James Murdoch returned to Westminster without his father and with an added air of confidence in denying knowledge of widespread phone hacking, despite accusations by one MP that he was the first mafia head to not know he was running a criminal enterprise.

Appearing before the House of Commons culture, media and sport select committee over night, Sydney time, to answer further questions about the News of the World scandal, Mr Murdoch blamed underlings for not properly informing him of strong indications of widespread illegal activity including advice by a senior barrister.

He was recalled after an earlier appearance in July with his father and News Corp chairman and chief executive, Rupert Murdoch. His evidence from that hearing on concerning his knowledge of phone hacking was later contradicted by a former News lawyer, Tom Crone, and the editor of the now-defunct News of the World, Colin Myler.

Labour MP Tom Watson, who has led the parliamentary attack on phone hacking, asked Mr Murdoch if he was familiar with the mafia code of silence known as omerta, before essentially calling Mr Murdoch a mafia don.

"Mr Murdoch, you must be the first mafia boss in history who did not know he was running a criminal enterprise." Having already said the line of questioning was offensive, Mr Murdoch told the chairman the comment was inappropriate.

Mr Watson had previously revealed a secret meeting with Neville Thurbeck, a former News of the World senior editor, who said Mr Crone said he would show Mr Murdoch an infamous "for Neville" email from private investigator Glenn Mulcaire which indicated phone hacking was widespread.

Mr Murdoch said he was not shown the email when discussing approval for a large £700,000 settlement for phone-hacking victim Gordon Taylor, head of the professional footballers' association.

He was repeatedly asked why he gave his approval if he did not know the email revealed extensive hacking, and legal advice which backed it, and repeatedly insisted that he did not know anything to suggest a practice of illegality.

Mr Crone and Mr Myler insist they told Mr Murdoch of the email, but Mr Murdoch said he only knew that it undermined the company's defence of Mr Taylor's action and that led him to approve an increased settlement of it - not of its other function of revealing the practice was not limited to one reporter.

He said he knew it only as a transcript that demonstrated an instance of phone hacking that was fatal to the Taylor case - not of a wider practice.

He was heavily questioned about a legal opinion by Michael Silverleaf QC, in 2008 which concluded there was ''overwhelming evidence of the involvement of a number of senior ... journalists in the illegal inquiries''.

Mr Murdoch denied he knew of its substance and denied previously misleading the committee, saying he was not briefed properly on the opinion's contents.

Another MP, Phillip Davies, remarked that: "I can't believe you've been so successful by being so cavalier with money," after Mr Murdoch said he had to rely on executives given that News of the World was a small part of a small division of his responsibility. If he did not leave it to executives, it would be "impossible to manage every detail of a business this scale".

He said had he known at the time of the Taylor settlement what he knew today, the company would have acted differently "to sort this out and put it right" and conceded that it did not do so because of a tendency to mount "an aggressive defence too quickly".

MP Claims Murdoch Is Like A "Mafia Boss"

Chris Bryant: Now we know the Commons has been lied to

What James Murdoch still doesn't seem to get is that his company targeted the phones of nearly 6,000 people

Well, James ain't no Rupert. He's better groomed, he's much more loquacious, and he seems to need fewer lawyers (of the 14 seats reserved for them in the select committee room yesterday only six were taken). There's also less of the casual violence of his father, who punctuates all his comments by hitting the table. But then James shows his nervousness in different ways. His flushed rosy cheeks, his deliberately corrugated brow, his occasional sips of water when he's asked whether he has lied - all betrayed a man who knew he was in trouble.

He'd prepared himself, of course. He had mastered the use of "I want to be absolutely clear about this", and "I want to help the committee" and "I have reflected on that". He tried to present himself as the model of a reasonable moderate. He knew how to remain polite at all times, calling the members Mr Watson, Mr Rotherham, Mr Masters.

He made some admissions too. He apologised for paying private detectives to trail the lawyers of the victims of phone hacking, members of the royal family and members of the committee. He expressly apologised to Tom Watson. And he apologised to Steve Rotherham for the Sun's mendacious coverage of the Hillsborough disaster (NB Kelvin Mackenzie).

But in the end he used the only defences left to him. First there was what we might call the Theresa May defence. It was everyone else's fault and he had been terribly let down by his staff. In particular he reserved this attack for Tom Crone and Colin Myler, his once loyal lieutenants, who have now called his evidence into question. He was full of casual asperity. He said Myler had been appointed to clear up the paper (which suggests that they knew there was a bigger problem under Coulson than they have thus far admitted) but had failed to do so. He couldn't speculate about Crone and Myler's motives (thereby suggesting the darkest of intentions) but he was clear that they had misled the Committee.

Next there was the extraordinary defence that, in Mr Murdoch's own words, "this wasn't a failure of governance, it was a failure of transparency", which is really a linguistic perversion for "I did everything I should have done but unfortunately you were lied to - by other people". It is certainly true that by my reckoning the Commons has been lied to now on about 486 occasions (my poor researcher has counted).

Successive News International executives have blustered their way through evidence, but, Mr Murdoch, this certainly was a matter of governance. No CEO of a construction firm could have passed the buck in the way you have tried to do. In the end it's your company, your employees, your profits and your responsibility.

But incompetence was Murdoch's next defence. He said that things were not "top of mind" so often that I started thinking of Alice (in Wonderland) who cried "curiouser and curiouser" - only in Mr Murdoch's case it was incuriouser and incuriouser. So astoundingly incurious was he that his conduct appears to have been tantamount to phenomenal carelessness (at least) and quite probably wilful blindness.

So, despite forking out the best part of a million pounds to buy Gordon Taylor's silence he wants us to believe he didn't ask why lawyers thought News International were bound to lose the case. Despite the fact that the newspaper was still maintaining there was just one rogue reporter involved, he never bothered to ask why on earth the paper's royal reporter would hack Gordon Taylor's phone. And despite the fact that he knew an expensive legal brief had been prepared laying out why the News of the World had to settle the Taylor case, he never asked to see it.

It all beggars belief, because what Mr Murdoch still doesn't seem to get is that it was not a company but his company that targeted the phones of nearly 6,000 people, paid police officers for information, corrupted the Metropolitan Police, used private investigators to harass and intimidate political opponents and mounted one of the most substantial cover-ups in history.

Why shareholders would have any confidence in this man, who by his own admission is incurious and slapdash as a manager, and a poor judge of his employees' characters, I cannot comprehend. The police investigations are still ongoing, but may lead to a substantial number of NI employees, including the very senior figures who crafted the cover-up, going to prison.

But we now know, beyond doubt, that the Commons has been lied to. The committee will now have to decide who lied to it and may want to have the liars summoned to the bar of the House. But however many employees the Murdochs kick off the ladder, it's the man at the top who is really culpable for the management culture that allowed all this to happen.

Britain's hacking scandal was reported on Tuesday to have broadened significantly into areas of national security, with the police investigating whether private detectives working for the Murdoch media empire hacked into the computer of a cabinet minister responsible for Northern Ireland.

Scotland Yard declined to comment on the report in The Guardian newspaper, saying it would not be "providing a running commentary on this investigation."

The report said the police had warned Peter Hain, the Northern Ireland secretary from 2005 to 2007, that his computer and those of senior civil servants and intelligence agents responsible for the British province may have been hacked by private detectives working for News International.

News International - whose chairman is James Murdoch, the 38-year-old son of the octogenarian mogul Rupert Murdoch - is a British subsidiary of News Corp., the Murdoch-owned global media empire.

The British outpost has been at the center of a controversy convulsing public life here over the use of private detectives to hack into the voice mail of celebrities and less well-known people thrust into the spotlight of the news by personal tragedy.

But the latest reports suggest that the scandal may be widening if it is established that classified material was also hacked from computers. British news reports on Tuesday said that Mr. Hain's computer may have contained information about informers within Northern Ireland's factions. Mr. Hain oversaw delicate negotiations that led to the restoration of local government for the province and the creation of a joint administration grouping its historic adversaries.

The report added weight to previous hints that the intelligence community may have been targeted. A former British Army intelligence officer, Ian Hurst, had previously accused The News of the World, the weekly tabloid that the Murdochs closed as the scandal broke, of hacking into his e-mail account in search of information on confidential informants within the Irish Republican Army.

Mr. Hurst had worked in Northern Ireland, running undercover operations. The BBC reported this year that his computer had been hacked and sensitive e-mails had been provided to The News of the World.

Last month, The New York Times reported that at least one of the scores of lawsuits that allege phone hacking mentions classified information from Britain's domestic intelligence agency, MI5.

A spokesman for Mr. Hain withheld comment, saying: "These are matters of national security and are subject to a police investigation so it would be inappropriate to comment." Neither the spokesman nor the police explicitly denied the report.

News International said it was "cooperating fully with the police" on all investigations, The Press Association news agency said.

The hacking scandal has spurred Prime Minister David Cameron to set up a full-blown inquiry into the practices and ethics of the British news media and its relationship with the police and politicians.

In recent days, the inquiry has heard testimony from a procession of celebrities ranging from the actor Hugh Grant to J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books, chronicling episodes of intrusion into their private lives by reporters. While the scandal revolved initially around phone hacking, it has since broadened into the realm of interference with computers by people using so-called Trojan Horse viruses for remote access to their target's computers.

The police inquiry into alleged computer hacking is one of three police investigations affecting the Murdoch media holdings in Britain. Two of them relate to claims of phone hacking and bribery of police officers. In July, Scotland Yard added computer hacking to the list after receiving what the police called "a number of allegations regarding breach of privacy" since January when previous inquiries were reopened.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/world/europe/british-hacking-scandal-widens-to-government-secrets.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

In the light of the latest round of horrors unearthed at Britain's phone-hacking inquiry, here's an interesting quote:

"Rupert Murdoch has created and flaunted an attitude of unlimited right to intrude on, harass, and - to the limit that may be legally feasible - defame people whom he or his editors target. The News Corp company ethos is one of lawlessness and unrestrained liberty self-righteously to do what it wants, inflated by notions of decisive political influence.

"I doubt if he personally ordered telephone or internet intercepts on individuals, but he must have known that some of his employees did them routinely … Murdoch deserves all the credit for building so powerful a company that most of its institutional self-confidence was justified, and most of the discredit for the sleazy way he operated it."

And who said that? Why, none other than Conrad "Tubby" Black, the disgraced Canadian-born newspaper mogul. These illuminating thoughts come from an interview he gave to the American Vanity Fair magazine for last October's issue, shortly before he was banged away in a US federal prison to finish a 42-month sentence for corporate chicanery. Black is not the most respectable of media tycoons, you might say, but then it takes one to know one.

I was intrigued by Monday's evidence to the inquiry from the young Welsh singer Charlotte Church, who told of a deal to perform at Murdoch's New York wedding to Wendi Deng in 1999. Then 13, she'd taken her agent's advice to waive her regular fee of £100,000 (now about $160,000) in return for favourable treatment from News Corp's British papers.

It didn't work. The tabloid Sun ran a daily countdown to her 16th birthday, announcing when she would be able to have legal sex. It also revealed her pregnancy before she had told her parents. And the now defunct News of the World published a front-page story about her mother's mental health problems which began: ''Superstar Charlotte Church's mum tried to kill herself because her husband is a love rat hooked on cocaine and three-in-a-bed orgies.''

Who knows where this will all end? Rupert might yet be the new Black.

Mike Carlton

Rupert Murdoch’s son James received and responded to e-mail messages in 2008 that referred to “a nightmare scenario” of legal repercussions from widespread phone hacking at the tabloid The News of the World, a chain of e-mail messages and replies released Tuesday by a British parliamentary panel shows. It is the first documentation that Mr. Murdoch had been notified of a wider hacking problem long before he has admitted.

In statements released Tuesday, James Murdoch, who runs News Corporation’s operations in Europe and Asia, admitted that he had received and replied to the message on his BlackBerry, but he said that he “did not read the full e-mail chain.” He said he stood by his repeated public denials that he knew of widespread hacking at the tabloid at the time he approved a large legal settlement with a victim of the practice in 2008.

But the new documents appear to add fuel to a controversy that has severely damaged the reputation of News Corporation and the Murdochs’ leadership, both in Britain and the United States. The e-mail chain of messages backs ups the accounts of two of James Murdoch’s former senior executives, an in-house lawyer and an editor, who said they had told him of evidence that illegally intercepting voice mail messages to gather news and gossip went beyond a single “rogue reporter.”

The top e-mail in the chain — the one Mr. Murdoch replied to directly — came from the editor of The News of the World at the time, Colin Myler, who wrote that the potential legal fallout from the hacking problem was “as bad as we feared.” Mr. Myler urged Mr. Murdoch to call a meeting promptly to discuss the issue. Mr. Murdoch replied within minutes, saying he could be available that evening or the next day.

The e-mails do not show conclusively that Mr. Murdoch knew more about the extent of hacking than he has said. But they make clear that his subordinates informed him about the potential fallout at the time they were seeking his approval for an unusually large payment of more than $1 million to a victim of hacking. That victim had obtained evidence that the practice was a common one at The News of the World.

Mr. Murdoch, viewed as a possible heir to his father at News Corporation, has come under pressure from British politicians and some shareholders of the global media company to explain how much he and other senior executives knew about the hacking. The e-mails seem likely to provide ammunition to critics of News Corporation’s leadership who have expressed doubts that James Murdoch or his father could have been as unaware of intrusive reporting practices at the tabloid as they have claimed.

The e-mail messages were sent to the parliamentary panel, the Commons’ committee on culture, media and sport, as part of an internal investigation by News International, the tabloid’s parent company. The parliamentary committee is investigating allegations that the tabloid illegally intercepted the voice-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of people in the news between 2001 and 2009.

After several years of denials, News International admitted widespread phone hacking earlier this year after a cascade of revelations, followed by dozens of lawsuits. At least 18 former News of the World employees have since been arrested, and the 168-year-old newspaper itself was closed down this summer.

In several intense and dramatic sessions of the parliamentary committee this year, Mr. Murdoch and his former executives gave differing testimony over the crucial question of what he knew, and when. Directly contradicting Mr. Murdoch’s statements, the executives told the committee that they informed him in 2008 that the company line — that phone hacking was the work of one “rogue reporter” — was not likely to be true.

They say that when Mr. Murdoch approved a large settlement of £725,000, then about $1.4 million, in a phone hacking lawsuit that year, he did so with full knowledge that other reporters at the paper may have been involved in similar practices. Mr. Murdoch has consistently countered that on the contrary, he knew of only a single reporter who was guilty of phone hacking at the paper and that he approved the settlement, which included a confidentiality clause, because his lawyers told him it made financial sense.

The e-mails, from Saturday, June 7, 2008, discuss that lawsuit, brought by a British soccer union executive, Gordon Taylor, whose phone had been hacked by The News of the World. One lawyer said the case was a “nightmare scenario,” because it might uncover other voice-mail interceptions and names other journalists implicated.

Another message noted that Mr. Taylor wanted to demonstrate that hacking was “rife throughout the organization.” As he forwarded the chain to Mr. Murdoch, Mr. Myler, the editor, warned that the situation was “as bad as we feared” and requested a meeting to discuss the matter further.

In a letter that Mr. Murdoch sent to the parliamentary panel, also released on Tuesday, he said he recalled no conversation with Mr. Myler that weekend and reaffirmed his position that he was “not aware of evidence that either pointed to widespread wrongdoing or indicated that further investigation was necessary.” He also apologized for failing to bring up the e-mail exchange when questioned extensively this year, saying he had been reminded of it only last week by the internal inquiry.

The lawyer who represented Mr. Taylor, Mark Lewis, who also represents several of those currently bringing lawsuits over allegations of phone hacking, said Tuesday that he was not convinced by Mr. Murdoch’s statement. “James Murdoch accepts that he signed the check to Gordon Taylor,” Mr. Lewis said. “Now we have to believe that not only didn’t he know but no one asked him what he thought of the e-mail he was sent.”

A spokeswoman for News International declined to answer further questions. But a company official, who did not want to be named discussing a continuing investigation, said Mr. Murdoch still maintained that he was never given access to crucial documents that showed, in detail, the depth of the illegality at the newspaper.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/world/europe/2008-e-mail-alerted-james-murdoch-to-hacking.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

Lawyers acting for News International will shock the High Court today when they offer a humiliating apology to victims of phone hacking and announce that Rupert Murdoch's media group has settled dozens of outstanding claims linked to criminal activities at the News Of The World.

There have been months of legal manoeuvring by lawyers acting for the company, which is still aiming to halt a civil trial scheduled for next month and limit the continuing damage to the Murdoch brand. The reputational cost of offering an unqualified apology to dozens of public figures and at least one victim of the worst terrorist atrocity on the British mainland will be balanced by a degree of relief that the company is on the threshold of an endgame for civil claims from the hacking scandal.

News International's senior counsel, Michael Silverleaf, QC, will get to his feet in Court 16 of the newly-opened Rolls Building at the High Court this morning to tell Mr Justice Vos that 40 of a remaining 50 hacking victims have recently accepted offers to end their legal actions against the Murdoch empire.

Among the most high-profile victims who have accepted NI's cash are the Labour MP Chris Bryant and the former footballer Paul Gascoigne.

Others who have settled or are close to settling include: Tony Blair's former communications chief, Alastair Campbell; the disgraced former Labour MP Elliot Morley; Phil Hughes, the agent who represented football legend George Best; and Sheila Henry, whose son Christian Small was killed in the 7/7 bomb attacks on London's transport network.

Lawyers close to the process said the two main law firms engaged in negotiations on behalf of News International, Linklaters and Olswang, were engaged in "a final push" to prevent the civil trial scheduled for 13 February from becoming an arena where more of the NOTW's dirty laundry is seen in public.

Steven Heffer, a solicitor representing three victims of phone hacking by the now-defunct Sunday tabloid, said: "A large number of claims against News Group Newspapers have settled or are close to settlement. These include three of my clients where agreement has been reached for payment of substantial damages and appropriate apologies."

The civil trial is intended to set out the blueprint for the level of financial compensation and legal costs for all civil actions - current and future - brought against News International relating to illegal interception of voicemails. A total of 63 cases were filed in the first wave of damages claims. But after Scotland Yard disclosed last month that it had identified 803 victims from the files of the jailed private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, many more claims are expected to be decided in light of Mr Justices Vos's final ruling on the appropriate levels of damages.

Victims' lawyers are also expected to outline in more detail than has so far been revealed the precise hacking methods used by NOTW journalists. The trial is expected to go beyond any detail so far heard at the Leveson Inquiry into press standards.

Gerald Shamash, who represents five victims, said all of his clients' claims were being settled. Between now and 13 February, News International's legal teams are expected to redouble their efforts to reach agreements with those either still determined to have their day in court or who expect the company to increase its offer of damages.

In a pre-trial hearing last year, Mr Justice Vos refused to rule out imposing exemplary or punitive damages on News International. Niri Shan, a media lawyer at Taylor Wessing, said: "News International are trying to avoid the judge making awards that will set a dangerous precedent. They're buying off the risk of that, and it's not unheard of for cases to settle at the last minute - even at the door of the court."

Sorry Day For Murdoch As High Court Hears Hacking Apology

Criminal practices inside the News of the World went far further than phone hacking, it emerged yesterday, as News International finally admitted in the High Court that it also illegally accessed computer emails.

In an hour-long series of humbling and expensive apologies that potentially passed £10m in damages and legal costs, the admission of computer hacking opens up a new chapter in the scandal, threatening the already shredded reputation of Rupert Murdoch's media empire.

After months of denial and legal obstruction, News International offered a series of "sincere apologies" for the "damage and distress" it had caused to the private lives of victims of phone hacking, blagging and excessive surveillance.

News International's leading counsel, Michael Silverleaf QC, confirmed that Murdoch titles had unlawfully accessed the emails of the son of the serial killer Harold Shipman and the freelance journalist Tom Rowland. The scale of the payouts to victims - including £130,000 to the actor Jude Law and £50,000 to his former wife Sadie Frost - dominated the hearing before Mr Justice Vos. But Mark Lewis, the lawyer representing the family of murdered teenager Milly Dowler, described the settlements as "just the tip of the iceberg".

Another solicitor, Tamsin Allen, who represents a number of the successful claimants, said that after continually being told by executives at the NOTW that they were wrong, that there had been no illegal practices and that Mr Murdoch's News Group Newspapers intended to offer an aggressive defence, "we have now discovered a massive conspiracy involving criminal activity and a cover-up".

In the new settlements, announced in the High Court, a total of £645,000 was awarded to 15 hacking victims, with "substantial" damages awarded to three others. News International will be responsible for the legal costs, which are likely to be six-figure sums in most cases.

Confirmation that email hacking took place backs up the claim made last April by Sienna Miller that her email account had been accessed. An out-of-court settlement of £100,000 prevented further disclosures by the actress.

The Independent has previously revealed that the Metropolitan Police's ongoing investigation into computer hacking, Operation Tuleta, has uncovered evidence that the former British intelligence officer Ian Hurst had his emails hacked as part of a NOTW commission. Eighteen other seized computers are currently being investigated by Tuleta officers for further evidence of illegal email access.

Mr Justice Vos rejected an appeal by Mr Silverleaf to have the trial scheduled for 13 February cancelled. The hearing was told by NI's counsel that it was "not necessary for a civil trial of any kind", because News International was "ready, willing and able" to offer "fair and generous" damages to the 10 individuals who have so far not reached an agreement.

The unresolved cases include the actor Steve Coogan, football agent Sky Andrew, singer Charlotte Church, jockey Kieren Fallon and the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, Simon Hughes.

Indicating that News International would now engage in a final push to avoid any further revelations that could be revealed in court proceedings, Mr Silverleaf said: "If they [the remaining cases] are settled, then there can't be a trial."

However, Hugh Tomlinson QC, counsel for the victims, told the court: "It is anticipated there will be more phone- hacking cases to come." Recent evaluations by the Scotland Yard team investigating the extent of phone hacking at the defunct Sunday tabloid claim there are potentially 800 victims.

Gavin Millar QC, who represents the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, stressed that his client had not been involved in any statements read out on behalf of News International. Mr Millar said Mulcaire was facing live criminal proceedings and had played no part in their admissions of wrongdoing.

Following the hearing, a number of the claimants offered further insight into what had happened to them:

* Christopher Shipman said he had been shown and provided with copies of emails dating from 2004 which had been intercepted by Mulcaire, who was regularly commissioned by the NOTW.

* Lord Prescott claimed News Group Newspapers had admitted that some of its employees were aware of, sanctioned and requested the methods used by Mulcaire. He welcomed the compensation that followed "years of aggressive denials and a cavalier approach to private information and the law".

* Jude Law said he was "truly appalled" by what the police and his lawyers had discovered. He said that no aspect of his private life was safe from intrusion - including the lives of his children and those who worked for him. "It was never about the money," he said. "It was about standing up for myself."

We hacked emails too - News International