8 – 10 computers and mobiles registered to Rebekah Brooks missing, trial told
Please note this is Hacked Off's old website, and it will soon be archived.
By Martin Hickman
Between 8 and 10 computers and mobile phones registered to former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks are missing, police told the phone hacking trial today.
Operation Weeting detectives spent months piecing together a picture of Mrs Brooks’s computer equipment using data from her wifi router, an asset list from News International and records from mobile phone networks.
Detective Constable Philip Stead told the court that at least eight of Mrs Brooks’s devices have not been recovered from searches of her homes in London and Oxfordshire or from News International.
They are three BlackBerry mobile phones, two Apple iPhones, two iPads and an HTC Desire mobile phone.
Another iPad and an iPhone are unaccounted for; but the Old Bailey heard that a friend of the Brooks’s, Carphone Warehouse founder Charles Dunstone, said the iPad was his, and the third missing iPhone may be one of the other two errant iPhones.
Andrew Edis, QC, the chief prosecutor, took two hours to run through each of Mrs Brooks’s missing devices.
The missing earliest one was a BlackBerry registered to her on 4 October 2007 while she was Sun editor.
NI terminated her mobile phone accounts on 27 September 2011, later telling detectives about each of the items: “No record of return, assume still with user.”
Det Const Stead researched Mrs Brooks’s devices using NI’s master asset list, bills from NI’s mobile phone provider Vodafone, Mac addresses from Apple, and call data from mobile phone networks.
At the end of the evidence, Mr Edis read out an email from 1 April 2011in which Mrs Brooks had written to her husband Charlie, with a copy to her PA Cheryl Carter: “Lost iPad2.” Mr Brooks replied: “Back of car last night? Restaurant?”
No evidence from her about the other devices was adduced.
Jonathan Laidlaw QC, representing Mrs Brooks, asked if Det Const Stead was aware that concern had been expressed about the accuracy of News International’s records. “I’m not particularly aware of the concern,” replied the officer, “but yes, it says ‘assume’ [still with user].”
The lawyer suggested that Mrs Brooks may have swapped sim cards on her BlackBerry phone, putting the sim from an old broken phone into a new handset and vice-versa – since she had just one number which was “her sole number.”
He also said there was no outgoing phone calls from the HTC Desire handset.
Mr Laidlaw suggested there was email correspondence in Mrs Brooks’s office around the time of the connection of the two missing iPhones – 5 and 8 March 2011 – about the change of an iPhone.
He quoted from a report written by Detective Constable Ian Gower about the process of obtaining the mobile phone and tablet data from News International.
In the report, the detective had written: “As stated, much of the identification of assets at News International premises were reliant on information provided to the investigation team by News International… The records and means of auditing the IT were known to be in need of improvement.”
There was, Det Const Gower wrote, a “high degree” of uncertainty about tracking assets to end-users.
Mrs Brooks, Mr Brooks and Ms Carter deny conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Mrs Brooks also denies charges of plotting to hack phones and plotting to pay public officials for information.
The trial continues on Monday.
2 Comments
Join the discussion and tell us your opinion.
Is it illegal to recommend one see the public record testimony of one of the defendants regarding this evidence? I’m still trying to get the rules straight, so don’t post this if it’s not OK to ask WTH? I want to ask who asked another to ask one of the defendants about a compressed email before we had a clue what metadata was. I bet that person knew what it was at that time. Shouldn’t gag Mother Nurture. Someone needs a real gob smacking.
It has become deplorably obvious we were for years denied justice because to have prosecuted these offenders fully in 2005 would have revealed the absolutely illegal domestic spying the US and UK governments were engaging in with our own telephony industries. ANOTHER opportunity to have debated this mess was suppressed. Instead, the US and UK crafted a secret resolution to carry on with presumed legality.
The tabloid hacking scandal and the NSA/GCHQ hacking scandals have collided.
To protect these illegal domestic spying operations from exposure to targets, including the implicated pubic, the police denied justice to thousands of victims of privacy violations. Employees were sacked. Families fell apart. Police were asked to assist by victims, and they refused. Victims had to SUE to get standing to approach the court for relief.
Let us not forget the officer who blew this whistle and the reporter who revealed police were covering up this evidence for years were both found to have more served the public interest than their illegal behavior warranted prosecution. PUBLIC INTEREST DEFENSE. Why can’t Snowdon get one of those? Espionage Act. Change that.
The costs are still being calculated. But instead of justice, police obstructed justice with national security to protect a global hacking system that makes this despicable tabloid blagging and voice mail interception look innocent.
What other crimes remain unattended to because to do so would have blown the government’s covers? Is the net a lawless place because the government and providers prefer it that way?
http://www.insna.org/PDF/Connections/v19/1996_I-2.pdf
On page 13 of this old 1996 periodical about all things socially connected, the columnist asks “Is Agency Coming to the Internet?” Then he breaks down the board of SAIC and their connections to US defense and intelligence departments. I call BS on all mergers, acquisitions and IPOs in tech and telephony since 1996. Have we seen the three step on those boards and our intelligence communities? A surprisingly small chain gang, if probability counts for anything these days.
This is reminiscent of the massive Tea Pot Dome Scandal, but this time around the tub ring, Data is the New Oil. Rub, rub. Scrub, scrub.
Tea Pot BLOWN. Another fine mess those Barons have got us into, Ollie.