The Drum Awards for Marketing - Extended Deadline

-d -h -min -sec

Phone-hacking trial: Andy Coulson 'a man of integrity and honour', jury told as his defence ends

By James Doleman |

May 29, 2014 | 5 min read

  • "No evidence" Coulson knew of Best hack
  • "Do his phone" email unrelated to voicemail interception, defence say
  • Defendant "straightforward and upfront"
  • "Proper verdict is not guilty", jury told
  • Proceedings resumed this afternoon to hear the final part of Timothy Langdale QC's closing address to the jury on behalf of his client, former News of the World editor Andy Coulson. The barrister began the afternoon by suggesting that there "was no evidence at all" that his client was involved in the hacking of reality TV star Calum Best and suggested the prosecution case had "little evidential basis" despite a 2006 email from Coulson about Best stating "do his phone".

    The defence barrister asked the jury to consider that there was no evidence Best's voicemail was intercepted as a result of this mail and suggested the real meaning of the phrase was an instruction to investigate the phone records of a News of the World journalist who was suspected of leaking information to Best. Langdale said that the defence had been hampered by the late disclosure of another email in which two journalists discuss a text message from Best which appeared to show information was being tipped off about forthcoming News of the World stories. "If that is an instruction to hack," the barrister asked, "why is it the only example?" suggesting to the jury that no other email of that nature from Coulson had ever been discovered.

    Langdale then went on to another instance of phone hacking from 2005 when Glenn Mulcaire intercepted the voicemails of two Mail on Sunday journalists which led to a "spoiler story" being run about an article about then deputy prime minister John Prescott and a woman named Tracy Temple. The defence QC told the court that the prosecution had raised the article but when Coulson had a look at the first edition of the News of the World he realised that the spoiler story was not the result of a hack but was "lifted" from the Mail on Sunday after it was published last on the Saturday night. "This is evidence the prosecution could have easily discovered if the investigation was fair and open-minded."

    Court then took a short break.

    When the jury returned the defence QC turned to what he called his last remarks. He put it to the jury that all of the "post-Blunkett" hacking allegations "don't stand up". He asked the jury "where is the plain English document that establishes that Coulson knew about Glenn Mulcaire?" He went on: "We've been around the houses, up hill and down hill but it does not exist." Langdale then asked the jury to look at an email from January 2007 in which Coulson and his legal advisor discuss payments to Mulcaire and Coulson says "pay him until the end of the contract and not a penny more". The defence counsel suggested "that does not sound like the actions of a conspirator".

    The QC then asked the jury to consider his client's appearance in the witness box. "He was hardly perfect, he made mistakes, he was not flashy, hardly the 'big I am'." Langdale went on to tell the jury that Coulson did not try to blame others and had given a "frank account of his relationship with Rebekah Brooks", adding that "he chose to enter the witness box and did not 'shilly shally' around the hard questions which he dealt with openly and honestly"/ The QC suggested to the jury that Coulson was "straightforward and upfront and did not try and pull the wool over your eyes".

    The barrister ended his speech by reminding the jury of the character witnesses who appeared on behalf of his client and their testimony that he had been "clever, loyal, a man of integrity and honour". Langdale invited the jury to consider if, given what they had heard, they could believe Coulson was the type of man who would undertake the activities he was accused of. The QC asked the jury to be "attentive to the detail" of the evidence stating that: "This does not prove his guilt and in many cases establishes his innocence. If that is a view you share the proper verdict is not guilty."

    Court then rose for the day

    All of the defendants deny all of the charges, the trial continues.

    Trending

    Industry insights

    View all
    Add your own content +