Full coverage as News of the World's former chief reporter, investigations editor and executive editor appear at the inquiry
12.42pm: Thurlbeck says it was "the suggestion of the Nazi theme" in his conversation with the tipster Jason that "initially persuaded usethat it was in the public interest".
He says he can't remember whether the discussion about the public interest was before or after 18 March 2008 – 12 days before publication and one day before his meeting with Jason.
12.42pm: Woman E did not give evidence in the privacy action taken by Mosley which resulted in a payout by the News of the World.
Leveson wants to know whether there was a discussion beforehand about the public interest in launching this undercover operation.
He says there was a discussion with the then deputy news editor, James Mellor.
12.40pm: Thurlbeck says he disputes evidence given by Mosley that "it was very clear to me that Thurlbeck was trying to set the thing up as a Nazi thing".
He says his evidence at the court case brought by Mosley following publication was misinterpreted. He says he was merely explaining that if Mosley made a "Sieg Heil" gesture, Woman E would have to stand back two to two-and-a-half metres if she was to "get" him.
Thurlbeck says: "The word 'get' is a kind of shorthand for 'capture him, video him.'"
12.39pm: Thurlbeck is asked whether he discussed with Woman E how she should turn to ensure she got footage.
He says he didn't coach her, but explained how close she would have to get to Max Mosley to film him if he made a "Sieg Heil" gesture.
12.36pm: Thurlbeck says of video footage of the event:
There was always a possibility that was going to be uploaded onto the website, provided it was visible. Sometimes these things are poor quality – evidential but not broadcast quality.
12.33pm: Thurlbeck is now talking about the News of the World's front page in 2008 about Max Mosley's alleged orgy.
The story came from a "tipster" called Jason.
Jason agreed to accept £25,000 if the story was selected to be the front page splash. If this was not the case, it would be less. An inside page story would earn him £6,000.
Jay tells the Leveson inquiry that "in the end Woman E [the woman involved in Mosley's alleged orgy] got £12,000".
Thurlbeck explains that they had to show her how she was to be fitted with a hidden camera to film the orgy.
He says he had nothing to do with the decision to upload the video to the website.
He says that would have been the editor's decision.
12.29pm: Pressed on how much the News of the World paid to Rebecca Loos, Thurlbeck says:
We are talking about a six-figure sum. It was the most I've ever paid for a story. We're talking about a six figure sum, just – a long way from seven.
12.29pm: Thurlbeck is now explaining how difficult it was to verify Rebecca Loos's claims about David Beckham.
I spent five months on the story, six weeks in Australia, five or six weeks in Spain. It was hard to prove the validity of what the girl was saying to me.
12.27pm: Robert Jay asserts that while David Beckham promoted Brylcreem, his his family did not.
Thurlbeck replies:
The Beckhams were always very keen to encourage publicity about their happy marriage ... they were making an awful lot of money because they were considered to be a wholesome happily-married unit. What we saw was in direct contrast to the image they were cultivating ... we thought it very important at the time to expose that image as a sham.
Jay suggests what Thurlbeck is talking about is "an implied representation".
12.27pm: Thurlbeck is discussing about how he exposed David Beckham's alleged extramarital affair with Rebecca Loos in 2005.
We decided there was huge public interest in that matter because the Beckhams had been using their marriage to endorse products.
They were openly presenting themselves as a very happy, close-knit family and were making millions of pounds on the back of that image, presenting a fairty-tale marriage – they even got married on thrones.
Thurlbeck says Beckham endorsed endless products including Brylcreem.
It was a wholesome image that the family cultivated and the public bought into on a massive scale and we exposed that to be a sham.
12.23pm: Industry-wide, Thurlbeck says there was "less regard" to privacy matters before the Max Mosley ruling:
Before these privacy rulings on Mr Mosley came into place and various other injunctions and so on, there was less regard to privacy, more regard to the accuracy, the facts were very important. But then it became more important to see if privacy was at stake.
12.20pm: Thurlbeck says "kiss and tell" stories are now almost a "dead" genre.
I would say the 'kiss and tell' story is now largely dead as a genre. In the last three years, we've taken great note of privacy matters. That was the second question after 'is it true': 'is it intruding into privacy?'
12.18pm: Thurlback goes on to explain more about "kiss and tells":
We went to enormous lengths to satisfy our team of lawyers that what we had was factually correct, but most importantly demonstrably correct.
We would verify our story in all sorts of ways: photographic evidence, documentary evidence, a message left on a birthday card, or a gift, a telephone call to the person in question would often verify their claim.
For every kiss and tell story that made the NoW [that was verified] I would estimate there would be another six, 10 that fell by the wayside because that standard of proof wasn't obtained.
12.16pm: Thurlbeck is asked about the amount of money paid to people for "kiss and tell" stories.
He explains the financial rewards:
A front page splash would cost significantly more than a page 45 lead, so there would be a sliding-scale and then the story would be judged on its merits in relation to the impact it would make, or how important it was to the newspaper.
Jay asks what the most was that the News of the World ever paid.
Thurlbeck replies: "Six figures sums were paid, but rarely. I would say an average for a front-page story would be £15,000; less sometimes, depending on the negotiations."
12.15pm: Jay asks about "kiss and tell" stories.
Thurlbeck says:
Journalists tend to get pigeon-holed early on in their careers. My pigeon-hole was undercover work and that stayed with me throughout my career.I wasn't really pigeon-holed as a 'kiss and tell' [reporter] … but I did do some.
12.13pm: The inquiry's counsel, Robert Jay, asks Thurlbeck about undercover investigations.
Thurlbeck says on any investigation involving criminals – gunrunners, paedophiles or drug dealers – he would have had to equip himself with recording devices to be able to write about it in the paper without risk of libel.
12.12pm: Lord Justice Leveson says he has decided that there should be no questions at all about phone hacking put to any witnesses who have been arrested in relation to Operation Weeting.
12.09pm: Thurlbeck confirms he has taken News International to an industrial tribunal.
He confirms he has been arrested under the Operation Weeting phone-hacking inquiry and that he has requested specifically not to be questioned matters on the issue. He says he has received assurances from the inquiry's team of solicitors that phone hacking is "off limits".
12.08pm: Thurlbeck is asked about a paragraph that describes how in October this year a French court seemed to disagree with Mr Justice Eady on a case taken by Max Mosley.
He is asked if he has read a translation of this now.
He says yes – he agrees with Robert Jay who says the court did chime with Mr Justice Eady but rejected defamation claims on grounds of jurisdication.
12.05pm: Former News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck has now been sworn in and is discussing some minor changes on his draft witness statement.
11.52am: Mahmood has now completed his evidence and the inquiry is taking a short break.
11.50am: Asked if Paul McMullan's testimony reflects his experience, Mahmood says: "Not at all. Not one bit."
11.49am: Leveson is asking Mahmood about the privacy of people, politicians or royalty.
Mahmood says:" I don't think there should be. If you hold public office you should be open to scrutiny."
11.48am: Barr is now asking Mahmood about his sting on the snooker player John Higgins.
"On that it bemuses me how anyone can criticise us," he says.
11.45am: They are now talking about another Mahmood investigation – this time about a dirty bomb.
Mahmood says he had a meeeting with people seeking to buy red mercury after which he went "straight to the police".
We did what any responsible … journalist or citizen would do - go straight to the police.
11.44am: Mahmood says he doesn't accept Eady's criticisms, after Barr puts it to him that the judge suggested the Beckham kidnap plot was a "high profile story and there was a good deal of sloppiness and inaccuracy."
11.40am: Barr is leading Mahmood through criticisms in a court judgment by Mr Justice Eady in the alleged Beckham kidnapping plot.
Eady: The only conclusion I can draw is that it was a bit of creativity on the part of Mr Mahmood or his subeditors.
Mahmood: I don't agree. Very clearly one of the members of the gang said that [he kidnapping] was what they intended to do.
11.34am: Barr is talking about a Wandsworth car parking attendant story involving alleged drug dealing.
Mahmood says:
I can't remember the details but I'm dealing with the bottom echelons of society .. that's the only way you can expose crack dens and people of this ilk... You may get stories coming from undesirable sources, it is our role to check this information.
Yes there was supervision with the Beckham inquiry.
In cases where they [criminals] are involved they are very closely supervised ... everything is on tape ... there is no scope to go off piste.
On any investigation we're constantly in touch with our lawyers.
11.32am: James Robinson has tweeted:
MM says his job is to write stories: 'I'm not a police officer, I'm not a social worker, I'm a journalist.'
11.29am: We are now online at another location and will resume reports soon.
11.14am: There is a fire alert at the Guardian and we are being asked to leave the building.
11.13am: Barr says a "very lucrative" trip to Dubai was being dangled in front of Shannon [actor John Alford (Shannon) was convicted of supplying drugs in 1999]. Mahmood reiterates that the NoW did not entrap Shannon. "As I say, if I dangle a big carrot in front of you would you be able to supply me with cocaine, a fake passport or a firearm? You would not and you wouldn't know where to get one."
Leveson is now testing the idea that someone who had "a very large carrot" dangled in from of them they might be tempted to go one step further.
We do not dangle huge carrots. I don't want to go into our modus operandi ... Our methods have been tested time and time again in the courts.
11.11am: Mahmood had posed as a sheik and tried to lure in a target by offereing a lucractive trip to Dubai.
They had acted on information their target was selling drugs.
11.11am: The inquiry has now moved on to talk of another investigation.
It's quite annoying this myth of entrapment. We never entrap people and frankly I don't think you can entrap people in the way they suggest.
11.07am: Mahmood is being asked about phone hacking.
Barr: Were you aware of phone hacking?
Mahmood: No, I was not. The first time I heard about it was after an arrest [of Clive Goodman].
Barr: Was it talk of the office?
Mahmood: Yes.
Barr tells him not to mention any names, but were any names mentioned?
Mahmood: All the fingers were pointing towards the newsdesk.
Barr: At any time did you hear from anyone within the News of the World that anyone else was involved?
Mahmood: No, rumours were about, but there was no firm evidence.
11.06am: Mahmood says fabricated stories, as far as he was concerned, did not get into the News of the World.
I don't believe that as a matter of course people could phone in with fabricated stories and they'd get in the paper. There were stringent checks in place.
Leveson asks him Mahmood if hhas seen Chris Atkins's film Starsuckers which documented cases of fabricated stories getting into some tabloid newspapers.
Mahmood says: "No, I didn't see that film."
11.05am: Mahmood tells the inquiry that investigations were very expensive and they tried to check sources as much as they could for "credibility" before embarking on an undercover operation.
11.05am: Mahmood says the majority of his stories came from credible sources who had given him stories in the past.
It's our job to assess credibility of the information we received. Nothing would get into the paper unless it was thoroughly assessed.
11.01am: They are now talking about Paul McMullan, the former features editor of the News of the World who told the inquiry two weeks ago of some work he had done with Mahmood.
He has never worked with me on a single investigation. As I say, I don't know him.
Mahmood says he never paid or commissioned a private investigator. He says Derek Webb was "assigned" to his investigations by the newsdesk but only on "a couple of occasions".
I never paid a private detective. I never commissioned a private detective to work for me. Derek Webb was assigned to my stories by the newsdesk. I can't remember which ones, but only on a couple of occasions.
11.00am: Mahmood is asked about the PCC.
Whenever a complaint came in to the PCC it was treated very seriously. Over 20 years I never had a PCC complaint upheld against me. We took it as a priority, that's my experience.
11.00am: Barr asks if the readership of the story was taken into account.
We were extra cautious to comply with the PCC code. Does this pass the public interest test? Was their justification for using subterfuge?
Barr says this doesn't quite answer his question. Mahmood says the public's interest in the story "wasn't discussed" so it never "came into it".
10.59am: After questioning from Lord Justice Leveson, Mahmood says:
If they present themselves as wholesome characters … and privately betray that, then there is a 'hypocrisy justification' for exposing them.
10.57am: Barr asks about a story concerning two women allegedly acting as prostitutes. Mahmood replies:
We do not engage in entrapment. They were working as prostitutes in an escort agency. They had set fees.
10.51am: Mahmood is asked about stings on model Sophie Anderton and a Miss X.
He says the public interest was alleged criminality; the paper spent a fortune on the story.
10.49am: Mahmood is now being asked about some of his more controversial investigations. He explains he wrote more than 500 stories for the News of the World and of those, a very small fraction of those concerned celebrities.
He is being asked what public interest defence there would have been for stings on celebrities.
'Are they involved in criminality, any moral wrongdoing, hypocrisy'? Those were the parameters ... each case was on its own merits.
10.48am: Mahmood says "95% of stories I did were my own stories from my own sources, but there were occasions where I was given stories from the newsdesk or directly from the editor."
10.47am: Mahmood explains how more "formal" the procedures are at the Sunday Times.
For example, he recently received information about a gang about insurance fraud – they were staging car crashes. He assessed the story and then proceeded to assess the public interest defence for a possible undercover operation to expose the fraud.
He examined the public interest defences for subterfuge; he then sent a memo to the newsdesk which asked various questions and approved it. It then went to the head of news who asked further questions.
The planned undercover operation then went to the editor John Witherow.
There was a formal meeting where every aspect of the story was discussed. Minutes were taken … was there a public interest for the subterfuge? … It's a very, very formal procedure, very thorough.
It was a lot more informal at the News of the World but he still had to satisfy the same sort of criteria, he adds.
10.46am: He explains that ultimately the editor would make a decision about his stories. The editor would be "hands-on with the more high-profile stories, but run-of-the-mill stories I liaised mainly with the newsdesk".
Everything was discussed with the legal team. I couldn't go off piste. Throughout the investigation I remained in touch with our lawyers.
10.40am: Mahmood is asked about the process of launching an investigation at the News of the World.
I'd receive information from informants and some were people who'd phone in with a lead, but more often than not it was people I'd known for many years.
Mahmood says that he'd have to establish a number of factors before presenting a potential story to the newsdesk, including public interest justification. The NoW lawyers checked over the story after the newsdesk, he says.
10.37am: Mahmood says evidence given by author Peter Burden who wrote a book about the News of the World's news gathering techniques was "riddled with inaccuracies".
He accepts that he had "disagreements" with the Sunday Times when he left the paper first time round.
10.36am: The most high profile of his recent cases has been the case of the Pakistani cricketers convicted for match-fixing.
10.35am: He is currently working as an investigative journalist at the Sunday Times and had about 20 years' experience at the News of the World exposing "criminal and wrongdoing".
He has also worked for the Sunday People, the Daily Mail, the Sunday Times and TV-am.
Mahmood has said his work has resulted in 261 convictions.
10.34am: Mahmood has provided two witness statements – one on 14 October and the second on 8 December.
10.34am: The inquiry has now re-opened. David Barr QC is talking to Mazher Mahmood, who has just been sworn in.
10.30am: There is plenty of debate this morning on who was responsible for the deletion of voicemail messages on Milly Dowler's phone.
The Guardian reported this update at 10.30pm online on Friday – which also
appeared in Saturday's newspaper on page 10.
Here is a Guardian statement summarising the report and discussing the
developments:
Our story on 4 July accurately reported the facts about the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone known at the time. It is uncontested that in April 2011, Metropolitan police detectives told Sally Dowler that Milly's phone had been hacked by the News of the World and that voicemails had been deleted by the paper's journalists or a detective working for them.
Subsequent investigation by Operation Weeting has confirmed the key details reported by the Guardian: that the News of the World commissioned Glenn Mulcaire to hack into Milly's phone; that he succeeded; that journalists listened to some deeply personal messages; and that Surrey police knew this at the time and took no action.
Although the investigation has found that the News of the World was not responsible for the particular deletion of voicemails which caused Milly's parents to have false hope that she was alive, the new evidence also suggests that it is likely the paper's staff were inadvertently responsible for deleting later messages.
The central and most serious allegation of the Milly Dowler hacking story was that the paper had hacked the phone of a teenage murder victim, behaviour David Cameron described as "absolutely disgusting". Only six weeks ago Rupert Murdoch himself, with four months to consider the evidence, described the News of the World's conduct in the Dowler case as "abhorrent and awful".
10.23am: The private session is now over so we expect the inquiry to open in about five minutes.
In the meantime here's a quick profile of Mazher Mahmood.
Mahmood is an undercover reporter who specialises in exposing the behind-the-scenes activities of high-profile celebrities.
The News of the World's final edition in July boasted how Mahmood had "saved children from paedos & nailed 250 evil crooks".
The reporter is known as the "fake sheikh" because many of his stings involve posing as a wealthy Arab.
Other high-profile exposés have trapped criminals and caused embarrassment to the aristocracy and the royal family.
Over 20 years on the paper he launched stings on big names such as Sophie, Countess of Wessex, Princess Michael of Kent and Sarah Ferguson.
His most recent high-profile scoop at the NoW was into spot-fixing by members of the Pakistan cricket team, which led to the conviction of Salman Butt, Mohammad Asif and Mohammad Amir.
He now works for the Sunday Times, where he is understood to have been hired on a salary of £150,000.
10.08am: Ross Hawkins, the BBC political correspondent, has just tweeted:
Leveson has been hearing legal argument, no media allowed, since 0930. Mazher Mahmood up first.
9.48am: We are expecting the inquiry to begin shortly.
In the meantime, here's the official statement on Viscount Rothermere's appearance before a parliamentary select committee at 2.15pm today:
There will be a rare public appearance from Viscount Rothermere, chairman of Daily Mail & General Trust plc at the privacy and injunctions joint committee on Monday 12 December, with other newspaper executives Kevin Beatty, the chief executive of A&N Media, and Liz Hartley, the head of editorial legal services at Associated Newspapers. Evidence will then be heard from James Harding, editor of The Times, Peter Wright, editor of the Mail on Sunday, and Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors.
The session is expected to cover the future regulation of the press (including reform or replacement of the Press Complaints Commission), the corporate governance of newspapers, and the extent to which proprietors and boards should set appropriate standards for respecting individuals' rights to privacy.
9.45am: Glenn Mulcaire's court case against News International over legal fees is now not being heard today. The private investigator is suing the former news of the World publisher after it pulled funding. The company had been paying for his defence in proceedings over alleged phone hacking but it ceased this arrangement after the scandal escalated in July.
9.31am: The Independent reports that Mazher Mahmood hired bodyguards from the firm of private investigator Jonathan Rees when his high-profile sting operations forced him to attend court cases.
9.29am: This week is "News International" week at the inquiry – here's a quick reminder of the other witnesses called by Lord Justice Leveson.
Monday: Mazher Mahmood; Neville Thurlbeck; Neil Wallis.
Tuesday (11.30am start): Lawrence Abramson; Tom Crone; Julian Pike.
Wednesday: John Chapman; Colin Myler.
Thursday: Daniel Sanderson; Derek Webb.
Friday: Not sitting.
9.23am: Good morning and welcome to day 15 of the Leveson inquiry which opens at the earlier time of 9.30am today with three high profile witnesses who previously worked at the News of the World – Mazher Mahmood, Neville Thurlbeck and Neil Wallis.
Former investigations editor Mahmood will be first to appear, and will be giving evidence in private.
There will be no video streaming of his testimony because of security concerns, but there will be audio.
Thurlbeck was the former chief reporter at the News of the World and Wallis the former executive editor.
Viscount Rothermere, the proprietor of the Daily Mail, is also giving evidence today – at the joint Commons and Lords select committee that is investigating privacy.
Please note that comments have been switched off for legal reasons.
Comments