Phone-hacking trial resumes with the prince, the bikini and the third man

A police officer, detective constable Tilbury, was then called to the witness box. Tilbury, the jury was told, was the case officer for this part of Operation Elveden, the police investigation into corrupt payments to public officials. The jury was shown an email from 2006 where a Sun journalist asks to arrange a cash payment of £4000 for a photograph of Prince William in a bikini from a military source at Sandhurst. Brooks’ reply is one word: “Ok.” The jury was then shown a payment request via Thomas Cook made out to the spouse of a serving soldier, whom we cannot name for legal reasons, and a story that appeared in the newspaper containing not the actual picture in question but a mock-up of it.

Jonathan Laidlaw QC, for Rebekah Brooks, then rose to cross-examine the police officer. He asked him if the source of the original picture, described in the email as William’s “platoon commander”, had been identified. Tilbury said this inquiry was still taking place. Questioned further, he advised the court that it was his superior officer detective inspector Kennett that was undertaking the investigation. Court then took a short break while this officer was located and when it resumed the jury was told Kennett would be available to give evidence after 12pm.

The next witness called was Paddy Haverson, the director of communications for Prince Charles and his two sons in 2006. Haverson told the court he had spoken to Brooks in July 2006 about another story, "Dirty Harry: Playboy prince cops a feel”, which subsequently led to an apology from the paper. In Haverson’s notes shown to the jury, Brooks is quoted as saying “if we f*cked up what are we willing to say". Haverson went to to testify that during this conversation she had mentioned a photograph in her possession of “Prince William in his underwear with a feather boa” which Haverson had asked her not to publish as it was taken at a private function. Brooks, Haverson said, agreed.

Jonathan Laidlaw, Brooks’ barrister, then rose to cross-examine. He showed the court an article from the People newspaper, with a photo of Prince William wearing a feather boa. Laidlaw asked if this may have been the photo Brooks was referring to, not the picture of William in a bikini. Haverson agreed that it may have been.

After Haverson stepped down, DI Kennett came to the stand. Brooks' barrister asked if the police had determined who the "platoon commander" identified as the source of the bikini photo was. Kennett replied he had not but had narrowed it down to two possibilities, an officer who had been killed in Afghanistan and another serving officer who was posted overseas. Laidlaw put it to the court that his client had been arrested 22 months ago and yet the police had not yet completed their inquiries. The officer explained that the serving soldier was posted overseas and, in reply to Laidlaw's question about why he did not "pick up the phone", told the court an interview under caution could not be done in that manner. Asked why the soldier could not be returned to the UK, Kennett stated that the army would not "return him to jeopardy" just so he could be questioned by police.

Laidlaw then put to the officer the suggestion that the email implied a "third man" was involved in the transaction to sell the photograph. When asked if the police investigated that possibility, Kennett replied that he did not read the mail that way and while he kept an "open mind" he had done no investigation based on the idea. Laidlaw continued to press the idea until Justice Saunders intervened, telling the barrister that he believed that line of questioning had gone on long enough. DC Kennett then stepped down from the stand.

The first police officer DC Tilbury then returned to give further evidence which we will cover in our next report.