mr. murdoch sr., you in answer to questions from mr. watson seemed to indicate that you had a rather hands-off approach to your company. i think the point you made was that "news of the world" was less that 1% of your entire worldwide business, and so you wouldn't really be expected to know the ins and outs of what was going on. could you just give us an illustration of how many times -- how often you would speak to the editor of your newspapers? how often you'd speak to the editor of the sun, for example, how often you would speak to the editor of the "news of the world." >> very seldom. sometimes i would ripping the editor of "news of the world" on saturday night and say we have news tonight, just to keep in touch. i'd ring the editor of "the sunday times" nearly every saturday. not to influence what he has to say at all. i'm very careful to premise any remark i made to him, it's just an inquiry. i'm not really in touch. but to say i'm hands-off is wrong. i work a 10 or 12-hour day and i cannot tell you the multitude of issues that i

mr. murdoch sr. is it not time for the organization to say enough is enough. this man allegedly hacked the phone of the murdered school girl. is it not time for your organization to say do your worst, you behaved disgracefully, we're not going to pay any more of your costs? >> i would like to do that. i don't know the status of what we're doing or indeed what his contract was, whether it still has any force. >> if he -- if the organization is still paying his fees, will you give the instruction now that that should stop? >> provided it's not in breach of a contract, a legal contract, yes. >> i just want to return now to the question of making statements without being in full possession of the facts. during our 2009 inquiry, all the witnesses who came to us testified to being intimately involved, in particular a huge amount of e-mails. it seems over the past few days they have been rather quick to distance themselves from that investigation according to some of the quotes in the newspapers. could i -- it was stated to us clearly that that investigation uncovere

mr. murdoch sr., you in answer to some questions mr.o indicate that you had a rather hands-off approach to your company, but i think the point you made was that "news of the world" was less than 1% of your entire worldwide business, so you wouldn't be expected to know the ins and outs of what was going on. could you just give us an illustration of how many times -- how often you would speak to the editor of your newspapers, how often you speak to the editor of the sun, for example, how often you speak to the editor of "news of the world." >> very seldom. sometimes i would talk to the editor of "news of the world" on saturday night. it was just to keep in touch. i read the sunday times nearly every saturday. not to influence what he has to say at all. i'm very careful to premise any remark i made to him saying i was just inquiring, and i'm not really in touch. i'm going to tell you that i've -- if there's anything i've had the most trouble with is the "wall street journal," because i'm in the same building. to say that we're hands off is

foam but something quite light and managed this managed to get merged with it at which point mr mr murdoch sr is wife stands up and attempts to slash the process down to try to protect her husband question marks that moment the proceedings were suspended for around fifteen minutes in the afternoon and then. murdoch's jr and sr came back and took the stand at the end of their hearing the committee apologized profusely for what they said was an unacceptable interruption by a member of the public this is a scandal which has implications throughout society the news corp employees and indeed bosses have been answering questions the softening about what they knew about the phone hacking at the news of the world alleged payments to by journalists to.

have been shaving foam or something quite light as advantages managed to get murdoch with it at which point mr mr murdoch sr as wife stands up and attempts to slack the process down to try to protect her husband quite a dramatic moment the proceedings was disbanded for around fifteen minutes in the afternoon and then. murdoch's junior and senior came back and took the stand at the end of their hearing the committee apologized profusely for what they said was an unacceptable interruption by a member of the public. who should live press politicians and police how they survive in the scrutiny. well it's not easy and this is a this is a scandal which as you say has implications throughout society the news corp employees and indeed bosses have been answering questions the softening about what they knew about the phone hacking at the news of the world alleged payments to by journalists to the police james murdoch specifically approved pay outs settling with celebrities particularly going to being hacked why the committee was asking has he done that when he now admits that he didn't have full knowledge of what was

mr. murdoch, sr., you in answering questions from mr. watson, seemed to indicate that you had a rather hands-off approach to your company, that i think the point you made was that news of the world was less than 1% of your entire worldwide business and so you wouldn't really be expected to know the ins and outs of what was going on. could you just give us an illustration of how many times, how often you would speak to the editor of your newspapers, how often you speak to the editor "the sun" for example and, how often the editors of "the news of the world"? >> sometimes i would talk to the news of the world... [inaudible] just to keep in touch and the sunday times, nearly every saturday. not to influence what he has to say, at all. i'm very careful not to premise any remark i make, or any inquiry, and, i'm not really in touch. i indicated i have been... an editor i spend most time is, the editor of the "wall street journal." but to say we are hands off is wrong. i work a ten or 12 hour day and, i handle a multitude of issues, that i have

mr. murdoch sr. >> it was relooked at -- i'm sorry. may i? >> yes. >> it was looked at in conjunction with the new and restarted criminal investigation. these are serious matters. it was deemed that these things would be of interest to the police. we immediately brought an additional counsel, lord mcdonald, who i believe you mentioned earlier, to help advise the company on what the appropriate way forward in terms of full transparent stee and cooperation with police investigations were. they were very serious matters, and the company took them seriously. >> just two questions. >> very quickly. >> the situation that i just painted where we're now here, not knowing who at news international, "news of the world" was complicit in keeping that file containing however many bits of paper, we're nowhere near it, knowing who knew what and when about that file. >> evidence that clearly contradicts not only the select committee but evidence as it would appear that led your closest and trusted aide over many years to give misleading evidence. do you find

mr. murdoch sr. had been hit. you can then -- in later pictures if you look close, you can see the foam. more than one person suggested that, you know, this could have been a brick, it could have been, you know, nails, it could have been much more serious. you have to bear in mind if it had been anything like that, it wouldn't have got into the room. we don't know how he got in with some shaving foam. he could have said he was just been home doing the weekly shopping. who knows? it was serious, but not because it could have been a much more vicious attack. it was serious because it was a disgrace. because anybody coming to give evidence in the mother of parliaments has a right to do so with dignity and in courtesy. >> amen to that. and that is -- those disruptions something we see many times in the u.s. congress as well. richard quest thanks for your remarkable reporting today on this remarkable story. thank you. >>> let's dig deeper and continue, joanne litman is a columnist for the daily beast. and i want you to

mr. murdoch, sr., would hinton have agreed? >> it could have been. >> who else could it have been? >> the chief legal officer. signing checks, it could be an assistant c.f.o., but on the instructions of the chief legal officer. >> whose decision was a to get rid of the -- tom crone? >> the chief executive, mrs. brooks. >> senior level personnel decisions would have been made by her. >> allegations were made in "the guardian" and he left soon after. how did he leave the company? >> that i don't know. at the time, that would have been a "news of the world" matter. >> why did les hinton resign? >> he resigned, sadly, last friday following rebekah brooks' resignation saying he was in charge of the company during that period. he said he felt he must step down. >> were either les hinton or rebekah brooks asked to leave? >> they asked. >> why did you not accept rebekah brooks' resignation the first time? >> i believed her. >> she insisted. she was suffering extreme anguish. >> can you tell us how much of these characters have been paid off? how much they have been given in a financial set

murdoch, sr. and junior. 80-year-old mr. och was clearly stunned as his son but it was brave and swift actions of his wife wendy i'm told by mps on the committee, she was superb, they tell me. don't mess with wendy one of the mps on the committee told me. >> john craig, thank you. just to let you know that questions are home affairs committee. they're getting you know way now. they will be questioning the former and current director of public prosecutions. you can watch that on news interactive. that is our sister service. so if you want to watch that session you can do so. in the meantime we're waiting for rebekah brooks to give evidence. here with our editor, adam bolson before rebekah brooks comes in one word about the security breach. a shocking moment this afternoon. >> clearly, rupert is an old man and therefore, any sort of assault even though it was kind of a comedy assault apparently about this come need wran -- comedian, calls himself johnny marbles is serious matter. there were no weapons there because you have to