mr. chapman at the time, along with mr. miler who testified to this effect, took a report and from them the opinion was clear that as to their review, there was no additional illegality with respect to phone hacking in that file. as to their review, that was the opinion that was clear. and the company really rested on a number of things from then on and i certainly know that in 2009 when additional allegations came in the summer, the company really rested on a handful of things. >> i just wanted to move right up to date. to what was discovered in the offices and when it was discovered. >> so in 2010 after the civil litigations had put a spotlight or unearthed, if you will, to us, to the company, additional new evidence, new information that hadn't been there before and the police investigation started off, one of the things that was went back and looked at, i suppose in the spring by senior people at international was that file. it was relooked at. it was opened up and looked at and it was very rapidly brought to our attent

mr. chapman at the time, along with mr. myler who testified to this effect, took reports from them and the opinion was clear that as to their review there was no additional illegality with respect to phone hacking in that file. after their review that was the opinion that was clear. and the company really rested on a number of things from then on. and i certainly know in 2009 when additional allegations came in the summer the company really rested on a handful of things. >> i wanted to move right up to date to what was discovered in the officers. what was discovered? >> so in 2010, after the civil litigations had put a spotlight, if you will to us, to the company, additional new evidence, new information that hadn't been there before, and the police investigation started off. one of the thins that was went back and looked at, i suppose it was in the spring by senior people at international was that file. it was relooked at, it was opened up and looked at, and it was very rapidly brought to our attention that this was someth

>> mr chapman, who was in charge of this, has left us. he had that report for a number of years. it wasn't until mr lewis looked at it carefully that we immediately said, "we must get legal advice, see how we go to the police with this and how we should present it," etcetera. >> my understanding was that the file was with the lawyersit was with the law firmand there would have been no reason to go and re-look at it. the opinion of it was very clear based on the review that was done. as soon as it was in a new criminal investigation, it was deemed appropriate to look at it and that was immediately done. >> mr murdoch, you either haven't grasped the point or you are not reading your own newspapers in the form of the sunday times. my final question -- given the picture that has been painted of individuals on the news desk acting as gatekeepers for a private investigator, do you think it is possible at all that editors of your newspaper would not have known about these activities? do you think it is remotely possible? >> i can't say that, because of the police inquiries and, i presume

mr. chapman has left us he told mr. lewis that we immediately signed the leaflet vice to go to police the case and how we should present it. >> with the lawyers, with the law firm would've had a reason to go in real academy. again, dpu is very, very clear based on the review that that was done and as soon as there was a new criminal investigation, it is deemed appropriate and immediately donned. >> u.k. press the point. my final question, mr. murdoch, given the picture that's being painted of individuals on the new stack, asking for private investigator, do you think it's possible at all at the editor of your newspaper would not have known about these activities? do you think that's at all possible? >> i can't say that. i presume coming judicial proceedings, that's how i can tell you, except it was my understanding that should better not say, but mr. miler, appointed by mr. hanssen didn't know what was going on and he commissioned not inquiry. now, that is my understanding of it. i cannot swear to the accuracy of it. >>

mr. chapman, who was in charge of this, has left us. and he had that report for a number of years, and i told mr. lewis who looked at it that we immediately said we needed legal advice to see how to go to the police with this, and how we should present it, et cetera. >> my understanding is that the file was with the lawyers, it was with the law firm and there was no reason to look at it. the opinion was very, very clear based on the review that was done. as soon as it was in the new criminal investigation, it was deemed appropriate to look at. it was immediately done so. >> mr. murdoch you regressed on the point you didn't read your own newspapers. my final question, mr. murdoch. given the picture that's been painted of individuals on the news desk acting as gatekeepers for a private investigator, do you think it's possible at all that editors of your newspaper would not have known about these activity scienies activities? do you think it's remotely possible? >> i can't say that because of the police inquiries, and coming -- i presume co

mr. chapman has left us he told mr. lewis that we immediately signed the leaflet vice to go to police the case and how we should present it. >> with the lawyers, with the law firm would've had a reason to go in real academy. again, dpu is very, very clear based on the review that that was done and as soon as there was a new criminal investigation, it is deemed appropriate and immediately donned. >> u.k. press the point. my final question, mr. murdoch, given the picture that's being painted of individuals on the new stack, asking for private investigator, do you think it's possible at all at the editor of your newspaper would not have known about these activities? do you think that's at all possible? >> i can't say that. i presume coming judicial proceedings, that's how i can tell you, except it was my understanding that should better not say, but mr. miler, appointed by mr. hanssen didn't know what was going on and he commissioned not inquiry. now, that is my understanding of it. i cannot swear to the accuracy of it. >>

mr. john chapman was the top legal officer of news international and mr.ne was head of legal affairs at news group newspapers. >> were you informed about the findings by your son or by rebekah brooks? >> i forget, but i expect it was my son. i was in daily contact with them both. >> okay. when were you informed about the payments made to gordon taylor and max clifford? >> no. >> you were not informed? >> no. >> at no point you knew that taylor and clifford made payments? >> i never heard. >> you never informed the chief executives that you authorized payment of half a million pounds -- i'd like you to tell me whether you had informed your father that you had authorized payment to gordon taylor as a result of him being a victim of a crime? >> the settlement with mr. taylor, and i'm happy to address the matter of mr. taylor in some detail if you would like. >> first just let me know -- >> my father became aware after the settlement was made in 2009, i believe, after the confidential settlement had become public as the newspaper reported on the out of court s

mr. chapman was asked his knowledge of it, and why it hadn't come to light before. and the management and standards committee -- >> what was his response to you? >> his response to us at the time was that he was off to do an investigation into the illegal interception of voice mails, that he felt that he -- he felt that the harbottle & lewis recommendation, which was the letter that you have got. >> very misleading letter. >> he felt, as our legal adviser that the letter from harbottle & lewis was -- >> got you off the hook. >> no, was an accurate review of the harbottle & lewis file. that is something that clearly you've heard today by james murdoch that he thought it was on examination. >> did he just -- >> do what, sorry? >> did he just clearly get holt r-r to issuharbottle & lewis toa misleading evidence, to sit on evidence that gave lies, to get everything off their own backs? >> harbottle & lewis are a very respected law firm. i'm not sure that it's fair to accuse them of -- >> i'm not. i'm asking about john chapman who reported to you. >> you said -- you aske

mr. chapman was asked for his knowledge of it, why it hadn't come to light before, and the management and standards committee -- >> what was his response to you? >> his response at the time was that he was asked to do an investigation into the illegal interception of voice mails, that he felt that -- he felt that the recommendation, which was the letter that you have got -- >> very misleading matter. >> he felt as our legal advisor that the letter was -- >> got you off the hook? >> no, was an accurate review of the file, that is, something as clearly you heard today, neither james murdoch nor i thought it was on closer examination. >> did he just do that off his own bat? >> do what, sorry? >> did he just clearly get them to issue a misleading letter or letter that may not have been misleading to them at the time but actually to sit on evidence that gave a lie to what we were told, did he just do that off his own bat? >> i think they are a very respected law firm. i'm not sure that it's fair of you to accuse them of -- >> i'm not. i'm asking about john chapman, who reported to you. >> you

mr. chapman was asked and took knowledge of it, why it hadn't come to light before and the management standards committee. >> was his response to you legs >> his response at the time was that he was to do an investigation into your voicemails that he fell -- he felt that the recommendation, which was the letter you have got. he felt that the latter firm lewis was inaccurate review of the file. that is something you had today that neither james murdoch or i thought it was a closer examination. >> to clearly get the issue or the letters that are misleading to sit on evidence. >> carbolic and louis berger respect date. i'm not asking about john chapman who reported you. >> to the cake the decision not to sell anything? >> you asked me if john chapman had asked -- >> no, he asked you what he said to you. >> yes, but she also said committee john chapman ask carbolic and louis to write a misleading letter? and my response to that less than whispery sleep at harvard and louis were respect to then ensure that would be the case and john chapman had been at their respective lawyer at the international fo

mr. john chapman was the top legal officer and mr. crowe was the head of legal affairs. >> were you informed of that by your son or rebekah brooks? >> i forget. but by expect it was my son. i was in daily contact with them both. >> when were you informed about the payments made to gordon taylor and mike clifford? >> no. >> you never informed the chief executives of the payment i want you to tell me whether you informed your father you authorized payments to gordon taylor as a result of him being a victim of a crime. >> the settlement with mr. taylor i'm happy to address the matter plaintiff taylor in some detail if you would like. my father became aware after the settlement was made in 2009, i believe, after the confidential settlement had become public as a newspaper reported on ought out-of-court settlement afterwards. the settlement in a civil claim that nature is something that normally in a company our size the responsible executives in the territory of the country would be authorized to make. that's the way the company is functi

mr. john chapman was the top legal and mr. head of legal affairs at news group newspapers. >> were you informed about the findings by your son, mr. murdoch, or by rebekah brooks? >> i forget, but i expect it was my son. i was in daily contact with them both. >> okay. when were you informed about the payments made to gordon taylor and max clifford? >> no. >> you were not informed? >> no. >> at no point you knew that taylor and clifford were made payments? >> no. >> okay. >> you never informed the chief executives of news corp that you authorized payment of half a million dollars. >> can i answer the questions now, mr. watt stone? >> i'd like you to tell me whether you informed your father that you authorized payments to gordon taylor as a result of him being a victim of a crime? >> the settlement with mr. taylor -- i'm happy to address the matter of mr. taylor in some detail, if you would like -- >> first just let -- >> my father became aware after the settlement was made in 2009, i believe, after the confidential settlement ha

mr. john chapman. >> reporter: the parliament committee had hoped to get answers to specific detailed questions about the phone hacking, but often the head of news corp. and his deputy chief operating officer either didn't know or weren't saying. >> i have no knowledge. >> i cannot -- i don't know. >> reporter: james defended executives les hinton and rebekah brooks, who resigned from their positions last friday. both formerly led the british newspaper. later in the day brooks faced questions by herself from the same panel. she was arrested on sunday over allegations of phone hacking and payments to police for information. she, too, denies any wrongdoing or any knowledge of wrongdoing. >> i have never paid a policeman myself. >> reporter: but for the murdochs, the day was not just about defending themselves. they were trying to salvage the reputation of news corp. >> "the news of the world" is less than 1% of our company. i employ 53,000 people around the world. >> reporter: in just two weeks, the second largest media company in the world has come under withering attack. >> and it is our determ

mr. speaker, the whole country has been appalled by the disclosures, the 7/7 victims the parents of holly wells and jessica chapman and, of course, there is a major police investigation on the way. there is one currently under way in our country. this clearly did not get to the truth. it is important that we had inquiries that are public and independent. this is the behavior of individual people. clearly, we cannot start all those. it may be possible to start it earlier. i will be happy to discuss. we will make sure we get this right. it is possible. they can start the process now. they should immediately appoint a senior leader. next year, they will have power to call witnesses on those. they are covering a number of key issues. there is the nature of regulation that is crucial. it is the relationship between the media and the police. i'm wondering if they can respond on those points. >> thought let me do that. of the two issues that i mentioned, the broader lessons as their parents i do think responding longer in may be possible to make a start on other elements. i do not want us to rush this decision. alatas to

mrs. rachel and chris chapman!800-registry who saw their story. they provided video of the big event to nbc news. >> rachel very much wanted her and chris' wedding to be reflective of who they are as a couple. their love is very easy to see. they live their vows longed before they ever said them. >> reporter: wheeled down the aisle by her father in the dress she originally planned on wearing, rachel made her way to chris surrounded by the warmth of family, friends, and sunshine. >> the person who has the biggest impact on my life, i can finally call mine. >> i love you so much. you're my best friend. ♪ >> give them a round of applause. >> rachel danced with her father to "sun rise sunset" and she twirled around with chris for the first time as husband and wife. now we're told the happy couple is off to fiji for their honeymoon. we wish them a wonderful life together. that's true love. >> they are truly in love. she's got a good one and he's got a good one as well. >> amazing young woman. >>> just ahead, why turn 40

mr. speaker, the whole country has been appalled by the disclosures, the 7 victims the parents of holly wells and jessica chapman and, of course, it does not involve police officers who were involved in the original investigation. that clearly did not get to the truth. but i do think that we have inquiries that are public and independent and have public confidence. there are two vital issues that we need to look into. the first is the original police inquiry and why that did not get to the bottom, and the second is about the behavior of individual people and individual media organizations, and has the right hon. john allman says, a book into this country. it may be possible to start some of the work earlier. i'm willing to work to make sure we get this right. >> let me thank the prime minister that i am encouraged that the prime minister does not recognize that we need a full inquiry into what happened. it is right to say that this can only be fully completed after the police investigation has taken this course. however, as he said in his answer, that may take some years. it is possible for the prime minister to

mr. speaker, the whole country has been appalled by the disclosures, the 7/7 victims the parents of holly wells and jessica chapman and, of course, the phone of millie doweler. how anyone could hack into her phone, listen to her family's frantic messages and delete them giving false hope to those parents are a moral and a disgrace. >> here, here. >> given the gravity what has occurred will the prime minister support the cause for full independent public inquiry to take place as soon as practical until the culture and practices of british newspapers? >> let me be very clear, yes, we do need to have a inquiry, possibly inquiries as to what has happened. let us be clear, we're no longer talking about politicians and celebrities. we're talking about murder victims, potentially terrorist victims having their phones hacked into. it is absolutely disgusting at what has taken place and i think everyone in this house and indeed this country will be revolted by what they've heard and what they've seen on their television screens. let me -- if i may, mr. speaker, make a couple of points. first of all, there is -- and people