This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/04/leveson-inquiry-keir-starmer-live

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Leveson inquiry: Keir Starmer appears Leveson inquiry: Keir Starmer appears
(40 minutes later)
12.14pm: Welcome to the Leveson inquiry live blog.12.14pm: Welcome to the Leveson inquiry live blog.
Today's key witness is the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer.Today's key witness is the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer.
Starmer first gave evidence in February, when he said the CPS was drafting an interim policy on the prosecution of journalists. He is likely to outline the draft and give an update on the consultation that is due to take place.Starmer first gave evidence in February, when he said the CPS was drafting an interim policy on the prosecution of journalists. He is likely to outline the draft and give an update on the consultation that is due to take place.
Please note that comments have been switched off for legal reasons.Please note that comments have been switched off for legal reasons.
12.17pm: The Guardian's Lisa O'Carroll reported last night that Rupert Murdoch and his son James are expected to give evidence at the Leveson inquiry. She reports:12.17pm: The Guardian's Lisa O'Carroll reported last night that Rupert Murdoch and his son James are expected to give evidence at the Leveson inquiry. She reports:
Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch are expected to appear at the inquiry into press ethics within weeks after Lord Justice Leveson announced he would be calling in newspaper owners to give evidence between now and the middle of May.Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch are expected to appear at the inquiry into press ethics within weeks after Lord Justice Leveson announced he would be calling in newspaper owners to give evidence between now and the middle of May.
Lord Rothermere, owner of Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers, is also expected to be asked to testify under oath.Lord Rothermere, owner of Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers, is also expected to be asked to testify under oath.
So too is Eygeny Lebedev, the son of the Russian proprietor of the Evening Standard, Independent and the cut-price i. It is believed all three proprietors have been pencilled in for the week beginning 23 April.So too is Eygeny Lebedev, the son of the Russian proprietor of the Evening Standard, Independent and the cut-price i. It is believed all three proprietors have been pencilled in for the week beginning 23 April.
Aidan Barclay the son of media-shy Sir David Barclay - who with his brother and Sir Frederick owns the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph - is also to be called.Aidan Barclay the son of media-shy Sir David Barclay - who with his brother and Sir Frederick owns the Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph - is also to be called.
The newspaper owners are expected to be grilled about their relationship with politicians including David Cameron and past prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, including details of their specific meetings, correspondence and telephone calls.The newspaper owners are expected to be grilled about their relationship with politicians including David Cameron and past prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, including details of their specific meetings, correspondence and telephone calls.
Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International, has been confirmed as a witness for the next module of the inquiry which is examining the relationships between the press and politicians.Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International, has been confirmed as a witness for the next module of the inquiry which is examining the relationships between the press and politicians.
Tom Watson, the Labour MP who led the calls for an investigation into phone hacking, has applied to be a core particpant in the next stage of the inquiry as has Brooks and Evan Harris, the former Liberal Democrat MP who advised the Hacked Off campaign for an inquiry into press standards last July.Tom Watson, the Labour MP who led the calls for an investigation into phone hacking, has applied to be a core particpant in the next stage of the inquiry as has Brooks and Evan Harris, the former Liberal Democrat MP who advised the Hacked Off campaign for an inquiry into press standards last July.
David Cameron, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will also be called before Leveson, who is expected to discuss their relationship with the Murdochs, Rothermeres and Barclays in the runup to general elections.David Cameron, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown will also be called before Leveson, who is expected to discuss their relationship with the Murdochs, Rothermeres and Barclays in the runup to general elections.
You can read the full story here.You can read the full story here.
12.18pm: This morning, the inquiry heard from Lord Macdonald, director of public prosecutions from 2003 to 2008 and Starmer's predecessor.12.18pm: This morning, the inquiry heard from Lord Macdonald, director of public prosecutions from 2003 to 2008 and Starmer's predecessor.
Macdonald ran through in detail the CPS's role in the 2006 prosecutions of Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire for phone hacking.Macdonald ran through in detail the CPS's role in the 2006 prosecutions of Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire for phone hacking.
Starmer stressed that the CPS did not take the particular course it did due to lack of funding to pursue wider prosecutions: "There were no resource pressures on the CPS."Starmer stressed that the CPS did not take the particular course it did due to lack of funding to pursue wider prosecutions: "There were no resource pressures on the CPS."
He also said that the CPS had no power to direct the police in the course of their inquiries.He also said that the CPS had no power to direct the police in the course of their inquiries.
Starmer outlined the briefings he received from former prosecutor Carmen Dowd, who has since left the CPS.Starmer outlined the briefings he received from former prosecutor Carmen Dowd, who has since left the CPS.
12.18pm: The inquiry has resumed after a short break and Keir Starmer takes the stand.12.18pm: The inquiry has resumed after a short break and Keir Starmer takes the stand.
12.19pm: Starmer says he appointed Simon Clements, who replaced Carmen Dowd as head of the CPS's special crime division, to deal with the Guardian's phone-hacking revelations in July 2009.12.19pm: Starmer says he appointed Simon Clements, who replaced Carmen Dowd as head of the CPS's special crime division, to deal with the Guardian's phone-hacking revelations in July 2009.
12.21pm: Starmer says he asked Clements to review the Guardian's claim that the CPS had decided not to prosecute News International executives in 2006.12.21pm: Starmer says he asked Clements to review the Guardian's claim that the CPS had decided not to prosecute News International executives in 2006.
12.22pm: Starmer says he was concerned about the Guardian's revelations. However, he rejected Guardian reporter David Leigh's request for answers to detailed questions as there was a flurry of press interest and he wanted to establish the facts from 2006-7 in detail.12.22pm: Starmer says he was concerned about the Guardian's revelations. However, he rejected Guardian reporter David Leigh's request for answers to detailed questions as there was a flurry of press interest and he wanted to establish the facts from 2006-7 in detail.
12.27pm: Starmer is asked about Met assistant commissioner John Yates's statement about phone hacking on 9 July 2009, which said:12.27pm: Starmer is asked about Met assistant commissioner John Yates's statement about phone hacking on 9 July 2009, which said:
Where there was clear evidence that people had been the subject of tapping, they were all contacted by the police.Where there was clear evidence that people had been the subject of tapping, they were all contacted by the police.
This case has been the subject of the most careful investigation by very experienced detectives … no additional evidence has come to light since this case has concluded.This case has been the subject of the most careful investigation by very experienced detectives … no additional evidence has come to light since this case has concluded.
I therefore consider that no further investigation is required.I therefore consider that no further investigation is required.
12.28pm: Starmer says he had limited information at the time and took Yates's statement at face value.12.28pm: Starmer says he had limited information at the time and took Yates's statement at face value.
He says he didn't appreciate at the time that Yates had conducted the review of the phone-hacking case in "only a short time".He says he didn't appreciate at the time that Yates had conducted the review of the phone-hacking case in "only a short time".
12.30pm: Starmer issued a statement saying the CPS was conducting a review of the material supplied to it by the police in 2006.12.30pm: Starmer issued a statement saying the CPS was conducting a review of the material supplied to it by the police in 2006.
He says he was concerned to establish the CPS had made the right decision in 2006 and so limited the scope of the review:He says he was concerned to establish the CPS had made the right decision in 2006 and so limited the scope of the review:
… my responsibility was to ensure that on material provided to us, that we made the right decision, and … so I limited the exercise to the material we had and the decision that we made as the Crown Prosecution Service.… my responsibility was to ensure that on material provided to us, that we made the right decision, and … so I limited the exercise to the material we had and the decision that we made as the Crown Prosecution Service.
12.32pm: Starmer recalls:12.32pm: Starmer recalls:
I needed to reconstruct the picture from the CPS point of view as quickly as possible. And so it was really the Guardian article that started the process and my thinking, but it was very rapidly followed by very many requests for more information, either from the press or from officials, so it was really all of that taken together that over the course of 9 July persuaded me that I needed to reinstruct the picture and do it rapidly.I needed to reconstruct the picture from the CPS point of view as quickly as possible. And so it was really the Guardian article that started the process and my thinking, but it was very rapidly followed by very many requests for more information, either from the press or from officials, so it was really all of that taken together that over the course of 9 July persuaded me that I needed to reinstruct the picture and do it rapidly.
Lord Justice Leveson adds that questions were being asked in the House of Commons.Lord Justice Leveson adds that questions were being asked in the House of Commons.
Starmer says: "I was finding it difficult to do so because I didn't have any knowledge, I didn't have the person who dealt with it, we were getting the material as quickly as we could, but when something is being treated as seriously as that, across government, it was obvious to me that I needed myself to get a much better picture."Starmer says: "I was finding it difficult to do so because I didn't have any knowledge, I didn't have the person who dealt with it, we were getting the material as quickly as we could, but when something is being treated as seriously as that, across government, it was obvious to me that I needed myself to get a much better picture."
12.43pm: Starmer says the CPS was unable to contact the prosecutor from 2006, Carmen Dowd, and was forced to make its own way through the evidence.12.43pm: Starmer says the CPS was unable to contact the prosecutor from 2006, Carmen Dowd, and was forced to make its own way through the evidence.
12.46pm: On 14 July 2009, the Guardian's Nick Davies gave evidence to the Commons culture, media and sport select committee and presented the "for Neville" email that suggested that News International's "rogue reporter" defence was wrong.12.46pm: On 14 July 2009, the Guardian's Nick Davies gave evidence to the Commons culture, media and sport select committee and presented the "for Neville" email that suggested that News International's "rogue reporter" defence was wrong.
Starmer says: "I was waiting for the report that I would get later that week. And as you will see, one of the issues when I issued the result of my examination was a query from the Guardian as to whether or not the "for Neville" email had been considered. It is wasn't part of it at that stage, I hadn't seen the 'for Neville' email."Starmer says: "I was waiting for the report that I would get later that week. And as you will see, one of the issues when I issued the result of my examination was a query from the Guardian as to whether or not the "for Neville" email had been considered. It is wasn't part of it at that stage, I hadn't seen the 'for Neville' email."
12.48pm: Starmer agrees that Clements was under pressure from the Home Office to complete his review of the CPS's 2006 decision.12.48pm: Starmer agrees that Clements was under pressure from the Home Office to complete his review of the CPS's 2006 decision.
12.50pm: Jay asks Starmer about the notes of a on 21 August 2006 conference suggesting that David Perry QC, leading counsel in the prosecution of Mulcaire and Goodman, had considered attempting to obtain a production order that could have revealed evidence that more than one reporter was implicated in phone hacking.12.50pm: Jay asks Starmer about the notes of a on 21 August 2006 conference suggesting that David Perry QC, leading counsel in the prosecution of Mulcaire and Goodman, had considered attempting to obtain a production order that could have revealed evidence that more than one reporter was implicated in phone hacking.
Starmer says "my understanding was that David Perry hadn't then or subsequently seen evidence implicating others".Starmer says "my understanding was that David Perry hadn't then or subsequently seen evidence implicating others".
12.55pm: Starmer stresses that he was told that no other suspects were considered in 2006.12.55pm: Starmer stresses that he was told that no other suspects were considered in 2006.
My concern was it was being suggested that there had been other suspects, we, the CPS, had taken not to pursue that suspect for whatever reason, and I'm being told 'nope, no other suspects were considered or charged. My concern was it was being suggested that there had been other suspects, we, the CPS, had taken not to pursue that suspect for whatever reason, and I'm being told 'nope, no other suspects were considered or charged.'
He says he was assured of this by Aser Hussein of his staff and Met investiagting officer DCI Keith Surtees's statement that "no other named subjects – apart from Goodman, Mulcaire and Mills – were identified as suspects of criminal activity through this investigation."He says he was assured of this by Aser Hussein of his staff and Met investiagting officer DCI Keith Surtees's statement that "no other named subjects – apart from Goodman, Mulcaire and Mills – were identified as suspects of criminal activity through this investigation."
"This gave me an answer to the concern that I had," he concludes."This gave me an answer to the concern that I had," he concludes.
12.57pm: Starmer issued a press statement on 16 July 2009 stating:12.57pm: Starmer issued a press statement on 16 July 2009 stating:
Having examined the material that was supplied to the CPS by the police in this case, I can confirm that no victims or suspects other than those referred to above were identified to the CPS at the time. I am not in a position to say whether the police had any information on any other victims or suspects that was not passed to the CPS.Having examined the material that was supplied to the CPS by the police in this case, I can confirm that no victims or suspects other than those referred to above were identified to the CPS at the time. I am not in a position to say whether the police had any information on any other victims or suspects that was not passed to the CPS.
Asked about why he didn't ask the police if they had more information, Starmer says:Asked about why he didn't ask the police if they had more information, Starmer says:
I was not concerned with whether the police had taken appropriate decision on the material available to them. I was concerned with whether the CPS had taken the appropriate decision on the material supplied to the CPS. It really wouldn't have been appropriate for me to say 'I'm going to investigate the material the police have to see whether they took appropriate decisions.' I was focusing on my organisation and the decisions taken in 2006 by the CPS.I was not concerned with whether the police had taken appropriate decision on the material available to them. I was concerned with whether the CPS had taken the appropriate decision on the material supplied to the CPS. It really wouldn't have been appropriate for me to say 'I'm going to investigate the material the police have to see whether they took appropriate decisions.' I was focusing on my organisation and the decisions taken in 2006 by the CPS.
12.57pm: The inquiry has now broken for lunch and will resume at 2pm.12.57pm: The inquiry has now broken for lunch and will resume at 2pm.
1.09pm: Here are the full findings of Starmer's press statement of 16 July 2009:1.09pm: Here are the full findings of Starmer's press statement of 16 July 2009:
As a result of what I have been told I am satisfied that in the cases of Goodman and Mulcaire, the CPS was properly involved in providing advice both before and after charge; that the Metropolitan Police provided the CPS with all the relevant information and evidence upon which the charges were based; and that the prosecution approach in charging and prosecuting was proper and appropriate.As a result of what I have been told I am satisfied that in the cases of Goodman and Mulcaire, the CPS was properly involved in providing advice both before and after charge; that the Metropolitan Police provided the CPS with all the relevant information and evidence upon which the charges were based; and that the prosecution approach in charging and prosecuting was proper and appropriate.
There has been much speculation about whether or not persons other than those identified above were the victims of unlawful interception of their mobile telephones. There has also been much speculation about whether other suspects were identified or investigated at the time. Having examined the material that was supplied to the CPS by the police in this case, I can confirm that no victims or suspects other than those referred to above were identified to the CPS at the time. I am not in a position to say whether the police had any information on any other victims or suspects that was not passed to the CPS.There has been much speculation about whether or not persons other than those identified above were the victims of unlawful interception of their mobile telephones. There has also been much speculation about whether other suspects were identified or investigated at the time. Having examined the material that was supplied to the CPS by the police in this case, I can confirm that no victims or suspects other than those referred to above were identified to the CPS at the time. I am not in a position to say whether the police had any information on any other victims or suspects that was not passed to the CPS.
In light of my findings, it would not be appropriate to reopen the cases against Goodman or Mulcaire, or to revisit the decisions taken in the course of investigating and prosecuting them.In light of my findings, it would not be appropriate to reopen the cases against Goodman or Mulcaire, or to revisit the decisions taken in the course of investigating and prosecuting them.
However, if and insofar as there may now be further information relating to other possible victims and suspects, that should be reported to the police who have responsibility for deciding whether or not to conduct a criminal investigation. I have no power to direct the police to conduct any such investigation.However, if and insofar as there may now be further information relating to other possible victims and suspects, that should be reported to the police who have responsibility for deciding whether or not to conduct a criminal investigation. I have no power to direct the police to conduct any such investigation.
2.04pm: The inquiry has resumed and Starmer is asked about whether the "for Neville" email was part of the evidence reviewed by the CPS.2.04pm: The inquiry has resumed and Starmer is asked about whether the "for Neville" email was part of the evidence reviewed by the CPS.
Starmer says he first saw the email on 17 July 2009 after requesting it from the police.Starmer says he first saw the email on 17 July 2009 after requesting it from the police.
2.13pm: Starmer says he spoke to David Perry QC, leading counsel in the prosecution of Mulcaire and Goodman, and came to the conclusion that there should be more investigation of the "for Neville" email.2.13pm: Starmer says he spoke to David Perry QC, leading counsel in the prosecution of Mulcaire and Goodman, and came to the conclusion that there should be more investigation of the "for Neville" email.
2.15pm: Starmer says he issued a press statement on 17 July 2009 saying the CPS was considering the "for Neville" email and would be meeting the Met's John Yates about this.2.15pm: Starmer says he issued a press statement on 17 July 2009 saying the CPS was considering the "for Neville" email and would be meeting the Met's John Yates about this.
He says when he spoke to Yates "there was a degree of pushback against my suggestion" about a further investigation. Yates said the "for Neville" email was not new material.He says when he spoke to Yates "there was a degree of pushback against my suggestion" about a further investigation. Yates said the "for Neville" email was not new material.
However, the two agreed to meet on the following Monday.However, the two agreed to meet on the following Monday.
2.19pm: Starmer, Yates, DCI Philip Williams and others met to discuss the "for Neville" email.2.19pm: Starmer, Yates, DCI Philip Williams and others met to discuss the "for Neville" email.
Starmer said that Perry couldn't remember having seen the email and asked if the police had considered it in 2006.Starmer said that Perry couldn't remember having seen the email and asked if the police had considered it in 2006.
2.22pm: At the meeting, Starmer says that he told Williams that he had understood that Perry had told a meeting on 21 August 2006 that there was no evidence of more journalists being involved in phone hacking.2.22pm: At the meeting, Starmer says that he told Williams that he had understood that Perry had told a meeting on 21 August 2006 that there was no evidence of more journalists being involved in phone hacking.
However, Starmer asked if the evidence might have suggested that the editor and other journalists had been involved.However, Starmer asked if the evidence might have suggested that the editor and other journalists had been involved.
Starmer says he was told that emails from 2005 would have been difficult to investigate.Starmer says he was told that emails from 2005 would have been difficult to investigate.
Yates again stressed that the "for Neville" email was not new material and had already been seen by counsel.Yates again stressed that the "for Neville" email was not new material and had already been seen by counsel.
Starmer says he was "not altogether comfortable" with the impression he was being given by the meeting and wanted to ask Perry about what he had said in 2006.Starmer says he was "not altogether comfortable" with the impression he was being given by the meeting and wanted to ask Perry about what he had said in 2006.
2.31pm: Starmer says he asked Perry to get back to him swiftly about specific questions.2.31pm: Starmer says he asked Perry to get back to him swiftly about specific questions.
Perry gave him views about the law relating to interception (based on Williams's briefing) "for Neville" email and Starmer accepted his advice.Perry gave him views about the law relating to interception (based on Williams's briefing) "for Neville" email and Starmer accepted his advice.
Starmer says an MP wrote him a letter asking to reopen the phone-hacking case but it was not in the CPS's power to do so.Starmer says an MP wrote him a letter asking to reopen the phone-hacking case but it was not in the CPS's power to do so.
He stresses that the reason the phone-hacking prosecutions did not go any further was not because of CPS advice.He stresses that the reason the phone-hacking prosecutions did not go any further was not because of CPS advice.
2.39pm: Starmer says his first instinct was that Perry's answers were a "flag" rather than a smoking gun.2.39pm: Starmer says his first instinct was that Perry's answers were a "flag" rather than a smoking gun.
2.41pm: Starmer says he was told by Yates in July 2009 "Mr Starmer, you needn't concern yourself", but by later that year he had become concerned.2.41pm: Starmer says he was told by Yates in July 2009 "Mr Starmer, you needn't concern yourself", but by later that year he had become concerned.
2.43pm: On 24 February 2010, the Commons culture, media and sport select committee published a report saying that the police had been wrong not to investigate further Mulcaire's contract with the News of the World or the "for Neville" email.2.43pm: On 24 February 2010, the Commons culture, media and sport select committee published a report saying that the police had been wrong not to investigate further Mulcaire's contract with the News of the World or the "for Neville" email.
Starmer says he felt he had exhausted the exercise with Perry, and was not sure what else as DPP he could do.Starmer says he felt he had exhausted the exercise with Perry, and was not sure what else as DPP he could do.
2.48pm: In September 2010, Starmer sought advice from counsel David Perry, Louis Mabley and Mark Hayward.2.48pm: In September 2010, Starmer sought advice from counsel David Perry, Louis Mabley and Mark Hayward.
Perry took a slightly less emphatic view than he had in 2006 about whether the law (RIPA) covered voicemail interception.Perry took a slightly less emphatic view than he had in 2006 about whether the law (RIPA) covered voicemail interception.
Starmer asked him to re-check his opinion about the "for Neville" email.Starmer asked him to re-check his opinion about the "for Neville" email.
Hayward took a wide view of whether there could have been a prosecution, and said that conspiracy charges could also have been considered.Hayward took a wide view of whether there could have been a prosecution, and said that conspiracy charges could also have been considered.
3.08pm: Jay raises Operation Varec, the Met's investigation into the New York Times's 1 September 2010 allegations on phone hacking.3.08pm: Jay raises Operation Varec, the Met's investigation into the New York Times's 1 September 2010 allegations on phone hacking.
Starmer says the police interviewed the people mentioned in the New York Times's article under caution but found no new evidence.Starmer says the police interviewed the people mentioned in the New York Times's article under caution but found no new evidence.
3.11pm: Jay moves on to the Guardian's January 2011 revelations about Sienna Miller's civil action against the News of the World.3.11pm: Jay moves on to the Guardian's January 2011 revelations about Sienna Miller's civil action against the News of the World.
He says information arising from the case convinced him that the CPS and police should conduct "a root and branch review" of all the material.He says information arising from the case convinced him that the CPS and police should conduct "a root and branch review" of all the material.
3.18pm: Starmer issued a memo in early 2011 stating that the hacking issue wouldn't go away and civil actions were leading to disclosures and hard-to-avoid questions from newspapers.3.18pm: Starmer issued a memo in early 2011 stating that the hacking issue wouldn't go away and civil actions were leading to disclosures and hard-to-avoid questions from newspapers.
3.21pm: Starmer says he met Yates on 14 January 2011.3.21pm: Starmer says he met Yates on 14 January 2011.
Asked if it "was it all sweetness and light" between him and Yates Starmer replies:Asked if it "was it all sweetness and light" between him and Yates Starmer replies:
I was absolutely clear in my mind at the beginning of that meeting I was going to settle for nothing less than a full review of all this material unless somebody blocked me access to it, and I approached it in that way. To be fair to Mr Yates, he did not seek to block that approach, and in the end agreed to it, but I have to say by then I had reached the stage where I really was not in the mood for being dissuaded from my then course of action, I'm afraid.I was absolutely clear in my mind at the beginning of that meeting I was going to settle for nothing less than a full review of all this material unless somebody blocked me access to it, and I approached it in that way. To be fair to Mr Yates, he did not seek to block that approach, and in the end agreed to it, but I have to say by then I had reached the stage where I really was not in the mood for being dissuaded from my then course of action, I'm afraid.
3.23pm: The inquiry is now taking a short break.3.23pm: The inquiry is now taking a short break.
3.34pm: The inquiry has resumed and Keir Starmer is continuing his evidence.3.34pm: The inquiry has resumed and Keir Starmer is continuing his evidence.
3.35pm: On 24 January 2011, Starmer asked Alison Levitt QC to conduct a full review, which is now taking place alongside the Met's Operation Weeting. Starmer's statement said:3.35pm: On 24 January 2011, Starmer asked Alison Levitt QC to conduct a full review, which is now taking place alongside the Met's Operation Weeting. Starmer's statement said:
It has been agreed following a meeting this morning with Acting Commissioner Tim Godwin and Acting Deputy Commissioner John Yates, that any evidence resulting from recent or new substantive allegations made to the Metropolitan Police Service of mobile voicemail interception arising from the Goodman and Mulcaire case should be subject to the same rigorous assessment as Alison Levitt QC is applying to material already in the possession of the Metropolitan Police Service.It has been agreed following a meeting this morning with Acting Commissioner Tim Godwin and Acting Deputy Commissioner John Yates, that any evidence resulting from recent or new substantive allegations made to the Metropolitan Police Service of mobile voicemail interception arising from the Goodman and Mulcaire case should be subject to the same rigorous assessment as Alison Levitt QC is applying to material already in the possession of the Metropolitan Police Service.
I have asked Alison Levitt QC (who has had no previous involvement in the case) to take a robust approach with a view to advising whether the Metropolitan Police Service should carry out any further investigation or deciding whether any prosecutions can be brought.I have asked Alison Levitt QC (who has had no previous involvement in the case) to take a robust approach with a view to advising whether the Metropolitan Police Service should carry out any further investigation or deciding whether any prosecutions can be brought.
This builds upon the previous request by the MPS to the CPS to assess all the material relevant to phone hacking.This builds upon the previous request by the MPS to the CPS to assess all the material relevant to phone hacking.
3.38pm: Answering questions from core participants, Starmer says no journalists were considered in the Damian Green leaks case.3.38pm: Answering questions from core participants, Starmer says no journalists were considered in the Damian Green leaks case.
He also says prosecutions of journalists are "rare", partly due to the public interest in freedom of expression.He also says prosecutions of journalists are "rare", partly due to the public interest in freedom of expression.
3.41pm: Lord Justice Leveson says Starmer is still working on the interim policy on the prosecution of journalists and thanks him for his efforts.3.41pm: Lord Justice Leveson says Starmer is still working on the interim policy on the prosecution of journalists and thanks him for his efforts.
3.42pm: Starmer has now completed his evidence.3.42pm: Starmer has now completed his evidence.
3.42pm: Leveson says the inquiry will resume with evidence on the week beginning 23 April.3.42pm: Leveson says the inquiry will resume with evidence on the week beginning 23 April.
The second module of the inquiry is now over.The second module of the inquiry is now over.
4.32pm: We are now wrapping up the live blog for today.4.32pm: We are now wrapping up the live blog for today.
The inquiry will resume on Monday 23 April.The inquiry will resume on Monday 23 April.
In the meantime, you can read the latest developments on the MediaGuardian homepage and our Leveson inquiry page.In the meantime, you can read the latest developments on the MediaGuardian homepage and our Leveson inquiry page.