VIDEO - Leveson Inquiry (Update Dec 21) David Pilditch - Diary - Colin Myler & Dan Sanderson

frencheuropean wrote:http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf477


24. It was only months later, in July 2008 that Portugal’s Attorney General formally closed the
investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance. Under the Portuguese system, the
authorities released the official police file - more than 10,000 documents including
photographs, official reports and witness statements including those of the McCanns.
Through the release of those documents and subsequent Jegal actions in Portuga! it is now a
matter of public record that the reports I was writing between September 2007 and January
2008 were truthful and accurate,

i082948v6A 5

very interesting

IAMBAZZA wrote:

frencheuropean wrote:http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-David-Pilditch.pdf477


24. It was only months later, in July 2008 that Portugal’s Attorney General formally closed the
investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance. Under the Portuguese system, the
authorities released the official police file - more than 10,000 documents including
photographs, official reports and witness statements including those of the McCanns.
Through the release of those documents and subsequent Jegal actions in Portuga! it is now a
matter of public record that the reports I was writing between September 2007 and January
2008 were truthful and accurate,

i082948v6A 5

very interesting

So its untrue until the police files are released and then its true. Can the McCanns sue for uncooborated stories even though, with the passage of time, they are shown to be true?

An interesting watch imo.

Goes up the creek at around 13 mins but back on track shortly afterwards

OP Updated with all videos for future reference

David Pilditch

Thanks HiDeHo,

I listened to the first ten minutes and was bored to tears......sorry.

What on earth was the point of this interview? Nothing to do with phone-hacking or why Pilditch was being interviewed . If it was to prove he libelled
the McCanns, why not come straight to the point and quote the libellous remarks?

Panda wrote:Thanks HiDeHo,

I listened to the first ten minutes and was bored to tears......sorry.

What on earth was the point of this interview? Nothing to do with phone-hacking or why Pilditch was being interviewed . If it was to prove he libelled
the McCanns, why not come straight to the point and quote the libellous remarks?

They wouldn't want the viewing public to start wondering if there was truth in the remarks.

This so called phone hacking saga has well and truly been taken over by the dramas of the mccanns! Anyone else agree?

What is it all about and who is truly behind it all?

AnnaEsse wrote:

Panda wrote:Thanks HiDeHo,

I listened to the first ten minutes and was bored to tears......sorry.

What on earth was the point of this interview? Nothing to do with phone-hacking or why Pilditch was being interviewed . If it was to prove he libelled
the McCanns, why not come straight to the point and quote the libellous remarks?

They wouldn't want the viewing public to start wondering if there was truth in the remarks.

Morning AnnaEsse, another public enquiry costing God knows how much and an insult to the likes of us trying to make sense of what is going on. A one and a half hour interview, it"s like the Spanish Inquisition to the person being interviewed.!!!!

mariang wrote:This so called phone hacking saga has well and truly been taken over by the dramas of the mccanns! Anyone else agree?

What is it all about and who is truly behind it all?

Morning mariang, I was under the impression this was a public enquiry.....my mistake, it"s another cover-up and a case of the McCanns stealing the
thunder of genuine complainants like they do when they keep on jumping on other people"s bandwagons, they have no shame.

good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

I hope fervently that there's something in that!

good morning tein,
i believe fervently that there is a great deal in that,
simply because i believe in karma...what ever happens in life,
we cannot aviod karma.

blossom45 wrote: good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

If that's the case, it's too late now as there was some pretty credible reporting in the early days. Sorry but I don't share your optimism.

good morning dazedandconfused,
because we all have differing views makes for good discussion,
and yes...there were many negative reports in early days,
but let's bear in mind that they have been whoosed from the general view,
not many people reading nowadays sees anything other than the mccann love fest.

blossom45 wrote: good morning dazedandconfused,
because we all have differing views makes for good discussion,
and yes...there were many negative reports in early days,
but let's bear in mind that they have been whoosed from the general view,
not many people reading nowadays sees anything other than the mccann love fest.

Yes, you may have a point. They've certainly been whooshed.

dazedandconfused wrote:

blossom45 wrote: good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

If that's the case, it's too late now as there was some pretty credible reporting in the early days. Sorry but I don't share your optimism.

Hi dazed, I'm afraid I too am pessimistic. In fact I would go as far as to say the writing is on the wall in great big letters, and I have zero expectations of the gruesome twosome ever facing justice.

pennylane wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

blossom45 wrote: good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

If that's the case, it's too late now as there was some pretty credible reporting in the early days. Sorry but I don't share your optimism.

Hi dazed, I'm afraid I too am pessimistic. In fact I would go as far as to say the writing is on the wall in great big letters, and I have zero expectations of the gruesome twosome ever facing justice.

Their God knows the Truth.

As, probably, does Fr. Pacheco.

I should think they've already given the thumbs up to Cerberus.

skymarkwhite Mark White
First 3 months of the #Leveson inquiry have cost the taxpayer more than £855,000 according to figures released by the inquiry
12 minutes ago Favorite Undo Retweet Reply

The End Is Nigh wrote:

pennylane wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

blossom45 wrote: good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

If that's the case, it's too late now as there was some pretty credible reporting in the early days. Sorry but I don't share your optimism.

Hi dazed, I'm afraid I too am pessimistic. In fact I would go as far as to say the writing is on the wall in great big letters, and I have zero expectations of the gruesome twosome ever facing justice.

Their God knows the Truth.

As, probably, does Fr. Pacheco.

I should think they've already given the thumbs up to Cerberus.

That's a whole different kettle of serpents, and I totally agree, TEIN!

chrissie wrote: skymarkwhite Mark White
First 3 months of the #Leveson inquiry have cost the taxpayer more than £855,000 according to figures released by the inquiry
12 minutes ago Favorite Undo Retweet Reply

morning chrissie, Yes I wondered how much this is all going to cost and what exactly it was meant to acheive. Your wouldn"t think Britain is officially in a
mild recession would you when Government money is being squandered on this and the Madeleine review.

Last auditions Levesons inquiry, 21 afternoon : Pilditch ( short last question) Flanagan, Fagge ( page 18):

http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Witness-Statement-of-Padraic-Flanagan.pdf

..........................................................................................................................................................................
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
1 (Pages 1 to 4)
Page 1
1
2 (2.05 pm)
3 MR JAY: Sir, the next witness is Mr Flanagan.
4 MR DINGEMANS: I had one question I understood I was going
5 to be able to ask?
6 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Of course you did.
7 MR DINGEMANS: That's all right. I know it's not very
8 valuable, but I'd still like to ask it.
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Well, that's a good trailer.
10 Questions by MR DINGEMANS
11 MR DINGEMANS: Can I take you to the article of 1 December
12 2007, for you sir the reference 1645. You were asked
13 what was your contribution to this article and on quick
14 scanning through, you couldn't work it out. Can you
15 read the fourth paragraph up from the bottom?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Does that help answer that particular question?
18 A. Yes. I think it was a meeting between the British
19 ambassador and police officers at the head of the
20 investigation and the Portimao District Attorney at the
21 police headquarters in Faro.
22 Q. Just in case people have no understanding of how joint
23 headlines and bylines work, does that mean, because your
24 name appears on the top, that this is like a sort of
25 lawyer's letter with two names at the bottom, or legal
Page 2
1 advice that is prepared by counsel, that is prepared and
2 signed and not altered, or do you just file separately
3 and it gets put together back in London?
4 A. The first name on the byline is normally the person who
5 is putting it all together. My role was as I stated.
6 I went to the airport, I'd literally just landed and it
7 was near the police station so I went straight there and
8 I just stood there and witnessed what was going on, and
9 all I did was relay that, I can't remember, either to
10 the news desk or to the reporter, but it was just simply
11 what I saw which was again police officers wouldn't talk
12 to me, but I saw the people involved leaving.
13 MR DINGEMANS: Thank you very much.
14 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Thank you. Mr Dingemans, you were
15 probably right, but it's important to be clear. Thank
16 you.
17 MR JAY: Thank you, Mr Pilditch. It's Mr Flanagan next.
18 MR PADRAIC FLANAGAN (affirmed)
19 Questions by MR JAY
20 MR JAY: Make yourself comfortable, please, Mr Flanagan.
21 Your full name?
22 A. Padraic John Flanagan.
23 Q. Thank you. I hope you'll find in the bundle in front of
24 you under tab 1 your witness statement, which is signed
25 and dated 12 December of this year, and appended to it
Page 3
1 is a statement of truth. Is that right?
2 A. It is.
3 Q. Is this the evidence which you stand by, as it were?
4 A. I do.
5 Q. You have been a journalist, you tell us, for 21 years.
6 You followed a typical career path, if I may say so,
7 through regional press and then you joined the national
8 press, indeed the Daily Telegraph in the year 2000 where
9 you have stayed ever since; is that right?
10 A. The Daily Express.
11 Q. Pardon me, the Daily Express. You now are a senior news
12 reporter at the Daily Express, is that so?
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. You tell us in paragraph 2 that you were the third
15 journalist sent by the Express to Portugal to cover this
16 story. You remained there for more than a month. You
17 visited Portugal four times, usually fortnightly spells,
18 to cover the story.
19 A lot of what you say has already been covered by
20 the previous witness, but did you have any sources on
21 the ground in Portugal which differed from those that
22 Mr Pilditch was talking to us about?
23 A. I don't know all Mr Pilditch's sources, but I was
24 checking this morning my records and I had between 50
25 and 60 names and numbers of people that I called
Page 4
1 regularly on this story. Not all of them in Portugal.
2 Some of them, the extended families back in Britain, but
3 there was a wide variety of sources that I used in
4 Portugal.
5 Q. In relation to the Portuguese police, can we identify
6 who your sources were? You had no one in the police
7 itself, since they officially could not speak to you, is
8 that so?
9 A. Yeah. It was impossible to get any official comment
10 from the police.
11 Q. Right, so sources around the police, we've heard of two
12 journalists and a translator. Were they the individuals
13 who were effectively your sources as well?
14 A. Probably more than two journalists, I think. There were
15 lots of TV, radio and newspaper crime specialists who
16 were -- who we made contact with and became friends
17 with, and we helped them on the British side of the
18 story and they helped us on the Portuguese side of the
19 story.
20 Q. Right, but did they have contacts within the Portuguese
21 police?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you. Can I ask you, please, about specific
24 stories you wrote. I think the first of these is
25 paragraph 11, 25 October 2007, which is page 31664.
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
2 (Pages 5 to 8)
Page 5
1 You'll find this in the bundle you have probably under
2 tab 4.
3 A. Yeah.
4 Q. "Police want answers to 14 questions."
5 This is dated 25 October 2007. Can we be clear who
6 the source is for this story? The answer may be found
7 seven lines from the bottom.
8 A. I think this story originated actually in one of the
9 Portuguese newspapers and it was written by a journalist
10 I became friends with and I called him up and asked him
11 where he'd got it from and he said he was shown these 14
12 questions in a document that was to be sent over to
13 British detectives, and said it was absolutely true.
14 That's where it came from.
15 Q. So when you say "a source within the Policia
16 Judiciaria" --
17 A. Yeah, that's via him, via the journalist.
18 Q. So the journalist who has written the piece in the
19 Portuguese paper, that was his or her source, and then
20 you're setting this out here in your piece; is that
21 right?
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. Can I ask you, about ten lines from the top of the
24 story:
25 "Investigators believe [do you have that?] that
Page 6
1 members of the party -- dubbed the Tapas Nine after the
2 Spanish themed restaurant they were in when Madeleine
3 disappeared -- may have been involved in the crime."
4 Where did you get that from?
5 A. From the same source.
6 Q. How was it put to you?
7 A. I was talking to him as I often did about the latest
8 developments that he'd heard and, telling me about this
9 dossier of questions, he also told me about -- that he
10 thought the members of -- the friends that were with the
11 McCanns at the time of the disappearance may have
12 been -- may have had something to do with that.
13 Q. Anything more specific or was it at that level of
14 generality?
15 A. Yeah, it was that general.
16 Q. How did you believe that this piece, this story, if at
17 all, could be stood up if it ever came to litigation?
18 A. Well, it would be very difficult to do that. I think it
19 needs to be said that I wasn't sort of working alone, as
20 it were, in Praia da Luz, scratching around for
21 something to send back. These stories were all the
22 result of conversations with the news desk about the
23 strength of them and the sources, and a view was taken
24 whether to proceed or to drop it.
25 I mean, I'm not trying to evade responsibility, but
Page 7
1 I had to make it clear to my superiors, you know, the
2 strength of the story and whether it was something that
3 they would want me to write up later in the day.
4 Q. So is this your evidence: you did make it clear to the
5 news desk that you felt that it would be difficult to
6 stand up this story if it were ever tested?
7 A. Well, I illustrate -- I don't think I would put it in
8 those stark terms, because at the time, working in
9 Portugal surrounded by every rival newspaper who were
10 working on the same stories, it was my duty to tell my
11 desk what the sources were and where the stories were
12 coming from, but I didn't feel as though it was my sole
13 decision to establish, you know, the -- whether I could
14 stand up in a court of law and defend it.
15 Q. No. But in order to assist their decision, did you
16 share your misgivings about the ability to stand this
17 story up with the news desk or not?
18 A. No. I think once you'd told them the sources and where
19 it had come from, then they could draw their own
20 conclusions.
21 Q. Mm. How would they do that?
22 A. Well, by reading what I've written.
23 Q. Right. So you felt that it would be obvious to the news
24 desk, given that you had misgivings about being able to
25 stand this story up, you needn't spell it out to the
Page 8
1 news desk, they would make the same deduction; is that
2 the position?
3 A. Broadly. Working in Portugal, the first question you
4 asked yourself wasn't: can I stand this up? It was:
5 what can I find today? What's the best material that
6 I can offer the news desk and keep up with my rivals and
7 do what I'm being paid to do? Considerations of the
8 law, you know, were always going to be further down the
9 line that day for my superiors.
10 Q. That's a very frank answer, Mr Flanagan, but are you
11 telling us that the predominant consideration, given all
12 the pressures you were under to produce a story, was to
13 produce really the best you could and then leave it to
14 others to worry about the legal niceties?
15 A. Well, it's quite a stark way of putting it. You would
16 be discussing with the news desk through the day what
17 you were doing, what was happening in Portugal, what
18 were the likely best lines of the day. I mean, bear in
19 mind that although we're concentrating on single stories
20 here, you know, it's highly likely that when I was
21 writing this, I might have been writing a front page
22 story and a spread inside the paper, so there would be
23 an awful lot of material to work through.
24 So it -- what I'm trying to say is that there were
25 constant discussions and I felt that the desk were fully
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
3 (Pages 9 to 12)
Page 9
1 aware of what I was doing and the strength of the
2 material.
3 Q. So judgments about whether to publish in the light of
4 obligations under the PCC code, clause 1, the accuracy
5 requirement, would be for others, not for you; is that
6 what you're saying?
7 A. Ultimately, yes.
8 Q. But didn't you feel that you were under an obligation
9 under the code and generally to, if I can put it in
10 these terms, worry about the accuracy of the story?
11 A. Yes, you would, but you'd also be conscious of trying to
12 do the best that you could to stand up as much as you
13 could, where you could, but, you know, working in
14 a foreign country under their legal conditions proved
15 very difficult.
16 Q. Yes. I think that eloquently speaks to the difficulties
17 you were under and demonstrated why it would be
18 difficult, moreover, to stand up the story, but then
19 there's the sort of anterior question: why write the
20 story at all?
21 A. It would be quite a brave reporter to call the desk and
22 say, "I'm not really sure about this, I'm not going to
23 send anything back today".
24 Q. Yes.
25 A. Because --
Page 10
1 Q. Sorry, please continue.
2 A. -- I felt that they could see, if they had the copy, the
3 strength of the material and they could take a view on
4 it.
5 Q. We're interested in culture and practices. "It would
6 take a very brave reporter". Are you able to elaborate
7 on that a little bit for us, please, Mr Flanagan? It
8 may be so obvious it goes without saying.
9 A. As you mentioned before, the story was extraordinary,
10 this snowball going down the incline, as you said. Bear
11 in mind that every newspaper, TV, radio reporters were
12 there, there was a huge appetite in the UK for this
13 story and there was a huge appetite for this story on
14 the news desk and the -- with the editor of the
15 Daily Express.
16 Q. When it all went pear-shaped, if I can put it in that
17 way, a letter before action, I think there was a claim
18 form, it doesn't matter, there was a decision not to
19 defend the case on liability. Were you surprised or
20 not?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Because?
23 A. I think at the Express they're more likely to want to
24 avoid massive legal bills and -- I just get the feeling
25 that they're more likely to settle cases out of court
Page 11
1 rather than fight cases.
2 Q. Even though the damages in this case were mega, weren't
3 they?
4 Okay. I'll ask you about one other piece,
5 Mr Flanagan, at 31619, 22 January 2008. Do you have
6 that one?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. "The manhunt by Madeleine investigators prompted by
9 a drawing of a possible abductor is designed to divert
10 suspicion from Kate and Gerry McCann, the Portuguese
11 police believe.
12 "Last night, sources in the Policia Judiciaria
13 revealed reports of a dishevelled man lurking around
14 Praia da Luz were investigated months ago and found to
15 be groundless.
16 "One stormed: 'The purpose of this latest exercise
17 by the McCanns is the same as always. It's another
18 diversionary tactic.'"
19 So again the "sources in the PJ", that was the
20 journalist, not a policeman; is that correct?
21 A. Well, it was a policeman source of the journalist.
22 Q. Was this piece based on anything other than an article
23 in the Portuguese press?
24 A. I think it was -- I can't recall exactly, but during the
25 months that we were there a series of likenesses were
Page 12
1 produced, which always generated a series of stories,
2 and this looks as though this is another release of
3 a likeness presumably based on Gail Cooper's description
4 to an FBI-trained artist.
5 But, yeah, the retired PJ inspector, Moita Flores,
6 was often on Portuguese TV and I think that would be
7 where his quote came from.
8 Q. Did you feel under pressure to deliver? Almost
9 a continual stream of this sort of story? Otherwise in
10 one sense you weren't doing what was required of you?
11 A. Yeah. For the Daily Express to send overseas, spend
12 that money on a news operation in a foreign country, is
13 considerable and you're sent there to produce stories.
14 It's quite clear that's what you're there to do, rather
15 than sort of investigate yourself and decide whether
16 there's anything worth writing about.
17 Q. You tell us in paragraph 19 of your statement there was
18 almost -- or there was constant dialogue between the
19 news desk and reporters. Did the news desk ever come
20 back to you with this sort of message: "Either we or the
21 editor is concerned about a particular piece; could you
22 stand it up for us, please, explain the reliability of
23 your source?" Was there ever that sort of conversation?
24 A. I don't remember a conversation like that, but there
25 might have been.
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
4 (Pages 13 to 16)
Page 13
1 Q. You don't remember one?
2 A. I don't remember one.
3 MR JAY: Yes. Those are all the questions I have for you.
4 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'd like to use the word I used
5 before. These were clearly very fragile stories in the
6 sense that it was all -- I used the phrase
7 tittle-tattle, but information coming from somebody who
8 was getting information from somebody else, who wasn't
9 supposed to be saying anything anyway.
10 A. Yes.
11 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: That's certainly right. You told
12 Mr Jay that you had some concerns about that. Did you
13 do anything at all to express concern that a lot of
14 theorising was taking place, no solid fact, and this was
15 a great risk?
16 A. I didn't raise it specifically. I didn't phone and ask
17 someone and say, "Look, I'm really worried about this",
18 but I think everybody was aware of the strength of these
19 stories, how fragile they were. I think it's sometimes
20 the case on crime stories that this kind of procedure
21 takes place where there's supposition and theorising in
22 the absence of any hard information being released.
23 It's a kind of natural tendency to fill a vacuum, and
24 with the Portuguese police's stance on speaking to the
25 press, there was a very large vacuum there.
Page 14
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: And you mentioned that all your
2 competitors are there. But who takes the decision --
3 well, I suppose I can answer my own question. The
4 decision as to what is right and what is not right is
5 not yours; is that fair?
6 A. It's partly mine, I think. I do -- I do have some
7 responsibility, but, for instance, I can't write a story
8 that I know to be a lie and claim to the news desk that
9 it's true.
10 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: No, I hope we'd agree about that.
11 A. But, also, the news desk and the editor also have a key
12 role.
13 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I understand that, and I'm sure
14 you're right. But you appreciate that I am looking at
15 this phrase that we bounce about customs, practice and
16 ethics all the time, and I'm just trying to grasp the
17 nature of the problem. You've been sent out to
18 Portugal, it's costing a lot of money. All your
19 competitors are doing the same. There's enormous
20 pressure, which you've told Mr Jay about, to file
21 something, you want something that's interesting, that's
22 going to command attention. Where does balance,
23 fairness, propriety come into it all?
24 A. I'm not sure I can answer that.
25 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Well, does it have a place at all?
Page 15
1 A. I think it does, but --
2 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I'm pleased you said that.
3 A. -- it's very difficult on any given day to be able to
4 look at a story, as we are now, in the whole. We know
5 some things to be false, a lot of things to be false,
6 that we didn't know at the time. I think what you try
7 to do is faithfully and accurately report what you're
8 finding out from people who know more about what's gone
9 on than you do.
10 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You see, one of the things you could
11 have said in these articles, repeatedly, is, "This is an
12 impossible job. The police won't talk to us, they're
13 not permitted by law to, but for some unusual reason
14 they're prepared to leak like a sieve to people they
15 know, who will then tell us. How accurate all this is,
16 who knows?"
17 A. Well, there were critical reports of the Portuguese
18 police. There's a convention that newspapers don't tend
19 to write about their own problems, they don't write
20 about journalism, they don't write about the challenges
21 that reporters are facing to -- gathering stories.
22 Maybe in the media sections of the broadsheets they
23 will, but it's not saying --
24 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: But don't you think -- and I don't
25 edit a tabloid newspaper, indeed any newspaper, but
Page 16
1 don't you think that's itself a very substantial story?
2 You all back in the UK want to know about this missing
3 girl. We want to give it to you. We want to find out.
4 And this is the problem we've got.
5 A. Mm.
6 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: And the result is that "Everything
7 I say you must now take with a pinch of salt." Because
8 you personally were taking it -- I'm not saying you
9 didn't believe that you were being given genuine
10 information, that's the honesty bit that you mentioned,
11 but I rather gather from the thrust of what you say that
12 you did not find this particularly comfortable, so
13 you're saying that's not a story?
14 A. I think it is a story, but then you're faced with the
15 problem: what do you fill the paper with the next day?
16 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: But the one thing you don't want to
17 fill the paper with, surely, is stuff that is terribly
18 damaging to people and may be complete piffle.
19 A. As I said, I think all you can do is the best that you
20 can in the circumstances.
21 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes.
22 A. That's the dilemma. And it's true that especially
23 reporting on crime stories, you know, the effects on the
24 families of victims is appalling. And I would like to
25 take this opportunity to apologise to the McCanns for
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
5 (Pages 17 to 20)
Page 17
1 adding to their hurt and distress through what I wrote.
2 Only a week or two ago we had an advisory from the
3 Dowlers reminding us about the effects of seeing
4 a photograph of their murdered daughter in the paper
5 every time somebody wrote about the deleted emails
6 story, and it brings it home to you what a searing
7 experience it must be to keep being reminded.
8 So we are mindful that these stories can be
9 incredibly distressing, but at the heart of the story it
10 is a crime, a little girl went missing, and while I was
11 out there, that was the focus.
12 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I understand. But it's not as though
13 the problem is unique. I mean, one can look at what
14 happened -- and I'm not in any sense asking you
15 questions about it, but one could look at what happened
16 to Mr Jefferies thereafter. And everybody goes like
17 a train at a story, which is destructive.
18 I have made it very clear that I am an absolute
19 believer in freedom of expression, there's no question.
20 But I am concerned to find a way of identifying balance,
21 which might, I appreciate, mean that the story is not in
22 such bright colours.
23 A. I think that's a reason why we're all so interested to
24 hear what you conclude.
25 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: You're not alone.


Page 18
1 All right, thank you very much. Thank you very much
2 indeed.
3 MR JAY: The last witness is Mr Fagge, please.
4 MR NICHOLAS FAGGE (sworn)
5 Questions by MR JAY
6 MR JAY: Your full name, please, Mr Fagge?
7 A. It's Nicholas Hilton Fagge.
8 Q. Thank you. You provided us with a statement which bears
9 yesterday's date. It doesn't have a statement of truth
10 on it, but that's not a criticism, Mr Fagge. Do you
11 stand by this statement as your evidence?
12 A. I do. I don't think I have it with me. It's in the
13 other bundle. Excuse me.
14 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Do you not have a copy?
15 A. My statement is just there. Excuse me.
16 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: That's all right.
17 MR JAY: Mr Fagge, dealing with your career, you started as
18 a journalist after a career in advertising in 1996. You
19 obtained your NCTJ qualification. You then worked in
20 the local press in Camden and then via the National News
21 Agency and Ferraris; you joined the staff at the
22 Daily Express at the end of the year 2001, is that
23 correct?
24 A. Correct.
25 Q. You left the Express in August 2010 and you're now
Page 19
1 a staff news reporter at the Daily Mail?
2 A. Correct.
3 Q. Thank you very much. You tell us in paragraph 2 your
4 experience at the Express. You had covered a series of
5 major news stories, the tsunami in Sri Lanka and
6 Indonesia, criminal proceedings relating to the murder
7 of Caroline Dickinson and various other high profile
8 stories, is that so?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. You also speak French and Spanish, which was relevant,
11 I think both languages, relevant to the Madeleine McCann
12 case; is that so?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. You explain in your statement how you were involved in
15 the Madeleine McCann story. First of all, you went to
16 Morocco in September 2007 because you speak French and
17 you were following up a lead there, I believe; is that
18 right?
19 A. That's right, yeah.
20 Q. And then you went to Portugal. In Portugal, we've heard
21 about sources close to the PJ, two journalists in
22 particular, and a translator. Were your sources the
23 same or different?
24 A. My sources certainly would be amongst those, as we all
25 made friends with different people and there were
Page 20
1 different people there at different times, I certainly
2 had two journalists I trusted and spoke to almost --
3 well, on a daily basis, as well as other people I spoke
4 to more infrequently.
5 Q. Yes. Looking at this at a reasonably high level of
6 generality, because I think we've derived the picture
7 from previous witnesses, did you share the concerns
8 we've heard them express about the ability to stand
9 these stories up if it ever came to litigation or
10 something similar?
11 A. From the outset of my filing stories from Portugal, I'd
12 always make the news desk aware of who the source of the
13 story was, how much credibility we'd give to it, but
14 ultimately said to them they had to make the decision
15 whether or not they thought it was legally safe, and in
16 fact on the top of every single story I ever filed from
17 Portugal, I would write, "Please legal", as I'm sure my
18 colleagues did as well. This is a reference to ensure
19 the news desk pass the story to the lawyers working for
20 the newspaper to determine whether it was legally safe
21 or not to publish.
22 Q. But did you, regardless of the steps you took to get the
23 matter covered by legal advice, did you have concerns
24 about the ability of the Express to stand these stories
25 up if it ever came to litigation? Given the nature of
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
6 (Pages 21 to 24)
Page 21
1 your sources.
2 A. In Portugal, I wouldn't be thinking about if it came to
3 the High Court, in all honesty. I would be doing my
4 best to verify the story as best as I could. I wouldn't
5 be thinking about a potential libel case some time in
6 the future. I think that's unlikely.
7 Q. But you would be concerned, of course, with clause 1 of
8 the PCC code and the requirement of accuracy, wouldn't
9 you?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you'd also be concerned, wouldn't you, in more
12 general ethical terms, that your story should indeed be
13 true, and if the matter had to be tested, you would be
14 able to substantiate your stories, wouldn't you?
15 A. I'd certainly verify the story as best as I could and
16 try to be as accurate as I possibly could be, but, as
17 you've heard before, you couldn't get the police to
18 verify anything at all, therefore you'd have to rely on
19 less credible sources because you'd have to talk to
20 somebody to talk to somebody else.
21 Q. Yes. This weakness in the evidence base, if I can
22 describe it in those terms, was that a matter which you
23 expressly communicated to the news desk, or did you
24 cover it simply by the moniker "legal please" or words
25 to that effect?
Page 22
1 A. The working day would start about 8 o'clock in the
2 morning, when you'd speak with the news desk, explain
3 what the developments had been overnight, explain what
4 stories the Portuguese papers were running, and you'd
5 probably last speak with them about 8 o'clock in the
6 evening. All through the day they knew exactly what was
7 happening, you'd explain the strength of the stories,
8 and if there were legal concerns, you'd explain them as
9 well.
10 Q. So were you surprised when the matter, as it were,
11 turned litigious in February 2008 and had to be resolved
12 by a substantial payment to the McCanns?
13 A. No.
14 Q. And why not?
15 A. Because the editor at the time decided it was the only
16 story he was interested in and put it on the front page
17 almost regardless of how strong the story was.
18 Q. Can I just understand that answer, please? Are you
19 suggesting that he ran the story regardless of its truth
20 or are you suggesting something different?
21 A. No, not of its truth, but the Madeleine story was on the
22 front page of the Daily Express more than any other
23 newspaper because he decided it would sell newspapers.
24 It became an obsession of his. I don't know quite
25 how -- what more to say.
Page 23
1 Q. Okay, but in the evenings then over a beer in Portugal
2 with your colleagues, seeing this obsession played out
3 on the front pages of the Express, weren't you troubled
4 by the direction in which this was going?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Okay. We know this was a very big story, we know you've
7 written other stories where the same difficulties
8 haven't arisen, I trust. Was this the only occasion in
9 which this sort of difficulty arose, or are there
10 others?
11 A. I can't think of another situation similar to this.
12 MR JAY: Unless it's thought helpful, I'm not going to go
13 through the individual stories because it's the same --
14 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: The same point.
15 MR JAY: -- point. Thank you, Mr Fagge.
16 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Well, you've heard what I've said to
17 your colleagues. If you have any different answers to
18 the questions I've asked, I'd be interested to hear
19 them.
20 It can't just be a question of sales, can it?
21 A. I think you have to ask the editor that, sir.
22 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I might do. But in relation to
23 a story like this, where you're hearing through several
24 layers, to what extent do you feel it's right, as the
25 journalist on the ground, to spell out perhaps in an
Page 24
1 article, perhaps some other way, the -- the word I have
2 used is the fragility of what you're reporting. Or do
3 you think it's just sufficient to say "legal"?
4 A. No, these would be conversations that I would have with
5 the news editor of the day, or -- over a number of days.
6 I explained the difficulty of establishing exactly what
7 did happen in certain circumstances, the information
8 I received or the new information I'd learnt about.
9 This would be conversations with the news editor and the
10 news desk in general. It wouldn't merit an article or
11 even really a --
12 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: But it is a -- maybe it isn't.
13 I must be wary about seeking to write stories. It is
14 a story, isn't it, how impossible it is to get
15 information that's reliable? Or isn't it?
16 A. It is a story that was published in the Daily Express
17 and I think a number of other papers about how
18 incompetent the Portuguese police appeared, but
19 Madeleine continued to be missing, the interest in the
20 story remained very high, there were new developments
21 each day, of which the newspaper and the readership were
22 interested in.
23 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: And the impact on the victims, that's
24 unfortunate but there it is?
25 A. Yes. It's tragic.
Day 21 PM Leveson Inquiry 21 December 2011
(+44) 207 404 1400 London EC4A 2DY
Merrill Legal Solutions www.merrillcorp/mls.com 8th Floor 165 Fleet Street
7 (Pages 25 to 28)
Page 25
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Is it unfair of me -- and you're
2 entitled to answer "yes" -- is it unfair of me to be
3 concerned that after all that happened, then when we got
4 to a similar high-profile case somewhat later, the press
5 broadly act in a not dissimilar way in relation to
6 Mr Jefferies?
7 A. I wasn't there.
8 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I know.
9 A. You may take that view.
10 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I think that's probably fair enough.
11 Right, Mr Fagge, thank you very much indeed.
12 A. Thank you.
13 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Thank you.
14 MR JAY: Sir, that concludes the evidence for today.

Food for thought from Flossie's Place:

The #Leveson Inquiry – Questions Mr Jay QC didn’t ask of the journalists writing #McCann articles for Daily Express


http://flossysplace.wordpress.com/2011/12/22/the-leveson-inquiry-questions-mr-jay-qc-didnt-ask-of-the-journalists-writing-mccann-articles-for-daily-express/

pennylane wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

blossom45 wrote: good morning all,
just a thought!
yesterday i was watching sky news,
there was a great deal of discussion about john terry being charged with racism...
kay burley warned at least two commentators to "be very careful what they say,as they don't want to predujist any up coming trial"
she was very firm in what she said and really stressed her point..
i can't help but wonder if this is the overall behavior of the press in relation to the mccanns.
they all know what's in the offing but don't want to put the spoke in any information coming to trial and have the cry of "unfair reporting biased the jury".

If that's the case, it's too late now as there was some pretty credible reporting in the early days. Sorry but I don't share your optimism.

Hi dazed, I'm afraid I too am pessimistic. In fact I would go as far as to say the writing is on the wall in great big letters, and I have zero expectations of the gruesome twosome ever facing justice.

Same here, but let's hope we're both wrong.

Thanks Frenchperson,

members of the party -- dubbed the Tapas Nine after the
2 Spanish themed restaurant they were in when Madeleine
3 disappeared -- may have been involved in the crime."
4 Where did you get that from?
5 A. From the same source.
6 Q. How was it put to you?"


So the McCanns are still hogging the limelight and the questions being asked are as inane as those the LP asked the witnesses. This was the only snippet that interested me, I thinks it is quite normal for a Reporter to be given confidential information which cannot be corroborated and the Newspaper"s Legal
team make the decision whether to print. I was told a long time ago by a Metropolitan Police Detective whose friend had been seconded to LP to help in the McCann case and the friend said the McCanns were "heavily involved"...but the spoilsport wouldn"t elaborate.

From the different depositions, the probability is high that the person who leaked the diary was the translator.

frencheuropean wrote:From the different depositions, the probability is high that the person who leaked the diary was the translator.

Wasn"t it CdeM who printed the translation ? if Sandra Fegueras is a Reporter for that paper it may be she paid the Translator. That doesn"t answer the question of the Tapas Group being involved though , I wonder where that info came from.