Rebekah Brooks' Lawyer: Leveson Evidence 'Could Prejudice' Any Future Trial

Rebekah Brooks

PA/The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 9/03/2012 09:10 Updated: 9/03/2012 09:24

Allowing a senior policewoman to publicly give evidence about corruption allegations at News International was a "spectacular failure", Rebekah Brooks's lawyer has said.

Stephen Parkinson said evidence given by Sue Akers at the Leveson Inquiry had brought "much prejudicial material" into the public domain - which could result in an unfair trial if any charges are brought.

The Scotland Yard Deputy Assistant Commissioner, who is leading the investigation into illegal newsgathering, told the inquiry into press standards that there was a "culture of illegal payments" at the Sun newspaper.

Akers, who is in charge of three linked inquiries into phone hacking, illicit payments and computer hacking, told Lord Justice Leveson the payments appeared to have been authorised at a "senior level".

This week it was announced that the Attorney General is looking into concerns the policewoman could have prejudiced any potential trials.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Parkinson said: "There is no excuse for the spectacular failure that occurred last week.

"Normally our system protects those who are suspects in criminal investigations reasonably well ... it restricts the circulation of facts, comment and speculation about their guilt or innocence.

"Last week, that did not happen - and it has not happened for much of the last seven months.

"Witnesses have been summoned before both parliamentary committees and the Leveson Inquiry. As a result, much prejudicial material has come into the public domain."

The attorney general Dominic Grieve is looking into claims Akers' evidence could prejudice any trial.

Brooks, a former editor of The Sun and a former chief executive of News International, remains on bail after being questioned by detectives last summer on suspicion of phone hacking and corruption.

She was arrested and questioned in July, days after resigning as chief executive.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

Allowing a senior policewoman to publicly give evidence about corruption allegations at News International was a "spectacular failure", Rebekah Brooks's lawyer has said. Stephen Parkinson said evid...
Allowing a senior policewoman to publicly give evidence about corruption allegations at News International was a "spectacular failure", Rebekah Brooks's lawyer has said. Stephen Parkinson said evid...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 12
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:08 AM on 03/14/2012
Nothing will happen, these are the big pictures, probably a bit to and fro, here and there, she might have to take the drop to please the public but that seems very remote, publicity will go into hiding and it will die a quick death and will vanish as if it never happened, wait and see, something big will overshadow it and take the heat off it then it will be like ashes blowing in the wind.
11:35 AM on 03/09/2012
I do believe that the RT. Hon. Lord Leveson is far to clever and careful to allow anything happening in his court that would prejudice any future trials of anybody involved in his inquiry.
12:53 PM on 03/09/2012
So why did he allow Akers to say all those things about the Sun journalists? The police inquiry is still ongoing and no-one of them was charged with anything. At this point they are just suspects and according to law they must be treated like suspects. According to reports (I can give the links of them if you want), some of them were questioned about practices that take place in Fleet street papers (not only the sun) for decades (beers and dinners with officers etc).
And still even if there were bigger payments to public officers by the Sun how do we know if there weren't for public interest stories? When the telegraph paid a public officer 150 000 for the MP's expenses story (just one story), it was ok. No -one is searching or questioning them for paying.
Also, being questioned about a subject doesn't make someone guilty.
If the police finds evidence that can support a case in the court then there will be prosecution. But even then, that doesn't mean that the person prosecuted is guilty. The court will decide this and Mr. Leveson must make sure that the court will take the right decision. This will happened only when all the documents and evidence from both sites are heard in the court. Unfortunately, with the way the inquiry is being conducted a lot of things are going to be prejudiced.
photo
Gavin Saunders
we only have each other
11:02 AM on 03/09/2012
What is really spectacular is the gall of Brooks, of all people, to argue this.
01:28 PM on 03/09/2012
x2
02:56 PM on 03/09/2012
Yes. It should be Akers and Leveson's job to make sure that people won't prejudice any potential future trial. Instead, Akers goes to the Leveson inquiry and talks about the Sun journalists as if they are guilty, while they haven't even been charged with anything yet.
So, yes it's strange that Brooks is the one who argues this.
photo
Gavin Saunders
we only have each other
10:57 PM on 03/09/2012
I'm sure you know what I mean. Brooks would not have hesitated to do exactly the same thing she is now complaining about in her ruthless persuit of copy for her rags. That she is using this tactic indicates just how much trouble she knows she is in.