why did you sack tom crohn? >> we didn't sack tom crohn. what happened with tom crohn was when we made the very regressable decision to close the "news of the world" after 168 years, tom crohn has p predominantly been the news of the world lawyer. he predominantly spent most of his time, in fact pretty much 99% of his time on the news of the world. and the rest of the company and the rest of the titles had -- we had appointed new lawyers and there wasn't i job for tom once we closed the news of the world and he left. >> someone is still dealing with the news of the world legal cases, though, presumably. >> yeah. the civil cases are being dealt with by -- like you said, the first one is the standards and management committee that we've set up. and you've seen the announcements on that recently. and i won't go over it. i know james and rupert have talked about it. but also farris, who'd been doing the civil indications all along, we've got some test cases coming up before the judge in january and there are people dealing with it. but tom croh

majority but they agreed on the other main points the editor of "news of the world" colin myler, tom crohnnd les hinton all misled them when they gave evidence earlier on that they misled parliament, that's a serious charge. the report will be put before the house of commons, probably vote it through unanimously and no one knows what will happen then. it's possible they'd be called to apologize in person which hasn't happened since the 1950s. it's a big deal but also this criticism of rupert and james murdoch, withering criticism about their grip on this situation or lack of grip on the phone hacking situation that will have big knock-on news reports in the u.s. >> it "exhibited willful blindness" to what was going on in his public's publications. in addition to an apology which takes you some steps the bigger question is what happens to this media empire if he's deemed to be unfit to run part ap.? >> reporter: well absolutely. shareholders are not going to be too impressed with this, to put it neither will. it's particularly damning for their attempt to take over the bskyb here. they with

we also concluded that tom crohn misled the committee by giving a counterimpression of the significance of the confidentiality clause in the gordon taylor settlement and sought to mislead the committee on commissioning of surveillance. we concluded that tom crone and colin miler misled the committee about their knowledge of evidence that other "news of the world" employees had been involved in phone hacking and other wrongdoing. the committee went on to conclude, but only by a majority vote, that whilst there was no definitive evidence to prove whether or not james murdoch was aware of the for neville e-mail or, indeed, other evidence which indicated that phone hacking was widespread, the committee was nevertheless astonished that he did not seek to see the evidence of which the decision to pay the settlement in the gordon taylor case was based. the committee also went on, again, to conclude by majority vote that corporately the "the news of the world" and news international had misled the committee repeatedly about the true extent and nature of the investigations that they claim to hav