Phone hacking trial: Judge criticises PM for ruining trial’s final stage

This article was last updated on April 16, 2022

Canada: Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…
USA: Oye! Times readers Get FREE $30 to spend on Amazon, Walmart…

The phone-hacking trial judge Mr Justice Saunders has heavily criticised Prime Minister David Cameron for his remarks regarding Andy Coulson on Tuesday after he was found guilty of conspiracy to hack phones at the News of the World during 2006 and 2009, but the verdicts of the couple of charged Mr Coulson was facing were still pending.

Afterwards, the former spin doctor, Mr Coulson’s barrister has asked the trial judge to discharge the jury from the case due to the avalanche of publicity, including Mr Cameron’s comments, immediately following the conviction of the ex-New of the World editor’s conviction yesterday.

Mr Coulson and ex-News of the World royal editor Clive Goodman had also been accused of conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office by paying police officers for two royal directories. But the jurors had been discharged after failing to reach an agreement even after nine days of deliberation on whether alleged individuals are guilty of authorising illegal payments.

On Tuesday, after Mr Coulson found guilty for his involvement in the phone-hacking scandal, Mr Cameron issued an apology statement for employing Mr Coulson in 2010.

Afterward on Tuesday, Mr Justice Saunders has demanded an explanation from Mr Cameron on issuance of the statement while the jury were still considering verdicts on two counts.

The judge has said today he had received a response from his principal private secretary who said the prime minister “was responding to the guilty verdict on hacking charges” and “was careful to make no further comment about any matters that might still be before the court”.

While accepting to understand Mr Cameron’s intention, still Mr Justice Saunders views the explanation as unsatisfactory. He has said in a written ruling: The Prime Minister “has now told the public and therefore the jury that he was given assurances by Mr Coulson before he employed him which turned out to be untrue. The jury were not aware of that before and it is a matter which is capable of affecting Mr Coulson’s credibility in their eyes.”

Now a decision is due to be made on Monday on the possibility for whether to order a re-trial for Coulson and Mr Goodman.

Article viewed on Oye! Times at www.oyetimes.com.