
14 Q. Right. You tell us that the "Kate's diary in her own
15
words" story was published in the News of the World on
16 14 September
2008 and you also tell us it was not
17 a story which was produced in a matter
of days.
18 A. That was -- again, might I just say that I only received
19
from Linklaters yesterday in the bundles, six arrived
20 yesterday morning,
so I only saw for the first time
21 records from other people that were requested,
because
22 I've not had access.
23 Q. I think
it's --
24 A. And the statement to you was obviously made before that,
25
so it was from recollection.
81
1 Q. I think it's important to try and understand what
2
material, documentary material, you had available to you
3 in September 2008,
rather than material which you've
4 only seen subsequently, since only
the former would have
5 informed your thinking at the time, wouldn't it?
6 A. Yes, but it's -- we're now 2011. It's remembering.
7
Q. Indeed. You tell us in your witness statement that the
8 story
was presented to you by Mr Edmondson, is that
9 correct?
10
A. It is.
11 Q. And he made it clear to you that he had a copy of the
12
diary. Did he let you know or tell you from where he
13 had obtained
it?
14 A. I can't recall the conversation specifically, but I'm
15
sure he would have done.
16 Q. Well, we can be more precise. If you could pick up the
17 Linklater file, if we can describe it in those terms,
18
and look, please, at tab 2.
19 A. Sorry, what number is it?
20 Q.
The papers which arrived from Linklaters which you
21 mentioned three minutes
ago.
22 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Do you not have the file?
23 A. If
it's not here.
24 MR JAY: We can provide you with another file. It's there.
25 We'll get it to you.
82
1 A. Sorry. I couldn't fit it in the bag, actually.
2
MR JAY: It has tabs, so it's easier to ...
3 A. Thank you.
4
Q. Tab 2.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Mr Edmondson to you, 5 September.
So we are nine days
7 before the story:
8
"We have got the Kate McCann diaries journalist at
9 a meeting.
They are in Portuguese, translated by cops.
10 Official police document looks
good. Don't think this
11 is a set-up. We can take possession
after paying
12 a small deposit and pay the balance upon publication,
13 3,000 euros in total. Get it as great stuff for next
14
week? Ian."
15 So your source, as it were,
was I think a Portuguese
16 journalist?
17 A.
Mm.
18 Q. I think it was a woman journalist, but it's not going to
19
matter. Made clear to you that the Portuguese police
20 had translated
the diary and therefore they remained in
21 Portuguese but they looked as if
they were what they
22 purported to be; is that correct?
23
A. Yes, according to this.
24 Q. Were you concerned by the fact that the diary had been
25 obtained from the police in some way?
83
1 A. I can't recall exactly how the conversation developed
2
and when and where it would have taken place with
3 Mr Edmondson, but if I
remember correctly, elements of
4 the diary had already been published in some
of the
5 Portuguese papers, I believe, previously, so I assumed
6
that it was the same journalist who was the author of
7 those stories, who
had come to us.
8 Q. But were you aware of some of the background which
9
comprised this: that the police had obtained the diary,
10 having seized it
from Dr Kate McCann, and then there was
11 an order by the Portuguese judge
for the diary to be
12 returned, but I think a copy by then had been taken?
13 Were you aware of any of that background?
14 A.
I don't recall that specifically, I'm sorry.
15 Q. But it was clear to you that the ultimate
source -- the
16 proximate source was the journalist, but the ultimate
17 source was the Portuguese police. That much was clear,
18
wasn't it?
19 A. I think it's clear that that's where it probably would
20 have emanated, yes.
21 Q. And then there were discussions
about the cost, which
22 I don't think we need dwell on. And then
--
23 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: This is a formal agreement is made in
24
writing, behind tab 3?
25 A. Yes.
84
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: This is 5 September?
2 A. Yes.
3 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: A substantial sum of money to supply
4
the diary of Kate McCann for exclusive publication?
5 A. Yes. According to this, yes.
6 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes. That's the --
7 MR JAY: So at
that stage you had a contractual commitment
8 to pay an amount, and the consideration
would be
9 exclusive publication in the News of the World; is that
10 right?
11 A. Generally, yes.
12
Q. It wasn't your understanding that anybody had asked for
13 Dr
Kate McCann's consent by that stage, was it?
14 A. At that stage?
15
Q. Yes.
16 A. I -- well, this is Friday at 8.06 pm. I know, as
17
I said, that Ian Edmondson was probably at that stage
18 almost in daily contact
with Mr Mitchell. What
19 conversations had taken place, I don't
know. But I know
20 that they had a very close relationship and a very
close
21 working professional relationship.
22 Q.
I think the question is a bit more precise. Before
23 making the contractual
commitment --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- which would save you having to
pay money which might
85
1 not lead to anything --
2 A. Well,
it would be on publication.
3 Q. It would be on publication. But were you satisfied that
4 Dr Kate McCann had given her consent or was the issue of
5
consent something which you were going to address later?
6 A. Well, I don't know -- at that
stage, I didn't know
7 whether or not they had it. You know, physically
had
8 from the journalist what she said she had.
9 Q.
No, indeed not. But --
10 A. So I -- the question really about whether or not we had
11 permission from Kate or whatever conversations
12
Ian Edmondson would have had with Mr Mitchell, until he
13 had it, I'm
not sure it was relevant.
14 Q. Sorry, my understanding of this contract, and it's quite
15 a short document with very few stipulations, is that on
16
consideration of the diary being supplied to the
17 News of the World, News
of the World would pay 20,000
18 euros to the journalist, and its purpose would
be for
19 exclusive publication in the News of the World?
20
A. Yes.
21 Q. But the payment of 20,000 euros wasn't dependent on it
22
being exclusively published in the News of the World?
23 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes, it was, paragraph
6.
24 A. Yes, it was. Yes, it was. All the contracts were on
25
that basis because we would run out of money rather
86
1 quickly --
2 MR JAY: Yes, you're
right, I'm wrong.
3 So the next few days, I think
the documents show,
4 were devoted to establishing that the diaries were what
5 they purported to be, do I have that right?
6 A.
Yes.
7 Q. And then did there come a point, you having established
8
that, that you wanted to ascertain whether or not there
9 was consent from
Dr Kate McCann for publication? Have
10 I correctly understood the position?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. But the obvious question, Mr Myler, is this: why did
you
13 not telephone either of the McCanns and find out whether
14
they consented?
15 A. Because Ian Edmondson had assured me on more than one
16
occasion that Clarence was aware of what we were
17 intending to do and had
said, "Good". I think it was
18 very clear from Mr Edmondson's
point of view how he'd
19 spelt out what he was doing, and indeed I stressed
very
20 clearly by using the phrase that I did not want Kate to
21
come out of church on Sunday morning and find that the
22 diaries were there
without her knowledge.
23 Q. But you were of course aware that if Dr Kate McCann had
24 not given her consent to the publication of this
25
personal diary, she would be outraged by the
87
1 publication. You were aware of that, weren't you?
2 A. I wouldn't have published if I'd thought that she hadn't
3
been made aware of it.
4 Q. And Mr Edmondson was telling you that he'd obtained
5 consent on what day?
6 A. Well, it was absolutely clear
from the Friday to the
7 Saturday that that assurance had been given to him
and
8 given again to me.
9 Q. It was going to
be a front page story, wasn't it?
10 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Which Friday to which Saturday
are we
11 talking about? What date?
12 MR JAY:
12th and 13th, isn't it?
13 A. In other words, sort of from the Friday conference to
14 deciding, you know, what you're doing with the front of
15
the paper.
16 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I see.
17 A. I made it clear,
I think on the Friday, by using that
18 phrase, and I repeated it to him again
on the Saturday.
19 And at no stage did he indicate to me that Mr Mitchell
20 had told him it wouldn't be appropriate to do what he'd
21
been told we were doing.
22 Q. Given the importance of all of this, why not just pick
23 up the phone yourself and find out?
24 A. Mr Mitchell
was a very experienced media spokesperson,
25 absolutely. I had no reason
to believe that what
88
1 Mr Edmondson was telling me wasn't correct.
2
Q. Did Mr Edmondson tell you clearly that he had told
3 Mr Mitchell that
a copy of the diary had been obtained
4 via the Portuguese police, had been
translated by you,
5 and that sections of that translation were going to be
6 published in the News of the World as opposed to the
7
News of the World simply using publications which had
8 already been made in
Portugal to base a story?
9 A. No, no, no. My understanding was that it was very clear
10 that Mr Edmondson had explained what had we had because
11
I think the extracts that had appeared in Portugal were
12 very minor, limited.
I don't know how much they used.
13 But there was a -- I think there's
a transcript in here
14 of a conversation where he explains that he was trying
15 to get me to go big with it, and I think in the course
16
of that conversation I think Mr Mitchell had said that
17 he'd vaguely
remembered when they had been used in part
18 in the Portuguese press and that
they were obviously
19 very selective.
20 Q. Yes,
but did Mr Edmondson make it clear to you that he
21 had made it clear to Mr
Mitchell that he had the whole
22 diary and was going to cause extracts from
it to be
23 published in the News of the World?
24 A.
That's what he led me to believe, yes.
25 Q. Because reading the transcript, and this is
something
89
1 which you didn't, of course, see at the time, the
2
transcript of the conversation --
3 A. Sorry, which tab are we?
4 Q.
This is tab 9.
5 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You did see it just a few days later
6
on the Tuesday.
7 MR JAY: A four-page transcript of a conversation between
8
Ian Edmondson and Clarence Mitchell on Friday, September
9 12, 2008.
It's quite a complicated document, and
10 certainly bears at least one
interpretation, probably
11 several. You saw it two days later or two
days after
12 publication, on the Tuesday, didn't you?
13
A. This is the transcript of the conversation between
14 Ian Edmondson
and Mr Mitchell?
15 Q. Indeed.
16 A. Yes.
17
Q. We know Mr Edmondson sent it to you. You're the first
18
recipient on the email, aren't you?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Having
seen that transcript, and I'm not going to go
21 through it now, why did
you apologise to the McCanns at
22 all? Unless it was capable of bearing
at least a number
23 of interpretations?
24 A.
Well, because I felt very bad that she didn't know. And
25 as I've
said before, without her permission, I wouldn't
90
1 have published it. I mean, why would I do something as
2 personal as that, however much behind a shield of
3
nailing the lies of the Portuguese media and the press?
4 I don't think
that would have been sufficient for the
5 grief it caused her, and I had absolutely
nothing to
6 gain and everything to lose, given the relationship that
7 we had established.
8 Q. But if that was your thought
process on 16 September,
9 why wasn't it the thought process you had the
previous
10 week, Mr Myler?
11 A. Because I was
given an absolute categoric assurance that
12 Clarence knew what we were doing.
13 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Well, you've read this transcript,
14
I'm sure. It's clearly not a document that spells it
15 out in
words of one syllable, is it?
16 A. You know, Mr Edmondson, given the number of times
17 I asked him for the assurance to make sure that there
18
was absolute clarity and understanding, had no view that
19 there was anything
ambiguous in what we were going to
20 do.
21 LORD JUSTICE
LEVESON: It may be, Mr Myler, that it's unfair
22 to ask you much
more about this, but would you agree
23 with this: this document is most clearly
ambiguous?
24 A. This --
25 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: This is the transcript
that you were
91
1 sent by Mr Edmondson as establishing, presumably, the
2
consent about which you were then concerned. And it's
3 not terribly
clear. Would you agree with that?
4 A. I need to --
5 LORD JUSTICE
LEVESON: All right.
6 A. I only got this bundle yesterday.
7 LORD
JUSTICE LEVESON: That's entirely fair enough.
8 A. I'm sorry.
9
MR JAY: What was the total sum that the News of the World
10 paid for
this diary?
11 A. I don't know. We'd have to check. Because often when
12 sums are going into a managing editor's sheet,
13
particularly when they have brackets which says they're
14 still being
negotiated, the tendency was for that sum to
15 be negotiated down, and therefore
it was a running
16 memoir, if you like. Chances are that that figure
17 possibly could have come down. So the managing editor's
18 office will have a record of that.
19 Q. Okay, but you
made a donation to the Madeleine fund?
20 A. Oh yes.
21 Q. Was it
a substantial donation?
22 A. I believe it was. And an apology the following week,
23 I think it was the following week, negotiated with,
24
I think, Mr Thomson from Carter Ruck, and in it was an
25 acceptance and an
acknowledgment that there had been
92
1 a misplaced understanding that we had Kate's permission
2 and, you know, we made that very clear, that the last
3
thing we wanted to do was to cause her any more
4 distress.
5
Q. May I move off that to another topic. This topic is
6 such that
I won't be able to conclude it today. I don't
7 know how you
--
8 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Do I understand that, save for
9
Mr Myler, we're not going to find ourselves tomorrow
10 running over a
witness?
11 MR JAY: We won't, because there's another witness,
12
Mr Sanderson, who deals with these matters. He'll be
13 quite short.
And then Mr Webb, who won't be that long
14 either, so although we're
not doing very well today,
15 overall we're not doing badly.
16
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: No, well, I understand the point.
17 All right,
I think that Mr Myler is due a break as well.
18 A. Okay.
---------------
PDF download:
Wednesday 14 December Transcript of Afternoon Hearing (pdf,
148KB)
I thought McCanns knew about diary,
Myler tells court, 14 December 2011
I thought McCanns knew about diary, Myler tells court
journalism.co.uk
Former News of the World editor says he regrets publication of diary excerpts but was assured that mother of Madeleine
McCann had given her consent
By: Joel Gunter Posted: 14 December 2011
Former News of the World editor Colin Myler told the Leveson inquiry today that he thought Kate McCann had given her permission
for excerpts from her diary to be published when the tabloid bought them from a Portuguese journalist.
The excerpts
– which were purchased for €3,000, Myler revealed today – included entries from the days shortly after Madeleine
McCann's disappearance in May 2007.
According to Myler, he was told by former News of the World news editor
Ian Edmondson that the family had consented to the publication of the diary, which Myler conceded today probably emanated
from the local police.
The former editor said today that Edmondson had been in daily contact with the McCann family's
representative Clarence Mitchell, and that Edmondson had said Mitchell was aware of the News of the World's intention
to publish and had said "good".
Myler said he had told Edmondson on the Friday night: "I don't
want Kate coming out of church on Sunday morning and finding out that her diaries have been published without her knowledge."
Myler told the court he regretted the publication, but had been given assurances by Edmondson that the tabloid was
on safe ground. Lord Leveson challenged the clarity of Edmondson's assurances, calling a transcript of a conversation
between him and Myler over the issue, which was read in court, "ambiguous".
Myler told the inquiry that
he would not have published if he had known Kate McCann had not given her consent, and "felt very bad" about the
episode.
The former editor was also grilled by inquiry counsel Robery Jay QC about the allegation that he "berated"
Gerry McCann over the phone after the McCanns decided to give an interview to Hello magazine rather than the News of the World.
Myler denied the claim, telling the court that he had "no cause at any stage to berate or be irate at Gerry".
He said he "valued" his relationship with Madeleine's father, and had simply pointed out to him that the News
of the World had better circulation than Hello.
Myler echoed other former News of the World staff in claiming during
his testimony that he did not recognise the picture of the tabloid painted by former deputy features editor Paul McMullan
and that illegality was restricted to a small number of people.
He told the inquiry that those who had used illegal
methods in the course of their work should feel "the full force of the law".
Pressed about the News of
the World's decision to publish the controversial video of Max Mosley visiting prostitutes, Myler admitted that he believed
Mosley would obtain an injunction if they informed him in advance. He defended the story, which he entered for the scoop of
the year award, claiming that there was a public interest in Mosley's actions due to his presidency of the international
motorsport body the FIA.
He acknowledged that letters sent by chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck to the prostitutes
in the video were threatening and called the terms used by Thurlbeck "unnecessary". Leveson told Myler he thought
that the letters were in fact "outrageous".
Myler's evidence continues tomorrow from 10am. He will
be followed by former News of the World reporter Daniel Sanderson, who wrote the stories featuring excerpts from Kate McCann's
diary, and private investigator Derek Webb, who alleges he was instructed by the News of the World executive to obtain a press
card from the NUJ in order to help pose as a journalist.
Why I published Kate's diary: NotW's ex-editor thought he had mother's
permission to print entries that left McCanns mentally raped, 15 December 2011
Why I published Kate's diary: NotW's ex-editor thought he had mother's permission
to print entries that left McCanns mentally raped Daily Mail
• Colin Myler claims family's press spokesman had given the go ahead
By REBECCA CAMBER Last updated at 9:06 AM
on 15th December 2011
The News of the World's former editor said yesterday he believed he had permission to publish the
extracts from Kate McCann's diary that she later said had left her feeling 'mentally raped'.
Colin
Myler said he was told he had full support for publishing a story from Clarence Mitchell, the press spokesman for Kate and
Gerry McCann, whose daughter Madeleine disappeared from Praia da Luz, in Portugal, in 2007.
Mr Myler told the Leveson
press standards inquiry he had 'nothing to gain and everything to lose' from upsetting the couple, having developed
a good relationship with them.
Mr Myler, who edited the News of the World from 2007 until it closed this year,
said: 'I stressed that I did not want Kate to come out of church on Sunday morning and find that the diaries were there
without her knowledge.'
Mrs McCann's diary was published in the News of the World on September 14, 2008.
She told the inquiry last month that when she saw it published she felt 'violated'. Her husband said: 'Kate
was distraught and in her words felt "mentally raped".'
The McCanns said Mr Mitchell was told by
the paper's Head of News Ian Edmondson that it was planning to run a 'supportive story' but not that it would
publish the diary.
Mr Edmondson, who has since been arrested as part of the
phone-hacking inquiry, told Mr Myler the diary was obtained from a Portuguese journalist.
Asked why he did not
phone Mr McCann to check if permission had been given, Mr Myler said: 'Because Ian Edmondson had assured me on more than
one occasion that Clarence [Mitchell] was aware of what we were intending to do.'
After the diary was printed,
Mr Myler ran an apology in the paper 'because I felt very bad that she didn't know', he said.
Speaking
after yesterday's hearing, Mr Mitchell said: 'At no point in the one brief call that I received from Ian Edmondson
on the Friday evening before publication did he spell out categorically that they had purchased a version of Kate's diary
that had been leaked by the Portuguese police and that they were planning to publish it in as big a way as they subsequently
did.'
Daniel Sanderson
Leveson Inquiry: journalist who obtained
Kate McCann's diary to appear, 15 December 2011
Leveson Inquiry: journalist who obtained Kate McCann's
diary to appear The Telegraph
Daniel Sanderson, the former News of the World reporter who wrote stories based on Kate McCann's diaries, will give
evidence to the inquiry today.
By Donna Bowater 8:50AM GMT 15
Dec 2011
Mr Sanderson's name was the byline on the News of the World front page that revealed Mrs McCann's
private diary.
She has already told the inquiry how publication of the diary, written after her daughter Madeleine
went missing, without her consent left her feeling "totally violated".
In their evidence, Mrs McCann
said she gave the diary to Portuguese police but it was later returned.
She said she believed a copy had been made
before it was translated into Portuguese and then back to English and given to the press.
Mr Sanderson is expected
to face questions over how he got hold of the diary.
Former police detective turned private investigator Derek
Webb, who was hired by News International, will also give evidence to the inquiry.
Mr Webb was the only private
detective former News of the World editor Colin Myler admitted hiring yesterday.
The inquiry heard Mr Webb was
arrested over work with a journalist in Thames Valley and was barred for working for the tabloid.
But when the
case collapsed, he was rehired but was told he should register as a journalist with the National Union of Journalists (NUJ).
Asked about Mr Webb's work, Mr Myler said yesterday: "I never had any reason to be asked or questioned about
the work he had done via an issue or a payment or a complaint or a problem."
Leveson Inquiry: Daniel Sanderson, 15
December 2011
12.14 Leveson is now hearing from Daniel Sanderson, a former NOTW reporter whose name
appeared on the McCann diaries story. He was the most junior reporter at the newspaper when the story appeared in September
2008.
He tracked down the diary after reading in The Sun that extracts of the diary were being leaked in the Portuguese
press. He was asked by Ian Edmondson to track down the journalist who was running the extracts. He asked a freelance journalist
based in Spain to collect the diary, which then arrived at the NOTW.
Sanderson was not aware of the time that the
ultimate source of the diary was the Portuguese police. "I did not speculate where the diary came from at the time,"
he says. "All I knew at the time was that there were extracts being circulated round Portugal, and someone was responsible,"
he said.
Jay asks whether he considered if the McCanns were circulating the diary. "I didn't speculate,"
says Sanderson. "I was a junior reporter at the time."
Leveson says this leaking was illegal under Portuguese
law. Did he think about it?
Sanderson says he does not want to appear "flippant" about a "private
document". But it was being publicly circulated. He did not know what the newspaper wanted to do with it
You
were just doing the job you were asked to do?
"Every job I embarked on I considered privacy, public interest
and whether I was adhering to the PCC code. But the reality was we weren't in possession of the diary so we didn't
know what we were dealing with," says Sanderson. He was told they would not publish it without the permission of the
McCanns. "In hindsight it was clearly the wrong decision to publish," he says.
Leveson says he won't
criticise Sanderson for the job he was asked to do as a junior reporter. But understanding what thought processes junior staff
do is important.
NOTW reporter Daniel Sanderson
12.24 Sanderson says the diary had been translated from English to Portuguese. Thinking
back, he says, it was obvious it had come from the Police - he thinks there were comments written on certain pages. "The
whole thing caused me concern," he says, crestfallen. Did he share that with Edmondson?
"My thinking
was this story was going to be published with the co-operation of the McCanns. We were translating the document, we were checking
with the McCanns, that was my understanding throughout.
"Don't forget, I wasn't aware necessarily
what the newspaper was planning to do with the document once it was in the NOTW offices."
Sanderson says he
arranged for the document to be translated and he wrote up the story as it came through section-by-section. He checked the
translation against internet sources to ensure it was not a fake - such as the family meeting the Pope. 12.29
Sanderson says he believed the McCann's agent would be asked to consent at the end of the week. He says if they
did not give the green light - even after he had finished the story - it would not be published.
Jay asks how the
story was changed by editors after Sanderson had sent it to Ian Edmondson.
Sanderson says his commentary was taken
out, and they just published extracts from the diary with a short introduction on the front page.
Sanderson says
in his statement he wishes to give a public apology to the McCanns, having seen how it made them feel. I did feel very bad that my involvement in the story made Mrs McCann feel the way that it had. Why was it the wrong decision
to publish? Because they didn't have the permission. They didn't have Mrs McCann's permission to publish.
Leveson says it was an "intensely personal document."
"As you read it for the first time
did you think you had any business writing a word of it without making sure it was truly what they wanted?"
Sanderson said it wasn't in his "sphere of responsibility". He said Edmondson spoke to Clarence Mitchell,
the McCann's spokesman, every day. He did not have Mitchell's phone number. The first time he spoke to Mitchell was
three weeks ago, to say he would apologise. "That's not just for this inquiry. That's because I'm genuinely
sorry," he says. 12.36 "It was a high pressure environment to work in," Sanderson
says.
In order to work at the News of the World you have to give a certain part of your life over to it. It's very, very
hard work and the phone is constantly on. You can be called evenings, weekends. There's no point making any plans with
friends because if you do they are likely to be cancelled because the news editor wants you to go on a job. You can't
work at NOTW if you're not prepared to work hard.
Sanderson says he did not experience bullying.
He says it is "nonsense" that untrue stories appeared. "The first thing you did was you made sure it
was true."
The first thing you did when you received a tip was to ascertain whether the tip was true. You worked out whether the
story was appropriate for the News of the World. And then you went about proving that it was true. It was never that you sat
there thinking, let's make up this story about this person. The story had to be true.
There were
"numerous processes," Sanderson says, to stand up stories. "If you met someone, the first thing you did was
sit down and say what evidence have you got." Often this came as text messages, credit card bills, other witnesses and
signed affidavits. That information would then be passed up to the news editor and the editor.
Leveson insists
that NOTW stories contained comment. Sanderson is puzzled; his were always 'quite factual'. 12.45
Leveson takes a lunch break. Derek Webb, the private investigator, is giving evidence from 2pm.
By Lisa O'Carroll and Josh Halliday 15 December 2011
- Extract -
12.18pm: Daniel Sanderson
the News of the World reporter whose name appeared on the Kate McCann diary story in the News of the World, is up next.
McCann told the inquiry that publication of the diary left her feeling "violated".
Leveson inquiry: Daniel Sanderson gives evidence
12.19pm: Sanderson
explains how he got in touch with a Portuguese journalist and they discussed payment for a copy of the diary. Sanderson then
liaised with the news editor at the time, Ian Edmondson.
Edmondson hired a freelancer, Gerard Couzens, who is based
in Spain to travel to Portugal to meet the journalist and collect the diary.
Sanderson says he wasn't aware
at the time that the ultimate source was the Portuguese police.
12.22pm:
Sanderson says he knew the diary was "a private document".
Leveson asks if he was concerned about the
provenance of the diary.
Sanderson says:
"A diary is clearly a private document
but at the time this was being publically circulated around Portugal. What the newspapers planned to do with the diary once
we were in possession of that I didn't know that at the time."
12.23pm:
Sanderson says he thought the News of the World was not going to publish the diary without the McCanns' consent.
"It was clearly a private document I understood that, but at that stage we were not in possession of
the diary so we didn't know what we were dealing with. As I understand the News of the World did not intend to publish
it. I was told at the time that we would not be publishing the diary unless we had the express permission of the McCanns."
12.26pm: Jay again asks Sanderson if he was he not concerned about the provenance of the diaries.
Sanderson struggles to answer and says: "I was a junior reporter at the time."
Leveson intervenes
and says that because he is looking into press ethics "what junior members of staff thought is important".
12.28pm: Sanderson says he was concerned about the publication of the diaries:
"The whole thing caused me concern...
With hindsight, it was clearly the
wrong decision to publish."
12.29pm: Sanderson says
he believes the document came from the Portuguese police.
"It had obviously been translated
from Portuguese. I suppose thinking back it must have come from the Portuguese police. From memory when I was looking through
the documents, I think there were comments on certain pages I remember. There were notes and comments, it looked like some
kind of official document."
He he asked if has not concerned about the provenance; that they may not
have come from the McCanns?
"It's very very difficult for me to try explain but
my thinking throughout this whole process was this story was going to be published with the co-operation of the McCanns."
12.31pm: Sanderson explains how the diaries were translated piecemeal.
"We
were translating the document; we were writing the story; we were checking with the McCanns and they were happy with the story;
we would publish it.
I wasn't aware what the NoW planned to do with the diary once it was in the office.
We looked at the diary and for every entry we would cross-reference that with stories that may have appeared in the
newspapers."
12.34pm: Sanderson says he understood that
the story would only be published if the paper was given the "green light" by the McCanns' press secretary,
Clarence Mitchell.
12.36pm: Sanderson says his story was changed
entirely.
"I wrote a story based on the extracts of the diary and it was changed. All
my pieces were taken out and the diary or extracts of the diary were published in its entirety without any writing from me
… Does that make sense?"
12.38pm: Sanderson apologises
to Kate McCann.
"I have every intention of apologising to the McCanns ... I did
feel very bad that my involvement in the story had made Mrs McCann feel the way that she had.
Why was it the wrong
decision to publish? Because they didn't have permission to, they didn't have Mrs McCann's permission to publish
the story."
12.39pm: Leveson now intervenes and turns
to Sanderson to ask if he not think about the McCanns when he read a document that was "intensely personal".
"Did you think you had any permission writing a word of it, without making sure this truly was what they
wanted?"
Sanderson answers:
"Seeking their permission was not
in my sphere of responsibility."
Leveson says it can't just have been the responsibility of Ian
Edmondson, who Sanderson says he understood to be in regular contact with the McCanns. "To reveal the most intimate moments
may actually give rise to other considerations that might require more carful consent," the judge says.
Sanderson
replies:
"My understanding was that the news editor spoke to the McCanns' press
secretary on daily basis so in terms of getting the McCanns' consent that was a job for the news editor. The first time
I spoke to the McCanns' press secretary was three weeks ago when I heard how it made Mrs McCann feel and to tell him that
I intended to apologise. That's not just for this inquiry, it's because I'm genuinely sorry."
12.45pm: Sanderson on working at the News of the World:
"It
was a high pressure environment to work in. In order to work at the NoW, you have to give a certain part of your life over
to it. It is very very hard work. The phone is constantly on. You can be called on evenings, weekends. There's no point
making any plans with friends because if you do they are likely to be cancelled because the news editor wants you to go on
a job. It was very hard work."
He says he did not experience a "culture of bullying".
12.48pm: Sanderson now explains how a story would have been stood up
in the News of the World. He said he would have had to get proof such as bills, credit card statements or even affidavits
from tipsters to try and prove what they were telling the paper was actually true.
"The whole time you're
operating as a journalist you're considering the PCC code at every level," he says.
12.49pm:
The Leveson inquiry has now broken for lunch.
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Daniel
Sanderson's evidence, 15 December 2011
Leveson Inquiry: Transcript of Daniel Sanderson's
evidence Leveson Inquiry
Wednesday 15 December 2011
- Extract -
6
MR JAY: Thank you, Mr Myler.
7 The next witness
is Mr Sanderson.
8
MR DANIEL SANDERSON (affirmed)
9
Questions by MR JAY
10 MR JAY: First of all, make yourself comfortable,
11
Mr Sanderson, and provide us with your full name.
12 A. My name is Daniel Mark Sanderson.
13 Q. Thank you. You have provided a witness statement which
14
starts at our page [5]2723, which extends over four
15 pages. Have you
now signed a copy of that statement?
16 A. I have.
17 Q. And is
that the evidence that you give to this Inquiry?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q.
Can I ask you first about your career and about
20 yourself? You started,
I believe, at a regional
21 newspaper; is that right?
22
A. That's right, yeah.
23 Q. Just tell us in your own words your career path until
24 the News of the World?
25 A. I started my journalistic
career as a local newspaper
73
1 called the Worthing Herald. From there I went to
2 a company called Kent News and Pictures. I was at Kent
3
News and Pictures for about eight months and then
4 I moved to a company called
Ferrari Press Agency. From
5 Ferrari Press Agency, I was -- I started
work at the
6 News of the World on a Saturday. I worked on a Saturday
7 for about a year, and then was offered a full-time job
8
at the News of the World.
9 Q. Yes. And the year you're referring to is that the
10 Saturday job started, I think, towards the latter part
11
of 2006; is that correct?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. And then
the contract job in 2007, is that also correct?
14 A. That's correct.
15
Q. When did you become a staff reporter at the
16 News of the World?
17 A. That was in 2009, I believe.
18 Q. So in 2008, when the McCann
diaries story came out in
19 September, you were in a very junior position;
is that
20 correct?
21 A. I was. I was probably
the most junior reporter at the
22 newspaper.
23 Q.
Right. You tell us something about the background to
24 this McCann diary
story, that on 28 July 2008, the story
25 appeared in the Sun newspaper which
said that extracts
74
1 of Kate McCann's diary had emerged in Portugal; is that
2 correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4
Q. Did Mr Edmondson ask you to track down the person who
5 was in possession
of the diary and was leaking extracts
6 of it in Portugal?
7
A. That's correct.
8 Q. What did you do to track down the diary, as it were?
9 A. I phoned -- I made contact with two newspapers in
10
Portugal. I was advised that one particular journalist
11 was in possession
of a copy of the diary and made
12 contact with that person.
13
Q. Was that person a Portuguese journalist?
14 A. That's correct.
15
Q. Was there a discussion then about how much it might cost
16 to obtain
the diary from -- I think it was a woman, from
17 her?
18
A. I believe that formed part of the conversation, yes.
19 Q. Yes. But you, of course,
did not go out to Portugal
20 yourself, did you?
21
A. No.
22 Q. You say in your statement that you liaised with
23
Mr Edmondson, who was the news editor, was he?
24 A. That's correct.
25
Q. And were told to ask a freelance journalist called
75
1 Gerard Cousins, who was based in Spain, to travel to
2
Portugal to meet the journalist and collect the diary;
3 is that right?
4 A. That's correct.
5 Q. And it's at that point that your
involvement, as it
6 were, ceased until the diary arrived in the News of the
7 World's offices on Saturday, 6 September 2008; is that
8
correct?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Can I ask you this, though,
in relation to the diary:
11 were you aware that the ultimate source of the
diary was
12 the Portuguese police?
13 A. I wasn't
aware at the time, no.
14 Q. When, if at all, did you become aware of that fact?
15
A. I haven't -- I didn't speculate as to where the diary
16 came
from at the time. Yeah.
17 Q. So is your evidence you didn't know from where the diary
18 came at the time?
19 A. All I knew at the time
was that I'd read in the Sun
20 newspaper that there were extracts being
circulated
21 around Portugal, and obviously somebody was responsible
22 for circulating those extracts, so I was then asked to
23
make enquiries as to how that was the case and who was
24 in possession of
a copy of the diary.
25 Q. But you didn't believe, did you, that the McCanns had
76
1 put out the diary in some way?
2 A.
No, but I didn't speculate at the time where the diary
3 had come from.
It's the point I'm trying to make.
4 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You may not have speculated,
but it's
5 quite an interesting question. Were you at all
6 concerned about the provenance of the diary? We now
7
know that the Portuguese law does not permit all this
8 and that this diary
was obtained quite wrongfully. I'm
9 not suggesting you knew that
at the time, but
10 I appreciate you were doing the bidding of the news
11 editor, but were you concerned about the provenance of
12
the diary and the propriety of doing what you were being
13 asked to do, or
not; was it just a question of being
14 told what to do and you did it?
15 A. I don't want to give the impression that I just
16
flippantly, you know, was told to find out the source of
17 the diary and so
I did that. You know, a diary is
18 clearly a private document, but at
the time, as I say,
19 this was being publicly circulated around Portugal.
20 What the newspaper planned to do with the diary once we
21
were in possession of it I didn't know at the time.
22 Does that answer
your question?
23 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I understand that, and it may be that
24
copies are going around Portugal. But you did not
25 concern yourself,
you were simply doing the job that you
77
1 were asked to do?
2 A. No, it's
not -- every story I ever embarked on with the
3 News of the World I considered
things like privacy,
4 public interest and, you know, whether I was adhering
to
5 the PCC code. It was clearly a private document,
6
I understand that. But the reality of the situation is
7 that at that
stage we weren't in possession of the
8 diary, so we didn't know what
we were dealing with.
9 The other point that I think
it's very important to
10 make is that as I understand it, the News of
the World
11 had no intention of publishing that diary --
12
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'm only interested -- now you're
13 going
to -- were you told this at the time or is this
14 something again you learned
later?
15 A. Was I told what at the time?
16 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
About the intentions of the
17 News of the World?
18
A. No, no, I was told at the time that we would not be
19 publishing
the diary unless we had the specific express
20 permission from the McCanns.
21 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I see. We'll come back to some of
22
those questions, I'm sure Mr Jay will, when you've
23 actually read
the translation of the diary.
24 MR JAY: Were you told by Mr Edmondson before the diary
25 arrived in the offices of the News of the World, which
78
1 we know to have been Saturday, 6 September 2008, that
2
there was no intention of publishing a story based on
3 the diary until the
McCanns' express consent had been
4 contained?
5
A. That was my understanding, that there would be
6 a conversation between
the News of the World and the
7 McCanns to obtain their permission to publish
the diary.
8 Q. Were you told that by Mr Edmondson in those terms?
9 A.
Yes.
10 Q. You said that you weren't going to speculate as to the
11
source of the diary. You also said it was a private
12 document.
Did you think at all about the provenance of
13 the diary?
14
A. My understanding was that we were going to -- the
15 News of the World
was going to obtain permission from
16 the McCanns.
17
Q. But that's a separate issue, Mr Sanderson. There's the
18
issue of obtaining consent and there's the issue of the
19 provenance of
the diary. Were you thinking at all about
20 the possible provenance
of the diary?
21 A. Of course I was. My understanding of the situation was
22
that -- at the time -- it's very, very difficult to
23 speculate about
the provenance of the diary until it was
24 actually in the office, and, you
know, I was a junior
25 reporter at the time.
79
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Mr Sanderson, I'm not going to be
2
critical of you in relation to the decisions you've made
3 about this.
You were asked to do a job and you did it.
4 A. Yes.
5 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
But one of the things I am required
6 to think about is the culture, practice
and ethics of
7 the press, as I'm sure you are very, very aware.
8 A. Yes.
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Therefore, what junior members of
10 staff are thinking about is actually not unimportant,
11
and that's why you're being asked the questions.
12 A. I know, and I fully appreciate
that.
13 MR JAY: Can you assist us then with your answer? Because
14
we have a private diary and that diary has somehow
15 entered the public domain.
Those are the facts which
16 you know.
17 A. Yes,
absolutely, but as I've said before, they were
18 already in the public
domain circulating in Portugal and
19 I have to say I wasn't aware of the
judge's comments
20 that you're referring to at the time about it being,
you
21 know, a private document. I wasn't aware of that at the
22 time.
23 Q. I think you said earlier that you
were aware that it was
24 a private diary --
25 A.
I was aware it was a private diary. A diary is by
80
1 definition a private document. I accept that, and, you
2 know, with hindsight it was clearly the wrong decision
3
to publish.
4 Q. When you come back to the office after the weekend on
5
Tuesday, 9 September 2008, Mr Edmondson shows you a copy
6 of the diary.
It's all in Portuguese, so it's been
7 translated evidently from the
original?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Was there anything about
the diary which caused you to
10 speculate as to its source or was your state
of mind the
11 same as it had been previously?
12 A.
Thinking back, I mean it had obviously been translated
13 from English to Portuguese.
I mean, the source was --
14 I suppose, thinking back, it must have come from
the
15 Portuguese police, absolutely.
16 Q. Why
do you say that?
17 A. From memory, when I was looking through the documents,
18
I believe there were comments on certain pages, I think.
19 I can't remember.
20 Q. Which -- obviously you don't speak Portuguese --
21 A. No,
but there were notes and comments, and I don't know,
22 it looked like
some kind of official document, if that
23 makes any sense.
24
Q. So was it at that point that you realised that the
25 source was probably
the Portuguese police?
81
1 A. Oh yes, no absolutely, absolutely.
2 Q. Did that cause
you any concerns?
3 A. The whole thing caused me concern. The whole thing
4
caused me concern.
5 Q. Did you share those concerns with Mr Edmondson?
6
A. Did I share them with Mr Edmondson? It's very, very
7 difficult
for me to try and explain, but essentially my
8 thinking throughout this whole
process was that this
9 story was going to be published with the co-operation
of
10 the McCanns. Does that make any sense?
11
Q. Yes.
12 A. So, you know, we were translating the document, we were
13
writing the story, we were checking with the McCanns
14 that they were happy
with the story, it would be
15 published, the McCanns would know all about
it. That
16 was my understanding of the situation throughout.
17 Because, don't forget, I wasn't aware necessarily of
18
what the newspaper planned to do with the diary once it
19 was in the News
of the World offices.
20 Q. But once it was in the News of the World offices, the
21
position was that it was translated on a piecemeal
22 basis?
23
A. That's right.
24 Q. And the English translation came back to you; is that
25 correct?
82
1 A. That's right. I arranged for the diary to be translated
2
from Portuguese back into English, and as you can
3 probably imagine, that
was quite a laborious task.
4 Q. Indeed. And when the translation comes back, do you
5 start writing up the story?
6 A. That's right,
yeah, yeah. The translation was coming
7 through in sections and I was
writing the story during
8 the week.
9 Q. I think
it was your concern also to ascertain that the
10 diary was not a fake, so
you were checking the
11 translation against Internet sources; is that right?
12 A. That's right. We looked at the diary and for every
13
entry we would cross-check that, we would
14 cross-reference that with stories
that may have appeared
15 in the newspapers.
16
So, for example, I think there was an entry -- there
17 was one entry about
the McCanns planning to visit the
18 Pope on a certain date, and we -- I cross-checked
that
19 with reports that they had seen the Pope on that date.
20
Q. Yes. In relation to obtaining the agreement of the
21 McCanns,
your evidence is, and this is page 52725, under
22 question 6, just above the
lower hole punch:
23 "My understanding of the
situation was that
24 Mr Edmondson had sought permission to publish the diary
25 from Mr Mitchell. I acquired this understanding because
83
1 Mr Edmondson told me he was going to speak to
2
Mr Mitchell about the story at the end of the week."
3
So the conversation was likely to take place, if it
4 was going to take place,
on the Friday, 12 September; is
5 that right?
6 A.
That's my understanding, yes.
7 Q. But it's not your understanding, is it, that there
was
8 any earlier conversation between Mr Edmondson and
9
Mr Mitchell?
10 A. No. No.
11 Q. Had you completed the story,
at least from your end, by
12 the end of the week?
13
A. Yes.
14 Q. So it follows, does it, that by the time the story was
15
given up by you to Mr Edmondson, you didn't know one way
16 or the other
whether the McCanns' consent had been
17 obtained?
18
A. No, my understanding was that the McCanns' consent would
19 be
obtained.
20 Q. Well, your understanding, at its highest, was that the
21
McCanns would be asked through their agent whether they
22 consented.
Is that not the true position?
23 A. Sorry, can you repeat that?
24 Q.
Your understanding was, at its highest, that the
25 McCanns' agent would
be asked for consent at the end of
84
1 the week. Is that not correct?
2 A.
That's correct, yeah.
3 Q. But you didn't know one way or the other whether the
4 McCanns would give the green light to the publication of
5
this story, did you?
6 A. No, but my understanding was that if they hadn't given
7 the green light, then the story wouldn't have been
8
published.
9 Q. Your understanding was that if they didn't give the
10
green light, at a point after you provided the story to
11 Mr Edmondson, then
the story wouldn't be published?
12 A. That was my understanding, yes.
13
Q. Was the story, once you'd given it to Mr Edmondson, in
14 other
words your copy, between then and its publication,
15 how at all was it changed
by editors?
16 A. How was the story changed?
17 Q. Yes. Well,
your copy, how was it changed?
18 A. Well, from memory, I wrote a story based on the extracts
19 from the diary and it was changed -- it was changed --
20
what essentially happened was that all of my pieces were
21 taken out, and
the diary was just published in its
22 entirety, or extracts of the diary were
published in
23 their entirety without any -- without any writing from
24 me at all. Does that make sense?
25 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
So it wasn't a story that you'd
85
1 written at all. It just became the diary?
2
A. Basically, yeah.
3 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: And was that the bits that you'd
4 taken out of the diary or other bits?
5 A. No, no, that
-- so I filed this very long story that had
6 explanations of bits of the extracts
in, and the story
7 that appeared in the paper, all of those explanations
8 were taken out and it was just the diary. There was
9
a bit on the front page that I'd written, but ...
10 MR JAY: I see. So the front page
contained your --
11 A. It was like an introduction. It was an introduction.
12
Q. And then the rest of it were just extracts from the
13 diary; is that
right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. So your story, as it were, was somewhat
mutilated, if
16 I can --
17 A. It was changed,
yes.
18 Q. It was changed. Of course, as your statement makes
19
clear, and this is in relation to Mr Edmondson speaking
20 to Mr Mitchell,
you say:
21 "I didn't actually ever have the
conversation with
22 Mr Edmondson specifically that he had received
23 permission to publish from the McCanns."
24 A.
No.
25 Q. So this was because, presumably, you'd handed over the
86
1 story to him before he'd had any conversation with
2 Mr Mitchell; is that correct?
3 A. That's true.
Yeah, that's the case.
4 Q. You also say in your statement under paragraph 5, but
5 still on page 52725, you say:
6
"However, with hindsight, the decision to publish
7 Mrs McCann's diary
was clearly the wrong one. Having
8 read how the article made Mrs McCann
feel, I intend to
9 apologise to her for writing the story once I have given
10 evidence."
11
So you're giving that apology publicly and we
12 understand that.
But can you explain why it was clearly
13 the wrong decision, in your own words?
14 A. Yes, I have every intention of apologising to the
15
McCanns for my involvement in the story. I know it's
16 not your
question but that is my intention. I felt --
17 I did feel very bad that
my involvement in the story --
18 my involvement had made Mrs McCann feel the
way that it
19 had. So that's the first thing.
20
Why was it the wrong decision to publish? Because
21 they didn't
have the permission to. They didn't have
22 Mrs McCann's permission
to publish that story.
23 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Can we unpick that a bit, too? You
24 read this diary?
25 A. I did.
87
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Some of it is factual.
2 A. What
do you mean --
3 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Some of it is factual, she's
4
describing events that have happened?
5 A. Yes.
6 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
But it's also an intensely personal
7 document.
8
A. Yes.
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: As you read it for the first time,
10
did you think you had any business writing a word of it
11 without making sure
that this truly was what they
12 wanted?
13 A.
Seeking their permission, seeking the McCanns'
14 permission wasn't
in my sphere of responsibility.
15 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You see, it's all very well having
16 a conversation with somebody saying, "Is it all right?"
17 but a lot depends upon the tenor, and what's actually
18
happening, what's being done.
19 A. Mm.
20 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
And one can visualise somebody
21 saying, "Yes, well, if you're simply
going to say I kept
22 a diary, that's fine".
23
A. Sure.
24 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: But to reveal the most intimate
25
moments may actually give rise to other considerations
88
1 which require a rather more careful consent.
2
A. Absolutely. My understanding of the situation was that
3 the
news editor spoke to the McCanns' press secretary on
4 a daily basis, so
in terms of getting the McCanns'
5 consent or having those conversations,
that really was
6 a job for the news editor. I didn't have the McCanns'
7 mobile number, I didn't have the McCanns' press
8
secretary's mobile number. The first time I spoke to
9 the McCanns'
press secretary was about three weeks ago,
10 when I heard how the story had
made Mrs McCann feel and
11 I phoned him to tell him my intention to apologise.
12 That's not just for this Inquiry, that's because I'm
13
genuinely sorry.
14 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'm sure it is, but did you expect --
15 I appreciate that the word copy approval is never given,
16
but did you expect that in order to get a fully informed
17 consent, effectively
the McCanns would be shown what you
18 had written?
19
A. You would have expected that, yes.
20 MR JAY: Can I ask you some general questions about
culture
21 in the News of the World? How would you define the
22 culture in the News of the World when you were there,
23
Mr Sanderson?
24 A. It was a high pressure environment to work in.
25
Q. Yes? Anything more that you could tell us?
89
1 A. What would you like to know?
2 Q. Well --
3 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: How it manifested itself. How the
4
high pressure manifested itself.
5 A. In order to work at the News of the World, you have to
6 give a certain part of your life over to it. It's very,
7
very hard work. The phone is constantly -- the phone is
8 constantly
on. You can be called evenings, weekends.
9 There's no point making
any plans with friends because
10 if you do, they're likely to be cancelled
because the
11 news editor wants you to go on a job. It was very hard
12 work. It was very hard work.
13 MR JAY:
Did you feel you had to buy into that, as it were?
14 A. Yeah. I mean, you can't work
at the News of the World
15 if you're not prepared to work hard.
16 Q. Was there a culture of bullying in your view?
17 A. No. I didn't
experience that.
18 Q. You heard the question I asked Mr Myler based on
19
Mr Wallis' evidence about a certain conception of the
20 story driving
the direction into which it's going to go
21 and be written.
22
A. Mm.
23 Q. Do you feel that that was the position or not?
24 A.
No, I think that's nonsense.
25 Q. Why do you say that?
90
1 A. Because, it's like Mr Myler pointed out earlier on,
2
a story only ever appeared in the News of the World
3 if -- well, stories that
I worked on, the first thing
4 you did was you made sure it was true.
5 Q. Is that the first thing you did and the last thing you
6
did, or were there other things you did before
7 considering whether it was
appropriate to proceed with
8 a story?
9 A. You
talked about -- you talked about picking up the
10 phone and receiving a tip.
To take you through the
11 process, you know, the first thing you did when
you
12 received the tip was ascertain whether the tip was true.
13
I mean, there were other things, like, for example,
14 you picked up the phone
and you saw -- you worked out
15 whether the story was appropriate for the
16 News of the World, so you used your values and
17
experience of the newspaper to see whether that story
18 that the person is
phoning in with is appropriate to the
19 News of the World. And then
you went about proving that
20 it was true. It was never that you sat
there thinking,
21 "Oh, well, you know, let's make up this story about
this
22 person". The story had to be true.
23
Q. How did you go about verifying its truth?
24 A. Well, there were numerous processes
that you went
25 through to prove a story was true. Do you want to know
91
1 them or --
2 Q. Yes.
3
A. I mean, for example, with any story, if you met somebody
4 with a
story for the News of the World, the first thing
5 that you did was you sit
down and say, "Okay, you're
6 telling me this story. What evidence
have you got that
7 what you're telling me is the truth?" Okay?
So there
8 would be things like text messages. You're telling me
9 something, how can you then prove that that's true? Can
10
you show me text messages that prove what you're saying
11 is true?
Can you show me credit card bills? You said
12 you were somewhere, can
you prove that for me? Are
13 there other people who will back up your
story? Will
14 you sign an affidavit saying that what you're telling
me
15 is the truth?
16
There were so many levels that you went through to
17 prove that a story's
true, because you're the first
18 gatekeeper, if you like, and then that
story that you've
19 managed to establish is true then goes to the news
20 editor and then goes up to the editor.
21 Q. And
then in terms of compliance with the PCC code, in
22 particular privacy issues,
but that's not the only
23 issue, what process, if any, do you go through
to
24 satisfy yourself that those matters are being addressed?
25
A. Well, the whole time that you're operating as
92
1 a journalist, you have the PCC code -- you're
2
considering the PCC code at every level.
3 Q. You've given us a very precise process, if
I may say so,
4 in terms of verifying fact or verifying evidence.
5 A. I'm just trying to explain to somebody who might not
6
know the intricacies of the operation, that's generally
7 how you work.
8 Q. But in relation to the code, very often it's a balancing
9
exercise between rights of individuals and the public
10 interest.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Is that a process you were familiar with?
13
A. It's something that you have to think about as
14 a journalist
every day. You have to consider the PCC
15 code, and I think Colin --
Mr Myler said earlier it's
16 about personal standards, and you have to
maintain those
17 personal standards while you're operating as
18 a journalist.
19 Q. Were there occasions when, apart
from the case we've
20 been discussing, when you felt uncomfortable in
relation
21 to your obligations under the code on the one hand and
22 what you were being tasked to do in relation to
23
a particular story on the other?
24 A. No.
25 MR JAY: Okay.
Thank you, Mr Sanderson.
93
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Facts are one thing. What about
2
comment?
3 A. What about comment?
4 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes.
Newspaper stories do not merely
5 consist of a recitation of facts. They
are then the
6 subject of comment, which actually then provides the
7 focus of the story, doesn't it?
8 A. Yes.
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Would that comment be yours or one of
10
your more senior manager's?
11 A. I'm sorry, I don't follow.
12
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I want to know to what extent did you
13 include
within your stories comment and context which
14 was yours rather than the
facts that you'd actually
15 simply been given.
16
A. You got the facts and then you wrote the story.
17 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: With your own
comments to it?
18 A. I was quite factual when I wrote my stories. I didn't
19 really add comment.
20 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You didn't
add comment? Did you ever
21 see that comment was added?
22
A. Stories are sometimes changed by subeditors, so you'd
23 write
a story, you'd send that through to the news
24 editor, they'd send
it through to the subeditors, and it
25 would be changed to fit with the space
of the page.
94
1 But, you know.
2 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON:
But not in any sense to change the
3 slant of the story?
4
A. Not in my experience.
5 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I see. All right. Thank you.
6 MR JAY: Thank you, Mr Sanderson.
7
I think the next witness is due to start at 2.00, so
8 we can have a slight
longer --
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Very good. All right, thank you.
10
Thank you very much indeed.
11 (12.45 pm)
12
(The luncheon adjournment)
PDF download:
Thursday
15 December Transcript of Morning Hearing (pdf, 144KB)
Leveson Inquiry: Witness Statement
of Daniel Sanderson, 15 December 2011
Leveson Inquiry: Witness Statement of Daniel Sanderson
Leveson Inquiry
Thursday 15 December 2011
Statement
of Daniel Sanderson
In response to the numbered questions set out in the letter
from the Leveson Inquiry dated 2nd December 2011. 1. Please explain exactly how NoW obtained a
copy of Dr Kate McCann's diary: you are not required to name any sources, but you are required to identify the precise
provenance of the diary, explain the circumstances in which NoW received it, and confirm (if it be the case) that
it was of the original which had been seized by the Portuguese authorities.
A story appeared in The Sun
newspaper on July 28, 2008, which said that extracts of Kate McCann's diary had emerged in Portugal, covering the first
weeks after her daughter Madeleine disappeared.
In the article there were two extracts that Mrs McCann had made
in her diary.
I was asked by my news editor lan Edmondson to track down the person who was in possession of the
diary and was leaking extracts of it in Portugal.
After Mr Edmondson agreed, I called several newspapers in Portugal
to ascertain who had the diary.
I was put in touch with a journalist in Portugal who confirmed that they were in
possession of a copy of the diary and were willing to sell it to the NoW for, if my memory serves me correctly, 18,000 Euros.
I believe the newspaper agreed to pay something like 9,000 Euros immediately and the rest on publication of the story.
The purchase was authorised by Mr Edmondson.
I liaised with Mr Edmondson and was told to ask a freelance journalist
called Gerard Couzens, who is based in Spain, to travel to Portugal to meet the journalist and collect the diary.
From there my involvement ended until the diary reached the offices of the NoW.
My understanding is that Mr Edmondson
took control of the diary's delivery to our offices.
I believe that Mr Couzens met the journalist on Friday
September 5, 2008 in Portugal and paid her Euro 9,000 for a copy of the diary.
It's my understanding that Mr
Couzens delivered the diary to the NoW's offices on Saturday September 6, 2008.
I was first made aware that
the newspaper had the document when I returned to the office after the weekend on Tuesday September 9, 2008.
Mr
Edmondson showed me the diary that morning.
It did not appear to be the original diary, but a copy that had been
translated from English into Portuguese.
MOD100052723
----------------
2. Was the copy NoW obtained in English or Portuguese?
The NoW copy was in Portuguese. 3. What steps, if any, did you take to establish its authenticity and that it was a document which you were
entitled to possess?
Over the course of the working week commencing on Tuesday September 9th 2008, I organised
for the diary to be translated back into English using a London-based translation service (I cannot recall the name).
It was a laborious task and the final section was completed on Friday September 12, 2008 - two days before the story was
published.
I spent the week writing the story as and when sections had been successfully translated.
In
terms of its authenticity, we approached the diary from the viewpoint that it was a fake. We had to cross check every entry
against our online cuttings system to check that each entry was correct and the diary was genuine.
For example,
if there was an entry where it said the McCanns had met The Pope that day, I had to check in cuttings that newspapers had
reported that the McCanns had indeed met The Pope on the corresponding date.
My understanding of the situation
was that the news editor, Mr Edmondson, would also confirm with the McCann’s press spokesman Clarence Mitchell that
the diary was genuine. 4. What was paid for the diary and to whom?
I believe 18,000
Euros were paid to the Portuguese journalist (the P J). It was paid in two parts; 9,000 Euros up front and 9,000 Euros on
publication. I can't be certain of this figure, but it is certainly a fairly accurate estimate. I am aware of the approximate
figure because that is the price that had been agreed with the PJ in my initial phone conversations with the PJ. The PJ set
the price, which I had communicated to Mr Edmondson. Mr Edmondson then authorised both payments to the source. The PJ then
contacted me after publication to organise the second payment, which was authorised by Mr Edmondson. 5.
By what reasoning process did you and others at News International (whom the Inquiry requires you to identify) deem it appropriate
to publish extracts from the diary given its the obvious privacy implications, including the fact that you knew or must have
know that the diary was confidential (if it is your position that you did not know this, please explain its basis)?
In order to answer this question, I need to explain how a national newspaper works. As a reporter, I reported to my line
manager Mr Edmondson, the news editor or assistant editor (news) as was his official title. Mr Edmondson reported to the editor,
Colin Myler, and other senior executives.
Once I had obtained the diary, obviously there were a number of discussions
between myself and Mr Edmondson as to how the piece should be written sensitively.
MOD100052724
-----------------------
Then after I had written it, the decision to publish ultimately rested with Mr Myler.
I feel that it is appropriate to note that in my role as a reporter, I did not have any say as to whether the story
was published.
But I think in terms of considering it being appropriate to publish Mrs McCann's diary and the
obvious considerations over privacy, the view taken by senior executives was that there were all sorts of false allegations
being made about the McCanns and they really were being pilloried in the press, that this account gave a true picture of the
McCanns and dispelled some of the lies being written about them.
The NoW had always been wholly supportive of the
McCanns' search for their daughter. Two weeks after she went missing in 2007, the newspaper teamed up with wealthy businessmen
to pledge £1.5 million to anyone who could help with information leading to Madeleine's safe return.
However,
with hindsight, the decision to publish Mrs McCann's diary was clearly the wrong one. Having read how the article
made Mrs McCann feel, I intend to apologise to her for writing the story once I have given evidence.
Although I
feel it is important to point out that I had no say in whether or not the diary was published. 6. Why did
you not contact the Dr Kate McCann in advance of publication in order to check the facts and in particular to obtain her consent
to publication?
It was clear to me that we could not publish the story without the McCanns permission.
My understanding of the situation was that Mr Edmondson had sought permission to publish the diary from Mr Mitchell.
I acquired this understanding because Mr Edmondson told me that he was going to speak to Mr Mitchell about the story
at the end of the week.
It is only natural Mr Edmondson sought that permission because he had an on going relationship
with Mr Mitchell. As I understand it, they spoke almost daily on the phone to talk about stories connected to the case.
[I have only spoken to Mr Mitchell once about three weeks ago to inform him of my intention to apologise to the McCanns
for my involvement in the story that upset Mrs McCann.]
I didn't actually ever have the conversation with Mr
Edmondson specifically that he had received permission to publish from the McCanns.
I assumed that because that
is what he said he intended to do and the story was published, that he had received permission from Mr Mitchell.
However, following publication, News International released a statement saying they published the extracts in the belief
held in good faith that that they had permission to do so.
MOD100052725
--------------------------
They said it was now clear that their belief was misplaced and that Kate neither approved
of nor knew that the extracts were to be published.
I believe that the newspaper agreed to make a donation to be
used in the search for Madeleine and published a correction on September 21, 2008.
It is clear from that statement
that Mr Myler believed that the newspaper had permission to publish by the McCanns when it had not.
I was not responsible
for contacting Mr Mitchell to obtain permission to publish Mrs McCann's diary. 7. What consideration
if any was given by you to any public interest considerations; and if so, what were they?
As I said in
response to question five, I think the view at the NoW was that there were a lot of lies being published about the McCanns
and this was a supportive piece that put the record straight.
It was part of the Portuguese police case into the
disappearance of Madeleine and it was an account of how Mrs McCann was feeling after her daughter vanished. 8. What legal advice, if any, did you take on any of foregoing issues?
As I understand it, Mr Edmondson,
Mr Myler and other senior executives would have taken advice from Tom Crone, News International's former legal affairs
manager. In his absence, they would have sought advice from Justin Walford, The Sun's legal manager.
I wasn't
party to any of the legal conversations concerning publication. 9. Please outline any discussions you had,
if any, at sub-editorial and editorial level on the foregoing issues.
I liaised with Mr Edmondson
about how the piece should be written in terms of sensitivity and the evidence I had gathered over its authenticity.
It is normal for a reporter to discuss with his news editor how he (the news editor) wants a story written.
It
was my job to seek to determine that the diary was genuine and ensure that it was written as sensitively as possible.
...
Daniel Sanderson
....12.2001
MOD100052725
--------------------------
PDF download:
Thursday 15 December
Witness Statement of Daniel Sanderson (pdf, 174KB)
NOTW reporter apologises for Kate McCann
diaries story, 15 December 2011
NOTW reporter apologises for Kate McCann diaries story
The Telegraph
Daniel Sanderson told the Leveson Inquiry he is "genuinely sorry" for his role in the publication of Kate
McCann's private diaries in the News of the World.
By Matthew Holehouse 1:41PM
GMT 15 Dec 2011
Mr Sanderson said he was the most junior reporter at the newspaper when he was asked by
Ian Edmondson, the news editor, to obtain a copy of Mrs McCann's diaries. They had been leaked by the Portuguese police
to local journalists.
Sanderson obtained a copy for 3,000 euros, with a further 20,000 to be paid to the source
after the story was printed.
He said he was acting under the belief that Edmondson would seek permission from Clarence
Mitchell, the family's spokesman, before printing the extracts.
Sanderson said he spoke to Mr Mitchell for
the first time three weeks ago, to tell him he wished to publicly apologise for the story.
"That's not
just for this inquiry. That's because I'm genuinely sorry,"
"I did feel very bad that my involvement
in the story made Mrs McCann feel the way that it had. Why was it the wrong decision to publish? Because they didn't have
the permission. They didn't have Mrs McCann's permission to publish," he said.
Mrs McCann told the
inquiry she felt "violated" by the story. "I’d written these words at the most desperate time of my life,
and it was my only way of communicating with Madeleine".
Sanderson told Lord Justice Leveson the notion the
News of the World printed untrue stories was "nonsense".
"The first thing you did when you received
a tip was to ascertain whether the tip was true. It was never that you sat there thinking, let's make up this story about
this person. The story had to be true," he said. Journalists would seek evidence such as text messages and credit card
bills to support a source's claims, he said.
He told the inquiry into press ethics the paper was a "high
pressure environment" but he did not encounter bullying.
"In order to work at the News of the World you
have to give a certain part of your life over to it. It's very, very hard work and the phone is constantly on. There's
no point making any plans with friends, because if you do they are likely to be cancelled because the news editor wants you
to go on a job," he said.
