So much for...
... the right to silence...
A judge has ordered the private investigator who intercepted the voicemail messages of politicians and celebrities to name the journalists who commissioned the illicit hacks. Glenn Mulcaire and disgraced News of the World Royal correspondent Clive Goodman were jailed for six months and four years, respectively, back in 2007 …
... the right to silence...
Right to silence is so that you don't give evidence to incriminate yourself.
Withholding evidence against someone else is an entirely different matter
You both must be American.
“You do not have to say anything but anything you do say will be taken down and may be given in evidence.”
I'm not American and I know that the English Caution runs "You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
It does not matter whether he has been convicted or not, he is still entitled to maintain his silence if he believes that to break that silence would incriminate him. This is a right which has been confirmed by the European Court on Human Rights.
For the Judge to issue an ultimatum "give up your right to silence or we'll jail you" is unconscionable.
Cameron hires Hack. Very trustworthy!
That way he can be sure the guy stays out of HIS voicemail :-)
that is all
"Tell us who they were otherwise we send you to prison".
So much for the right to remain silent, and this isn't even a criminal trial!
This is an abuse of democracy, of our rights.
Mulcaire is already convicted criminal. He was convicted of illegal interception, and sentenced to prison for six months in 2007. So his guilt has already been proven.
Thus, expectations of innocence and doubt aren't really justified.
Beyond reasonable doubt, the man is a criminal.
Would these be the kind of rights where a police officer can assault you while being filmed and still get away with it?
... of offences like obstruction of justice or conspiracy? These people abused their victim's right to privacy and it's only fair that they should be brought to justice. The police and courts are right to pursue them, using legal means to find out what happened.
Is "FOAD judge" a valid legal defence?
I used to get anonymous cell calls from a guy with an gravelly Australian accent, and next day a brown envelope would appear through my letter box.
Never did catch the guys name ...
I didn't buy that statement for a second. Not a chance..
"Coulson resigned over the Goodman affair, only to land on his feet as communications director for David Cameron."
They leave a trail of destruction everywhere they go. But never where they are at that time.
Kinda like they wait a while, shit in their own backyard, then leave it for someone else to clean up the mess. All the while being pristine clean themselves.
Let's hope Karma catches up.
How else could he have got paid *without* upper management involvement?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017