Phone-hacking trial: 'Members of royal family' were paid for stories, witness claims
After Friday's unexpected break, when court could not sit due to a member of the jury being unable to attend, the trial of former News of the World editors Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, and four others, resumed on Monday at London's Old Bailey. Giving evidence in his defence this morning was Clive Goodman, former royal editor of the News of the World, who is charged along with Coulson with conspiracy to corrupt public officials by purchasing royal phone directories from police officers.
After a long delay the jury finally took their seats just after noon. Judge Saunders told them that one of their number had been discharged due to ill-health. He reminded them that it was very important that no more jurors were lost. "Stay away from anyone that is ill," he joked. The judge also reminded the remaining jurors not to contact the person who has been discharged. Clive Goodman then took the stand to continue his evidence in chief.
Goodman was asked if any other royal journalists he knew had copies of the royal phone directories in question. The defendant said he was sure others had them including Richard Kay of the Daily Mail. Goodman was asked from whom he received the books in question on counts two and three of the indictment, and named two contacts, Farish and Anderson as being the source. Anderson, the witness said, "worked in the newspaper industry" possibly as a freelance journalist. Farish, Goodman said, was involved in the "production of newspapers" possibly as an administrator. Both of the names were false.
The defendant was asked about what he did to protect his confidential sources. Goodman said the practice when he began in newspapers in 1986 was to create a false identity so the source could be paid and "only a a handful of people" would know their real name. "They were just budget headings," the defendant added. It was not uncommon, the witness told the court, to pay other people under these names "for administrative purposes". The use of false names were known to the management, the witness told the court.
Goodman was then asked how he first came across "Anderson" the freelance journalist. The defendant said he had called with a story, but this was disjointed and was never published. However on the third attempt, Goodman said, a tip from "Anderson" did lead to a small article being published, so the source was paid in cash and the false identity created. The defendant testified that he never knew Anderson's full name. "It was a strange situation." Goodman said that his impression was that his source was getting the information on the royal family "second hand" as much of it was out of date.
The defendant was then asked about his second contact "Farish". Goodman said Farish had called him originally and he had never discovered the source's full name. The witness said some of the information Farish gave him was good, some not and repeated his theory that this contact worked in a newspaper, but not as a reporter. His information was not always current, the defendant said, and he believed he was "not on plot, not getting the information himself".
David Stens QC then asked the witness about cash payments. Goodman said his use of these was "pretty small beer" when the paper was paying other people £50,000 or more for stories. Some of the contacts he paid, Goodman said, "worked for the royal family, were friends of the royal family or even members of the royal family themselves". Those working for the royals, the former reporter told the court, relied on them not just for an income but also, in many cases, for their homes. "It was a risky business for them" Goodman confirmed. The witness then told the court that it could be difficult getting cash payments authorised and this could lead to problems with sources when money was delayed "sometimes for months".
Court then rose for lunch.