Text messages sought in Britain's tabloid phone hacking scandal
LONDON — A British lawmaker called on Sunday for the country's media ethics inquiry to publish all the text messages it has between Prime Minister David Cameron and Rebekah Brooks, the ex-chief executive of Rupert Murdoch's British newspaper division, who faces charges over the country's tabloid phone hacking scandal.
The Mail on Sunday newspaper printed two previously unseen messages the pair had exchanged in 2009 on Sunday, prompting a call from opposition Labour Party lawmaker Chris Bryant for Judge Brian Leveson's ethics inquiry to disclose the texts.
Some messages sent between Cameron and Brooks have been studied by the national panel and released to the public, provoking embarrassment for the British leader.
However, other texts, which the inquiry says were not relevant to its work, have been kept private.
Bryant claims the messages have been withheld only because they are “salacious and embarrassing.”
Cameron, a school friend of Brooks' husband, traded text messages with the senior media figure at least once a week and offered her support after she stepped down in 2010 during the hacking scandal.
The leader was also forced to acknowledge that he had occasionally gone horse riding with the couple, an image that appeared to reinforce claims by opponents that Cameron is part of a remote elite.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.