McCanns and JK Rowling among host of names to give evidence at phone hacking inquiry
By Steve Doughty
Last updated at 12:08 AM on 15th September 2011
The judge leading the inquiry into phone-hacking and the press yesterday named 46 individuals who will be invited to take centre stage.
They include crime victims such as the parents of missing Madeleine McCann and murdered teenager Milly Dowler.
The list also includes Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, former motor racing boss Max Mosley, former Lib Dem MP Mark Oaten, jockey Kieran Fallon, and Paul and Sheryl Gascoigne.
Looking for answers: Kate and Gerry McCann will be part of the group of alleged phone hacking victims represented by a barrister in the first stage of the inquiryLord Justice Leveson awarded them ‘core representative’ status, which means they can have a lawyer to speak for them at the tribunal hearings.
However, the judge said yesterday that he will press them to share just one lawyer between them and that he will name a single barrister to speak for them if they cannot agree.
Lord Justice Leveson also indicated that he would be reluctant to allow lawyers for the 46 – who say they are victims of hacking or press malpractice – to cross-examine other witnesses.
The judge said News International should be a ‘core participant’ at the inquiry because one of its titles had been at the centre of the phone hacking scandal and it had a ‘significant interest’ in the outcome.
Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Daily Mail and The Mail on Sunday, have also been given the right to play a full part, alongside Northern and Shell, publishers of the Daily Express and the Daily Star, and Guardian News and Media.
J K Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books, and actor Hugh Grant are also in the group of alleged hacking victims
Left out: Former News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks, pictured in July with Rupert Murdoch, will not be giving evidence at the inquiry
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037410/Leveson-phone-hacking-inquiry-McCanns-JK-Rowling-evidence.html#ixzz1YdIXVucd "
DAILY MAIL (ONLINE), my thoughts for your attention:
"They include crime victims such as the parents of missing Madeleine McCann " Well is the British press now allowed to judge on an ongoing investigation??! The answer is NO. The truth is that once again, any article from the Daily Mail relating to the MCCANN CASE is deliberately BIASED and PREJUDICED.
I for one would be VERY curious as to what the hacking reveals and wonder why this wasn't officially done by the POLICE in the first place. People who lie and cash on their daughter's "disappearance", "missing" state need to be monitored, this has already been done for people involved in other cases so why weren't these investigated on with the same means as other SUSPECTS?
Yes I know, they are EX- MAIN SUSPECTS now BUT, sorry, HEY! This is an ONGOING investigation, when the public asks questions to the police with a Freedom Of Information act this is the answer we get, so what gives any "right" to the Daily Mail / MAIL ONLINE to state that the McCanns are the "VICTIMS" of a crime?
Was HUNTLEY the VICTIM of his crimes you think? What did you print when his investigation was ongoing, you "professional" journalists? And if he was hacked, taped by the police, would anyone had gone crazy about it?
So DAILY MAIL, will you EVER stop trying to INFLUENCE, CONDITION your readers? Why do you do this, because people like me did protest in 2007 claiming you did NOT have any right to print that "Maddy was abducted", so is it in frustration, or greed, or WHAT, that you're still trying what you ever can to push THEIR side of the "story"?! I wish someone would sue you and take your LICENCE OFF for this sentence. And that you explain to me WHY you state that THEY are VICTIMS of a crime, when you don't even know whether they were not actively involved in it! It's MADELEINE who is THE VICTIM, not them who left her ALONE at THREE YEARS OLD, HOME ALONE "because ot was safe". What is this? The Maddy Circus at Comedy Central??!!! It was SO SAFE that she hasn't been seen since the 3rd May 2007 - or perhaps even before - depending even if her identity is correct...... According to THEIR story - which you don't doubt for a second I could believe- it was 'perfectly safe to leave three children under four years old alone in a holiday flat abroad' 'while we dined and drank not far away'... Give your heads a hard SHAKE, the lot of you. The money is flowing, but not the truth, get as much compensation as you can for tomorrow you will still get up wondering if the Maddy Circus at Comedy Central is the right thing to carry on milking on.
Why should I believe YOU and the MCCANNS? Why don't you produce a new article to recapitulate what has been highly inconsistent in the "story"? This would bring you more income, and wouldn't be seen as a comedy number, comedy which people get tired of, BORED with. Mind you, with such dull slush, is it really surprising?
-And Oh, do you know why I don't believe the McCanns? Because they LIED in the first place.
How did they lie?
- They called their family and friends to claim that the shutters and the window had been DAMAGED. It WASN'T.
- They said that once the shutters are down and LOCKED as they had set them, anyone could lift them up from the outside (Gerry even boasting he tried them himself on that 3rd May night, despite his 'state of nerves / grief '...). This is a SHEER LIE. No one can normally lift this sort of shutters up from the outside as the locking security system perfectly works.
- Gerry claimed he came in using his key which means using the MAIN door but a while after, he said he entered via the PATIO, through the French windows. What is the truth, Gerry?
- Kate Healy -his wife- claimed she discovered that her daughter was missing at around 10 pm, whereas on 2 occasions - occasions that are separated in time by FOUR YEARS!- she slipped up to reveal that the time of the EVENT was in fact 9 pm! (see previous blog posts, one being about the Late Late Show, RTE, Ireland).
But don't ask me WHY they lied... Or why YOU don't want to write articles in a neutral and interesting manner... Doesn't the TRUTH interest you?