Judge in hacking trial censures Cameron
PRIME Minister David Cameron has been strongly rebuked by the judge in the phone hacking trial after he made a public statement about Andy Coulson while the jury was still considering its verdicts.
Justice Saunders said he was ‘‘very concerned’’ about Cameron’s intervention, which came after his former director of communications was found guilty of conspiracy to hack phones.
The judge accused Cameron of launching ‘‘open season’’ on the defendant, who was still facing two charges of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office at the time of the statement on Wednesday.
The judge’s unusual public criticism of the prime minister angered senior government figures, who privately questioned
British Prime Minister David Cameron, right, is in hot water with a senior judge for his comments on the conviction of former journalist and spin merchant Andy Coulson. his decision to speak out.
Downing Street said that Cameron had consulted Dominic Grieve, the attorney-general, before making his televised statement apologising for hiring Coulson. Cameron had taken the ‘‘best legal advice before issuing his apology’’ and was right to make the statement, the prime minister’s official spokesman said.
The judge said that he had con- sidered halting the trial following a petition from the defendants’ lawyer over the ‘‘ill-advised and premature’’ comments. ‘‘I don’t know whether it was just done in ignorance or whether it was done deliberately,’’ he said.
Coulson’s legal team tried to contact Grieve when it emerged Cameron was preparing to make an apology.
However, they were unable to reach him before the prime minister recorded the television clip, in which he said he was ‘‘profoundly sorry’’ for hiring Coulson.
The judge said he had asked the prime minister for an explanation and was told by Chris Martin, his principal private secretary, that the ‘‘prime minister was responding to the guilty verdict on hacking charges that had been delivered in open court’’.
But the judge said the prime minister had ‘‘missed the point’’ and revealed information the jury had not been told during the trial for legal reasons. He said: ‘‘My sole concern is to ensure that justice is done. Politicians have other imperatives and I understand that. Whether the political imperative was such that statements could not await all the verdicts, I leave to others to judge.’’
Coulson’s legal team applied to have the remaining charges thrown out, claiming the ‘‘astonishing’’ intervention had led to negative publicity that meant that the former newspaper editor could no longer expect a fair verdict.
The judge said the prime minister’s statement, in which he accused Coulson of having lied to him, attacked the defendant’s credibility and put before the jury matters that had not been heard in evidence.
After considering the application to discharge the jury, the judge said he was confident the jury could still reach a fair verdict. However, after further deliberations, the jury came back into court to say they were unable to reach majority verdicts on the remaining charges.
The judge then discharged them and the prosecution have said they will announce on Monday whether they intend to seek a re-trial.
Kenneth Clarke, a Cabinet minister, said Cameron’s comments were ‘‘unwise’’, adding that the thought he may have been in contempt of court probably never ‘‘crossed David’s mind’’ because he has no legal training.
Lord Macdonald, a former director of public prosecutions, said he did not think it was ‘‘a risk that the prime minister should have run in a case which was this important and this sensitive’’.