Tony Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 strewth mate - nothing is proved? they've just paid out vast sums to the people they hacked - dowlers family were paid 2 million, another 150 have come forward, there was a culture of law breaking with the threat of exposure for anyone who crossed them and it corrupted the politics media and police of this country - doesn't that make your blood boil? don't you feel angry that some asshole used media power and blackmail to infect the governance of the land you and your kids inhabit. he paid 2 million quid to the bereaved family of a sex beast's victim cos his company hacked her phone - and you'll buy his papers? That may be but digger still agreed a substantial payout to the Dowler family. Why do so if NI had behaved properly? It doesn't really matter what you or I may or may not think, the Police say they didn't do it and the Guardian corrected their story a couple of months after the payout. We can only take it at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sausage Dog Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I can't believe I'm defending The Sun, but the claim in The Guardian that the NOTW hacked her phone and deleted voicemails have been declared to be false. As I understand it, it came out that the calls had been deleted automatically. However, NOTW employees had hacked Millie's phone. That just makes them not quite so bad, but still beyond the pale in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sausage Dog Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 It doesn't really matter what you or I may or may not think, the Police say they didn't do it and the Guardian corrected their story a couple of months after the payout. We can only take it at face value. And your link proves my point - the NOTW did hack Millie's phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Being told not to, has made me want to buy it now....freedom of choice and all that! My sentiments exactly, I will probably go out of my way to buy a copy now ! I think Frank has a hint of Fascist about him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 As I understand it, it came out that the calls had been deleted automatically. However, NOTW employees had hacked Millie's phone. That just makes them not quite so bad, but still beyond the pale in my book. That's also my understanding and, if Tony reads the correction at the end of the Guardian article he posted a link to, he'll see: Since this story was published new evidence – as reported in the Guardian of 10 December – has led the Metropolitan police to believe that this was unlikely to have been correct and that while the News of the World hacked Milly Dowler's phone the newspaper is unlikely to have been responsible for the deletion of a set of voicemails which confirms our recollections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevski35 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 strewth mate - nothing is proved? they've just paid out vast sums to the people they hacked - dowlers family were paid 2 million, another 150 have come forward, there was a culture of law breaking with the threat of exposure for anyone who crossed them and it corrupted the politics media and police of this country - doesn't that make your blood boil? don't you feel angry that some asshole used media power and blackmail to infect the governance of the land you and your kids inhabit. he paid 2 million quid to the bereaved family of a sex beast's victim cos his company hacked her phone - and you'll buy his papers? I'm saying nothing is proved against the Murdochs, I'm not saying nothing is proved against ex - NOW employees. Like I said before, find me a newspaper that hasn't paid people off and I'll eat my hat.(Piers Morgan and the mirror spring to mind). Most people get to positions of power by all kinds of dirty tactics. I'm not niave enough to believe otherwise. Lots of things make my blood boil, but Murdoch is not one of them. He runs a private business where you can chose to buy thier products. His papers have also done a lot of good (ie. Sarah's Law). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 It doesn't really matter what you or I may or may not think, the Police say they didn't do it and the Guardian corrected their story a couple of months after the payout. We can only take it at face value. There are still many unretracted stories about the payout that clearly state that NOTW had been involved in intercepting messages to Millie's phone. Hacking "The settlement is three times the biggest payout to any other victim of phone hacking, but reflects the gravity of the actions of News of the World journalists in accessing the murder victim’s voicemails. The 13 year-old was still being treated as a missing person when the News of the World arranged for her messages to be intercepted in 2002. " I'm taking what the Telegraph says on face value because if what is stated in that article is incorrect the article would not still be publicly available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 As I said in the first place. I can't believe I'm defending The Sun, but the claim in The Guardian that the NOTW hacked her phone and deleted voicemails have been declared to be false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Im buying it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 As I said in the first place. 1. Arranged to hack phone 2. deleted messages from phone The Guardian was wrong about 2. That 1. happened is still a matter of public record. And that 1. happened is a complete and utter disgrace. So what you are saying is that it's ok because they didn't delete the messages? Only accessed them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.