Jump to content

Rebekah Brooks cleared, Andy Coulson found guilty........


Recommended Posts

Mac - he lived practically across the road from me. I'd often see the slimy fecker and the other "gentlemen" of the press camped outside his front door. His house may have gone up for sale two years ago when the case first came to court but I think I can remember quite clearly when the removal vans arrived.
That certainly seems to be the view. Although getting a jury to find the desired verdict can't always be guaranteed, finding a prosecutor and/or witnesses that play ball definitely can be done. Like most people I'm astounded that both Mr and Mrs Brooks were found not guilty. There's no way you can be that high up in a newspaper and not know how stories are being sought and found. I'd totally understand if Coulson feels like the hog roast!
Yes, he seems to have been made the scapegoat because he lied to David Cameron about his involvement in phone hacking when he hired him. Obviously, he's guilty as hell but I fail to see how Rebecca Brooks couldn't have possibly known about what was going on at the paper. She was shagging Coulsen at the time and they worked together very closely. She must have known.

I can't get excited about the whole phone-hacking palaver anyway. Most people (the cops included) didn't think phone hacking was a crime at all, and there are lots of other perfectly legal ways of getting hold of people's private information and splashing it all over the front pages. Even the payoffs for coppers etc. in return for stories are hardly big news - it's been around for ever, and whilst it's definitely not legal I wouldn't class it alongside proper corruption in terms of seriousness.


The Brooks trial was great entertainment (including for the lawyers involved, with the added satisfaction for them of being paid handsomely) but it was never actually important.

Phonehacking blew up because of the Dowler case, full stop.


Would the majority of the public have been up in arms about listening to to the intimate affairs of Boris Johnson, Heather Mills, Prezza, Gazza or The Royals? Would they bollocks! Half the population pay to lap that shit up every day!

So many of the general public have a perverse sense of right and wrong.


One day cackling over Gazza having fallen off the wagon again; the next day 'outraged' at the source of the information.



Does the addict not share some responsibility - along with the dealer?

I was reading the Independent at lunchtime and they said that just about all of the hacking incidences presented at the trial occurred under Coulson's watch. The one exception that was under Brookes' editorial reign, she was conveniently away on holiday at the time.


Make of that what you will.

"Doesn't make it right though."


Obviously. And as it turns out some of it was actually criminal, but still hardly crime of the century. Re Millie Dowler, it was the hacking equivalent of doorstepping the family of a murder victim, which still goes on of course. The point being that it is not the illegality that matters, but the lack of respect/decency. And that's where the hypocrisy comes in - many consumers don't really care about decency or respect in journalism where the victims are unsymapthetic and they want to read the stories.

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Doesn't make it right though.


Didn't you used to work for a red-top? At any point did you get wind that the paper would go to illegal efforts to get stories? Phone-hacking or anything else? Because anyone I've spoken reckons it's rife and you'd have to live under a rock to not be aware of dodgy goings on.


Yet people still work there and people still buy it.


People suck. *Bob* is spot on with the hypocrisy on the part of most of the public - they want to devour endless celeb-driven drivel yet cry foul when they find out about poor Hugh Grant's phone being hacked. It's as much push from consumers for this dirge that drives the media to ever desperate lengths.


Anyone complaining about this looks at that Daily Mail website sidebar of shame? You're partly to blame for all this. Stop looking at pictures of Kardashians and read a book.

They did.


But the point remains. For many - whether they deserved to get the full weight of the law thrown at them hinged upon whether there was sympathy for the victim (or mostly one victim in particular in this case) - not on a point of law or 'right' and 'wrong'.


If the victims had just been Max Clifford, Heather Mills and George Galloway a ?100m trial would not have been on the cards.


Great to see some unlikeable people squirm in court, but there's a slightly grotty level of schadenfreude, hypocrisy and double standards in play which clearly hasn't occurred to Mr & Mrs Bloke in Street - who've happily spent the last ten years tittering over a picture of Sienna Miller's tits as photographed through a long lens.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I had a leaky toilet cistern and Niko came out the same day and not only fixed the leak but thoroughly cleaned off the years of calcium build-up. His attention to detail was matched by his kind humanity. The result was a completely renovated toilet which has never worked more efficiently as well as 'service with a smile'. MANY THANKS NIKO!!!  
    • I am trying to find out about people's experiences of the 4+ and 7+ assessments. I am a teacher and have a wealth of experience tutoring for theses assessments (including my own son), but it's always good to keep on top of things as they always make tweaks to them. TIA! 
    • "Sep, you don't even live here."   ???
    • "You have no idea why"   To be fair Sue, it's blindingly obvious to anyone who has a conversation with anyone who isn't a Corbyn supporter. And even some who liked Corbyn (like me initially) found him somewhat flaky even at his most popular But let's say you are right and I have NO idea why anybody might not vote for him. They still didn't vote for him. He lost two elections. The second one badly (and strongly predicted but the stubborn old goat wouldn't budge so we we were stuck with Johnson and another 3 million PMs in the 5 years that followed) So even with ZERO evidence, we have our eyes and ears and brains But we do have evidence   https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/27022-their-own-words-why-voters-abandoned-labour
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...