tied to the british phone hacking scandal. new evidence suggests senior editors at the "news of the world" knew that illegal eavesdropping was wide spread at that tabloid. nbc's
kosinksi is in london.
, good morning to you.
and his son told lawmakers they had no indication hacking could have been wide spread at "the news of the world." nobody told them, they say, even though out comes an old letter from a former reporter saying hacking was
, discussed as part of daily meetings.
the most humble day of my life.
and son james denied knowing anything at the top about phone hacking practices at "news of the world," allegedly celebrities, royal, murder victims, despite private investigators being on the payroll, despite paying out huge settlements to people suing over it. whatever they knew or didn't, a letter has now surfaced from their former royal reporter to the company's hr department. clyde goodman who spent months in pri or for the hacking, released in
that hacking was widely discussed in the daily editorial conference. he told them editor andy colton who has since been arrested banned mentioning it. that it had the full knowledge and support of senior staff and that the editor promised on many occasions that i could come back to a job at the newspaper if i didn't implicate the paper or any of its staff. that editor told parliament this two years ago.
i never condoned the phone hacking nor do i have any recollection of where phone hacking took place.
deliberate decision by the company to mislead parliament, then the substantial question has to be asked, that sounds like a deliberate cover-up.
and now there's talk of calling
back to parliament. he explained why his company didn't push further in internal investigation.
opinion based upon that review with issues with the company with respected
and the opinion was clear, and the company rested on that.
is calling james' testimony inaccurate, misleading, and self-serving. the company's response? that it understands how important this all is and will continue to cooperate. the murdochs say, look, both police and
told us there was no
reason to believe
this was anything bigger, although the lawyers say, wait a minute, what we asked to look at was very, very limited. so is there any evidence that the murdochs knew that hacking could have been extensive? no. and the investigation goes on. matt?
kosinksi in london this morning. thank you.
it's 18 after the hour.