Jingle Bells .. UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 903-ii
HOUSE OF COMMONS ORAL EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT PHONE HACKING TUESDAY 19 JULY 2011 RUPERT MURDOCH and JAMES MURDOCH REBEKAH BROOKS
really should read that soon .. Jingle Bells .. LOL .. couldn't find hide nor 'air of it in the SMH .. http://www.smh.com.au/ or The Australian .. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/ .. dancing all the way .. what sweet news!, arizona!!!! .. on reading this ..
"The judicial laws around perjury in UK criminal cases are much stricter and easier to bring to completion than in the US, and perjury in a criminal case will usually result in jail time as well as a fine."
it was 3 back-flips, in a triple somersault .. LMAO!!! all the way up .. then i read this ..
/////////////////////
Could James Murdoch Be Punished If He Lied Before Parliament?
by Marian Wang - ProPublica, July 25, 2011, 11:05 a.m. - .. MULTI links ..
James Murdoch (Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images)
It’s three against one for James Murdoch. That’s the latest tally of how many former News International executives have publicly accused the son of Rupert Murdoch of giving inaccurate testimony before Parliament last week.
The younger Murdoch says he stands by his testimony, but what if it turns out he fibbed? Could James Murdoch be tried for perjury?
In the United States, witnesses before congressional committees commonly testify under oath [PDF] at investigative hearings—thereby criminalizing any intentional misstatements, which are punishable by up to five years in prison.
But taking an oath to tell the “truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” is less common in hearings before British parliamentary committees, according to the Guardian. Though the committee reportedly considered making an exception for the Murdochs, ultimately no oath was administered.
So, even if Murdoch had lied, he wouldn’t have committed perjury. In theory, Murdoch could still be punished by fines or imprisonment if he’s found to have committed a contempt of Parliament or, in other words, done something to impede the work of Parliament.
But such serious sanctions are rare. One member of Parliament said last week that criminal sanctions hadn’t been applied to lying witnesses “in modern times.” Read the exchange between the MP and the Leader of the House of Commons, Sir George Young: ----- Mr David Ruffley (Bury St Edmunds) (Con): Select Committees will have a vital role in getting to the truth behind the allegations of phone hacking and other corrupt practices, but in modern times this place has not used criminal sanctions against witnesses who lie to Select Committees. In the light of the inquiries announced this week and the public interest, would it be possible to have an urgent debate when the House returns in September on why this is?
Sir George Young: If a Select Committee feels that there has been a contempt, the procedure is that it makes a report to the House and then the Speaker decides whether to give it priority, and if he does it is put on the Order Paper and referred to the Standards and Privileges Committee. If that Committee finds that there has been a contempt, it has at its disposal a wide range of penalties, including fines. ... It is entirely a matter for the Standards and Privileges Committee, and ultimately the House, what sanctions should then be applied to anyone who has committed a contempt. ----- Murdoch testified last week that he had signed off on a phone hacking settlement with a British soccer player without knowledge of the details—and in particular, without seeing a key piece of evidence: an email laying out the extent of phone hacking at the newspaper. Two former News of the World executives have countered that statement, saying Murdoch was “mistaken”—they had personally showed him the email at the time. Several British politicians—including British Prime Minister David Cameron—have said that Murdoch should be hauled back before Parliament to explain the discrepancies.
One of the two executives, Colin Myler, also faces similar questions about inaccurate testimony before Parliament. James Murdoch himself had said when closing News of the World that company executives had misled Parliament in earlier hearings on phone hacking that took place in 2007 and 2009. Myler, along with former News International chairman Les Hinton, had testified in those hearings that there was no evidence that more than one reporter had been involved in the hacking. Hinton resigned two weeks ago from his post as CEO of Dow Jones & Co., saying his testimony wasn't meant to mislead and that he hadn’t been aware of what was happening at the company.
which sure read like they knew what they were talking about, i didn't want to believe it .. ProPublica, rang a bell, but had to check .. bit from wiki ..
Reception
Praise
ProPublica is also renowned for conducting a large-scale, circumscribed investigation on Psychiatric Solutions, a company based in Tennessee that buys failing hospitals, cuts staff, and accumulates profit. The report covered patient deaths at numerous Psychiatric Solutions facilities, the failing physical plant at many of their facilities, and covered the State of Florida's first closure of Manatee Palms Youth Services, which has since been shut down by Florida officials once again. Their report was published in conjunction with The Los Angeles Times.
Criticism
Dave Kopel, a policy analyst for the libertarian Cato Institute and a former columnist for the now-defunct Rocky Mountain News, criticized a ProPublica report on hydraulic fracturing as a "one-sided series of facts arrayed to support a point of view". He argued that a common theme in ProPublica's work is that "the government is not doing a good enough job in controlling things, particularly things involving big business". ProPublica later responded to his article, countering those claims and saying quote, "using carefully culled quotations and selected statistics, Kopel asserts 'indisputably false facts' in ProPublica's reporting." Board members .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProPublica
darn, as felt, it seems they probably know their business .. not sure, but i'm not feeling like dancing anymore .. sadly, it kinda looks like ProPublica has trumped IA on that one .. DANG .. lol .. many many thanks for the article, arizona! .. a really good catch .. hope i'm wrong .. LOL .. gulp ..
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
