UKC

Following on from the Coulson thread, Brooks has decided to broadcast her innocence and she feels vindicated.

Is this the same woman whom I heard with my own ears, say she paid police officers for stories? ( later rescinded, no doubt on the advice of her brief)
And had tried to hide evidence.
( and for all we know was successful- hence the ' not guilty verdict'

http://www.channel4.com/news/phone-hacking-trial-innocent-vindicated-rebeka...

Is there anyone on here who actually accepts her word for this ?

( You may have guessed, I don't believed a word of it)

In reply to Jim C:
I don't believed a word of it

ME neither, BUT she does look purty....

In reply to Padraig:

"BUT she does look purty...."

Should have gone to Specsavers!

In reply to Padraig:


If I was kind, I would say that this trial has taken it's toll on her looks.
( I do like redheads particularly with wavy hair )
true

Her evidence, on the other hand,is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing like the truth

In reply to Jim C:

She should just shut the f*ck up, crawl away and be happy she got away with it. Vindicated my arse. "Incompetent" I think the judge called her for apparently knowing nothing of what happened on her watch.

In reply to Jim C:




Does anyone?

In reply to mypyrex:


The jury?

In reply to Jim C:

She was not vinidicated she was found not guilty in a trial where guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. It is not uncommon for those found not guilty of criminal charges to have lost subsequent civil actions where the burden of proof is less strict. There is also now the question of competance given the widespread problems in the organisation she ran; how did she not know?. Maybe more to the point building a culture of deniability and having the best of both worlds must be tempting for such execs but we just dont know with her and possibly never will.

In reply to Offwidth:

I should also be remembered that News international funded her extensive legal team, whilst I believe the Dpp had just a single barrister and a couple of part-time assistants. It's almost as if someone wanted the prosecution to fail

In reply to Chris the Tall:
Its worrying but less so than the many more who simply cant afford to look for justice. The law always favoured the rich but never in modern times as much as now. Look at the gap in the out of court settlements for hacking between the stars and the ordinary folk.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


More details here:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/25/-sp-phone-hacking-trial-rebe...