News of the World Whistleblower Found Dead

[bud]

you have a link for that?

sure.

Senior journalists at the News of the World paid police officers to find celebrities or other people they wanted to write about by tracking their mobile phone signal, it was reported on Tuesday.

The technique, which was know as "pinging" in the paper's newsroom, pinpoints handsets by using mobile phone masts to measure the strength of their signal, according to the New York Times.

Its use normally has to be authorised by the police and security forces with the mobile phone networks on a case-by-case basis under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa), in which a request signed by a senior police officer is sent to the network authorising the location of the phone.

Using those powers to locate individuals who were not the subject of a police surveillance or serious crime investigation would constitute a breach of Ripa - which was the basis for the jailing of the News of the World's royal editor Clive Goodman in 2007.

[Guest American Woman]

And that has what, exactly, to do with the police officers involved in Sean Hoare's death?

[bud]

And that has what, exactly, to do with the police officers involved in Sean Hoare's death?

absolutely nothing, you dimwit.

[Guest American Woman]

absolutely nothing, you dimwit.

Right. It has absolutely nothing to do with them, but I'm the dimwit. Thanks for showing who you are - yet again.

[Oleg Bach]

Did you see that Murdoch female go after the comedian shaving cream pie tosser? Those Murdochs are a tough bunch - they might just be capable of killing you if you really piss them off or they feel a threat...It was telling - If a female member of the family has such protective and aggressive vigor - Imagine what the males could be like. Oh and that hot arch angel red haired demon woman ---she looks dangerous also - the editor who supposedly just stepped down -

The inquiry was a strange proceeding because the executives - were quite taken back that their NORMAL behavour was not normal in the normal world. They looked surprise that evil was not as ecceptable to the general public as it was to them.

[bud]

Did you see that Murdoch female go after the comedian shaving cream pie tosser? Those Murdochs are a tough bunch - they might just be capable of killing you if you really piss them off or they feel a threat...It was telling - If a female member of the family has such protective and aggressive vigor -

the wife is wendy deng. a 42 year old chinese woman who has become murdoch's access into the chinese market.

Imagine what the males could be like.

his son did nothing but to look on while facial cream man went for his father. he was frozen. these guys are pencil pushers and nothing else.

[bush_cheney2004]

Did you see that Murdoch female go after the comedian shaving cream pie tosser? Those Murdochs are a tough bunch....

Yes, that was excellent. She jumped into action to bitch slap the pie perp. My kind of woman...salute!

The inquiry was a strange proceeding because the executives - were quite taken back that their NORMAL behavour was not normal in the normal world. They looked surprise that evil was not as ecceptable to the general public as it was to them.

Hacking into public facing accounts of all types is far more common than people realize. When it comes to phone messages, the funny part is that 30 years ago, phone messages were written on little pink slips by the receptionist for anyone in the office to see.

[Oleg Bach]

Perfect example of what they called highly successful corporate culture. This out fit based it's profits in sensationalism and titilzation of the weak public mind. The culture that had formed over a period of time was one of total immorality..with no regard to any sort of ethical behaviour. As mentioned those that were being questioned had this strange persona of surprise...a surprise that quietly shocked their privledged pointed little heads.

It would be like a company that started eating newborn babies for lunch and did so for years..until someone appeared and said that eating babies was real bad...and they should not do it. The response to the reprimand was such " What - we have been gobbling down fried baby parts for years....it's what we do and it keeps us on top of the tabloid game..Oooh I see - of course we agree that eating babies is bad - and we never really did eat them - though a few baby parts might have fallen into the company buffet` by accident - and that we will correct because we are good people" This is a type of corporate insanity - where profit and being number one clouded the mind and ego to the point of utter moral blindness.

[BubberMiley]

Right. It has absolutely nothing to do with them, but I'm the dimwit. Thanks for showing who you are - yet again.

I believe he was pointing out that they were all of the same bribed police department, but was too frustrated and impatient with your wittedness to clarify.

[Guest American Woman]

I believe he was pointing out that they were all of the same bribed police department, but was too frustrated and impatient with your wittedness to clarify.

Speaking of "wittedness," bud's link/post doesn't say that. There's nothing in his link that says the officers who were paid by News of the World were from the same department, much less the officers who are involved in the investigation of his death, so not surprisingly, he once again he resorted to insults instead of responding to the actual post. Now if you'd like to offer up the proof, go for it....... or can you only follow in his footsteps?

[bud]

Speaking of "wittedness," bud's link/post doesn't say that. There's nothing in his link that says the officers who were paid by News of the World were from the same department, much less the officers who are involved in the investigation of his death, so not surprisingly, he once again he resorted to insults instead of responding to the actual post. Now if you'd like to offer up the proof, go for it....... or can you only follow in his footsteps?

why don't you give it a rest so you wouldn't look more like a dimwit?

if people in the police force are capable of being corrupt by taking money to do illegal activities in regards to the very same case, why isn't it reasonable to assume that people in the police force who are dealing with the death of this man, who was a whistleblower involving the same case, could be lying?

Edited July 20, 2011 by bud

[Guest American Woman]

why don't you give it a rest so you wouldn't look more like a dimwit?

Why don't you try being civil? You think constantly throwing insults does anything to strengthen your positions? Honestly, I'm so glad I'm not a Palestinian, because support from the likes of you does nothing helpful to their situation.

if people in the police force are capable of being corrupt by taking money to do illegal activities in regards to the very same case, why isn't it reasonable to assume that people in the police force who are dealing with the death of this man, who was a whistleblower involving the same case, could be lying?

Because they aren't the same people??

What an ignorant outlook. Just because there are some corrupt police officers doesn't mean every police officer should be suspect or that it's "reasonable" to assume that they would be -- and that someone who doesn't automatically assume so is a "dimwit."

[bud]

Because they aren't the same people??

the head of scotland yard has resigned over the corruption charges meaning that this is not a problem with just a few people. how the hell do you know that the police officers involved in investigating the death of the whistleblower are not also corrupt? you don't. so considering the circumstances, it is very reasonable to assume that they can also be corrupt and their announcement that the death is not suspicious can be and should be questioned.

What an ignorant outlook.

what a dimwitted response.

Just because there are some corrupt police officers doesn't mean every police officer should be suspect or that it's "reasonable" to assume that they would be -- and that someone who doesn't automatically assume so is a "dimwit."

don't be silly. the whistleblower would have been one of the witnesses in outing the corrupt people involved in the police force. it is reasonable to assume that others in the police force could be involved in further corruption in order to cover their department.

here, dimwit, take a look at this:

UK Police corruption probes in 19 forces

Nearly half of all police forces in England and Wales have officers facing charges of corruption or dishonesty, according to a survey by The Times newspaper. Altogether 105 police officers in 19 out of 43 forces are under investigation. They include high-ranking officers such as superintendents and detective chief inspectors. London's Metropolitan Police has by far the greatest problem with 51 officers suspended.

Edited July 20, 2011 by bud

[BubberMiley]

While there is evidence that Scotland Yard is corrupt and reasonable grounds to suspect that immediately declaring the death "not suspicious" was, in itself, suspicious, if you can't, on this forum, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there is corruption, then you must drink the kool-aid and try and come up with potential alternate scenarios, like capricorn and scriblet.

Indeed, perhaps it was his liver. Could have been AIDs too. Hard for one to say.

[eyeball]

While there is evidence that Scotland Yard is corrupt and reasonable grounds to suspect that immediately declaring the death "not suspicious" was, in itself, suspicious, if you can't, on this forum, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there is corruption, then you must drink the kool-aid and try and come up with potential alternate scenarios, like capricorn and scriblet.

Indeed, perhaps it was his liver. Could have been AIDs too. Hard for one to say.

I wonder how many potential alternate scenarios News of the World would have dreamed up if...well...you know...if.

How ironic.

[Bob]

What do you mean, you're sure it's not a coincidence? You think a "whistle blower" can't die same as anyone else? According to police, his death is "unexplained but not suspicious." People die. It happens. Even people who blow the whistle.

You have no idea of the circumstances surrounding his death, yet you have declared the police are either stupid or liars. Since they are the ones who were there, why would you think you know more than they do?

Sean Hoare was the kind of reporter who could knock back several whiskeys and a few lines of cocaine before filing salacious stories of celebrity misbehavior.

His lifestyle could have taken its toll.

He's certain it isn't a coincidence because it helps him build an imagined narrative of Rupert Murdoch being a particularly evil and heinous man, which he must be considering he owns media that is described as conservative. Remember, conservatism is evil and any media mogul that produces conservative media is capable of anything, because conservatives are inherently unscrupulous, as opposed to their noble and charitable liberal contemporaries.

[Remiel]

He's certain it isn't a coincidence because it helps him build an imagined narrative of Rupert Murdoch being a particularly evil and heinous man, which he must be considering he owns media that is described as conservative. Remember, conservatism is evil and any media mogul that produces conservative media is capable of anything, because conservatives are inherently unscrupulous, as opposed to their noble and charitable liberal contemporaries.

Yes, just like you are certain that I say it just because Murdoch is conservative, because that feeds into your imagined narritive of me being a particular evil and heinous poster.

Pathetic.

[Bob]

This entire scandal reminds me of the whole chase after DSK, in a sense. Various groups were so certain of DSK's guilt for various reasons - whether it's some hatred of "bankers" and "elites", and/or his Jewish connection, they wanted him to be guilty of such a heinous crime like rape.

I suspect that you fall into the same category of folks who want Murdoch to fall, and are convinced that he is somehow complicit in this scandal. Your certainty of Murdoch's guilt is without question rooted in your disdain for what Murdoch represents - the media mogul who runs the corporation that owns Fox News. It's so transparent and obvious, and you're trying to act otherwise. If anything if pathetic it's your seeming obliviousness to your own bias.

What seems more likely to reasonable people is that this scandal doesn't go beyond a few unscrupulous journalists at the tabloid newspaper News of the World. At worst, an editor or two was involved. But the assumption that somehow this scandal took place at the direction of Murdoch or other executives like his son is a product of absurd bias that I mentioned above.

[Remiel]

What seems more likely to reasonable people is that this scandal doesn't go beyond a few unscrupulous journalists at the tabloid newspaper News of the World. At worst, an editor or two was involved. But the assumption that somehow this scandal took place at the direction of Murdoch or other executives like his son is a product of absurd bias that I mentioned above.

The bias on parade here is yours. While in whatever la la land you crawled out of I am assuming that Murdoch must be guilty, back in the real world my only assumption is that he could be guilty. And if you cannot figure out the difference between those two assumptions, well... I will let everyone else draw their own conclusions.

[M.Dancer]

The bias on parade here is yours. While in whatever la la land you crawled out of I am assuming that Murdoch must be guilty, back in the real world my only assumption is that he could be guilty. And if you cannot figure out the difference between those two assumptions, well... I will let everyone else draw their own conclusions.

My assumption is the Editor(s) must have had some knowledge of what is going on with the writers, in so much as editors question writers about; what they are writing, who they are interviewing, background sources and more often than not, have oversight in regards to expenses being laid out in pursuit to a story.

I cannot say for certain that this is the case with NOTW, but that is how it works here.

I would be surprised if such mundane things like what stories one of his many properties are running and how they got the story would have made it up the chain to Murdoch's office. CEOs are not supposed to micro manage.

Edited July 21, 2011 by M.Dancer

[Remiel]

My assumption is the Editor(s) must have had some knowledge of what is going on with the writers, in so much as editors question writers about; what they are writing, who they are interviewing, background sources and more often than not, have oversight in regards to expenses being laid out in pursuit to a story.

I cannot say for certain that this is the case with NOTW, but that is how it works here.

I would be surprised if such mundane things like what stories one of his many properties are running and how they got the story would have made it up the chain to Murdoch's office. CEOs are not supposed to micro manage.

Those are good points, but I do not think they really are what we are "talking" about. This thread is about the death of a whistleblower; at issue is not whether Murdoch could have known about the phone hacking beforehand, but rather whether he could have been party to something being done after the fact. Another big assumption that has been made though is that "poweful interests" necessarily means Murdoch. Murdoch is hardly the only person who had something to lose here...

[M.Dancer]

at issue is not whether Murdoch could have known about the phone hacking beforehand, but rather whether he could have been party to something being done after the fact.

Fair enough. I highly doubt that a man who can employ the best legal talent that money can buy would need to avail himself of a hitman. His risk management people would not condone such risky measures....

....now whether someone else. some other powerful person is involved...are such powerful people normally that stupid? Or perhaps someone became unstrung?

Indeed, as you indicate, highly speculative...

[Sir Bandelot]

My assumption is the Editor(s) must have had some knowledge of what is going on with the writers, in so much as editors question writers about; what they are writing, who they are interviewing, background sources and more often than not, have oversight in regards to expenses being laid out in pursuit to a story.

I cannot say for certain that this is the case with NOTW, but that is how it works here.

I would be surprised if such mundane things like what stories one of his many properties are running and how they got the story would have made it up the chain to Murdoch's office. CEOs are not supposed to micro manage.

Yet the CEO is like the top-dog and often reaps the greatest rewards for a business. What bothers me is how someone like a CEO can hold every advantage when things are going right, but then claim they are at arms lenght if things have gone wrongly. Even if not aware of what could be a sytematic abuse or crime carried out by the corporation they represent, they should be held responsible and fall on the sword. To me it's fair, part of the price they pay for the position.

[Sir Bandelot]

I highly doubt that a man who can employ the best legal talent that money can buy would need to avail himself of a hitman. His risk management people would not condone such risky measures....

....now whether someone else. some other powerful person is involved...are such powerful people normally that stupid? Or perhaps someone became unstrung?

Indeed, as you indicate, highly speculative...

I doubt it as well but feel there is still good reason to investigate, or at least explain the rationale for lack of an investigation. Then there's no need for such long and speculative debates...

[M.Dancer]

I doubt it as well but feel there is still good reason to investigate, or at least explain the rationale for lack of an investigation. Then there's no need for such long and speculative debates...

What lack of an investigation?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14239849