mr. james murdoch. you made a statement on the 7th of july in which you stated that the paper had made statements to parliament without being in the full possession of the facts, and that was wrong. you essentially admitted the parliament had been misled in what we were told. can you tell us to what extent we were misled and when you became aware of that? >> mr. chairman, thank you very much, and i'd like to say as well how sorry i am and how sorry we are to particularly the victims of illegal voice mail interceptions and their families. it's the matter of great regret of mine, my father's, and everyone at news corporation and these are standards, these actions do not live up to the standards that our company aspires to everywhere around the world, and it's our determination to both put things right, make sure these things don't happen again, and to be the company that i know we've always aspired to be. as for my comments, mr. chairman, in my statement, which i believe was around the closure of the news

mr. murdoch. i do very much appreciate your and encourage and having seen this through despite what just happened to you. thank you. >> thank you [inaudible] when you signed off on the payment, did you see or were you made aware of that transcript that he had? >> nope. i was not aware of that at the time. >> there was no reason for it. >> there was every reason to settle the case given the likelihood of losing the case and given the damages that we had conceived council would be levied. >> if they are prepared to release their obligation to the system jihadi will you release the clause so that we can get? >> i cannot comment on the matter. i wasn't involved in that matter. as to the matter is a confidential agreement i don't think it is worth exploring hypothetical. >> he removes himself from an obligation. if he were to realize if his people were to be released -- >> in the hypothetical scenario i am happy to respond to the chairman about what is specifically you would like to know. other than th

mr. murdoch said he did not review the full contents of the time and was so unaware of its significance. police in pakistan say they have freed almost 70 boys and men being kept in captivity in a religious school in a southern port city of karachi, and many were found in chains, and the youngest was just seven years old. some were arrested, but others got away. from islamabad, a report. >> descending into a torture chamber. that is what local officials have called this basement. still in chains down below, the men and boys who police say were kept like animals, shackled, starved, and beaten. it was known locally as a jail, and for those kept here, that is what it was. "they would tie us up and cane us 200 times." "they were beating everyone too much," this man said, "and they were not giving us enough food. " they are looking to see if there are links with militants, but so far, there is no proof. after they were freed, the students were led away, still chained together, because police could not find the keys. some were said to be drug addicts or petty criminals, said their by their fami

mr. murdoch said? >> my recollection, yes. >> we know that mr. murdoch did back mr.yer before 1997, didn't he? >> yes, he did. >> thank you very much, mr. moore again. there may be further questions, but those i have to ask of you. >> okay, thank you. >> i'd like to ask mr. morgan about stephen not. i don't know whether you recall that. >> yes, i do. >> mr. moore again, you said in your book and you confirmed in your evidence to the inquiry earlier that the first you ever heard of the practice of phone hacking was on the 26th of january, 2001. is that correct? >> yes,. >> any still maintain that, don't you? >> yes. >> you were the editor of the daily mirror in august 1998, where you? >> yes. >> in your member no doubt been a black man who is one of your editors come is that correct? >> yes, she was a reporter actually. >> she was actually special projects editor 1998, was that she? >> i don't know. she may have been. >> were you aware that she was contact by someone by a major news story about how mobile telephones could be hacked? >> no. >> the story came from someo

mr. rupert murdoch. high, piers, how are you, he said cheerily. fine, thanks, boss to really enjoyed you humiliating me. instead i said i was in great shape. the paper was in great shape and while everything is in great shape it should rest in the chico. one thing i've learned is that he really doesn't want to hear you wincing so there's no point going down that road. he just wants her precisely how you intend to smash the opposition into oblivion. is that more or less correct, at least regards your state of mind, mr. morgan? >> from a business point of view, yes. >> and then what you attribute to them is i'm sorry about all that press complaining thingamajig, he said to my astonishment. is that what mr. murdoch said? >> well, that was my memory of it years later, yet. i would say it was a word for word because i don't have a recording of it. >> the thingamajig part, is, does that time with what you call in having said? >> it was my memory. the fact that he couldn't remember in that moment the exact wording, i wouldn't read too much into it. >> ri

mr. murdoch said? >> that was my memory.i do not have a recording of is. >> that thingamajig part to is that jive with what you recall him having said? >> in my memory the fact i could not remember in that moment the exact wording i would not read too much into it. >> that you will say that this must have continued with you that was one of astonishment? >> dividend of background for this, the front-page which i a created and i take full responsibility only came about because it has effectively suggested it will not be a good idea. >> you may not remember the precise words but one does remember emotions or feelings when something is said. that must have been at your state of mind when he did answer did you agree? >> he was taken aback by this year coverage of the issue the first time he made the statement against nature and i was getting kicked all over the place and he new-line was very on. he knew that i made said dumb decision that night team jane the front page at the last moment and i think he wanted to express a sense o

mr. murdoch and other newspaper people who would have objected. that's all has been broken. i don't see any reason why such a law should not be brought in. the case to my reference is not answerable. it is so clear that you need it and it is the right way to do it. the only outstanding issue is how you would arrange your tribunal to do this without it being costly. you need prior notification and an independent person to decide whether it should be published or not. >> towards the end of your statement you deal with the wider picture and your views about this regulation and it becomes that. but there are some specific points i would like to raise with you. the first point in relation -- you are well aware that he has stated publicly that the justice made his decision incorrect. he referred in the lecture in 2010 to the objective and relativistic few of justice easy and to the select justice committee that they have available expressed a similar view. i don't interpret your evidence and saying that he is entitled to express that opinion. not sure what he may be saying if it i

mr. murdoch said? >> my recollection, yes. >> we know that mr. murdoch did back mr. player before 1997, didn't he? >> yes, he did. >> thank you very much, mr. moore again. there may be further questions, but those i have to ask of you. >> okay, thank you. >> i'd like to ask mr. morgan about stephen not. i don't know whether you recall that. >> yes, i do. >> mr. moore again, you said in your book and you confirmed in your evidence to the inquiry earlier that the first you ever heard of the practice of phone hacking was on the 26th of january, 2001. is that correct? >> yes,. >> any still maintain that, don't you? >> yes. >> you were the editor of the daily mirror in august 1998, where you? >> yes. >> in your member no doubt been a black man who is one of your editors come is that correct? >> yes, she was a reporter actually. >> she was actually special projects editor 1998, was that she? >> i don't know. she may have been. >> were you aware that she was contact by someone by a major news story about how mobile telephones could be hacked? >> no. >> the story came from s

mr. murdoch when they met him this is an opportunity to put things right in the future and to have some decentds and at here to them. >> thank you very much if you can wait there we will have some further questions. >> it's fitting that you should have been in the inquiry first. first of all to deal with seven of your witness statements. this is the cry that war that occurred in may 2002. do you follow me? nist please to tell us about that in your own words? you said it formally organized? what was its purpose? >> well it was seven weeks after she had gone missing but a lot of the sort of initial media hype by the down a little bit and it was the first that was the day that she had gone missing in the afternoon and she would have come home of 4 o'clock and i remember calling and thinking actually he had gone up to london on that day and i said why don't you come back and i will meet you very and we will do that what back because so many questions are just buzzing around in your head. why didn't anyone see her etc., etc. and was a very last minute arrangement so it was maybe an hour or two befo

mr. rupert murdoch in new york, drawing it to his attention. did you receive a reply to that letter? >> no, i didn't. that letter was written on the 10th of march, and i sent it by the court of delivery, and i have evidence from the united states postal service it was delivered. i also sent two e-mails. and i was astonished because all i was asking him to do was to order an inquiry into this. i got no reply. and i have to say that i cannot imagine rising to a proper international company a letter alleging serious criminal conduct by a senior employee and get no reply. and i'm sorry to say this, but i think i will, if i may. that's conduct you suspect if -- expect if you wrote a letter to a mafia leader about one of the soldiers. but if it was a serious offense, you would expect it from the ma mafia, not a large company like this. >> your legal team will remind me in due course to get the reply, which you have been seeking because it may be possible to do that. >> thank you. >> i hope you don't mind, mr. mosely, if i leave off operation motorman. no that's just my opinion. >> the inte

the complaints and the wide proceeding treatment the complete was upheld by the dcc and then mr rupert murdochve a public statement which you set out in 34 where he said it is clear the young man, that's you, went over and had no hesitation to make the public demonstration. now i've reminded mr. morgan forcefully this is the responsibility to which she is an editor subscribes to in the employment. the company will not tolerate the company's best practices of the popular journalism. i'm going to return to that in a moment. they ask you a little bit in this first witness statement to deal with the issue of the investigators would now be 50 on page 24202 you have no recollection of any personal involvement in the use of the private investigators during your time in the news of the world but we were looking at the period that i think was less than two years. so paragraph 51 from time to time they would engage in a private investigative journalism during my time as editor the professionals were useful tools in securing the water it in evidence for or fact checking the articles and stories the journ

mr. murdoch said? >> to my recollection, yes. . .

mr. murdoch sr. said that, effectively, it was wrong to pay legal costs, particularly issuing an apology to the family whose phone he'd so cruelly hacked in the circumstances. you then came out and said that those legal costs were being stopped, but subsequently confirmed to us in a letter that any damages that are awarded against glenn mull care, the company will stand in good for. >> i think, and i'm not a lawyer, forgive me, mr. farrelly, but i think there are questions where with respect to him being a co-for the and were to be a case or a damage award against him that he was conducting work on the company behalf, then really the company's liable for those things, is my understanding. and, again, i can provide more detail on that if you like, but i think there's a legal point there. and i'm not a lawyer, but there's a legal point there that is -- >> i'm sorry -- >> -- worth noting. an agent on behalf of the business. >> if he's -- [inaudible conversations] >> thank you. >> if he is where he can't

mr. rupert murdoch in new york, drawing it to his attention. did you receive a reply to that letter? >> no, i didn't. that letter was written on the 10th of march, and i sent it by the court of delivery, and i have evidence from the united states postal service it was delivered. i also sent two e-mails. and i was astonished because all i was asking him to do was to order an inquiry into this. i got no reply. and i have to say that i cannot imagine rising to a proper international company a letter alleging serious criminal conduct by a senior employee and get no reply. and i'm sorry to say this, but i think i will, if i may. that's conduct you suspect if -- expect if you wrote a letter to a mafia leader about one of the soldiers. but if it was a serious offense, you would expect it from the ma mafia, not a large company like this. >> your legal team will remind me in due course to get the reply, which you have been seeking because it may be possible to do that. >> thank you. >> i hope you don't mind, mr. mosely, if i leave off operation motorman. no that's just my opinion. >> the inte