Will James Murdoch escape with a rap on the knuckles?

On 21 July, James Murdoch, deputy chief operating officer and chairman and CEO, International, News Corporation, issued a nine-word statement on the issue of phone-hacking. “I stand by my testimony to the Select Committee,” Murdoch junior had said. Murdoch had told a UK parliamentary committee inquiring into the hacking scandal that he had agreed to an unusually high settlement of £725,000 to Gordon Taylor because it made financial sense, and not because a legal battle with Taylor might prove that the hacking involved much more than one rogue reporter. Two of News International’s senior executives, Colin Myler (who was editor of NoTW) and Tom Crone, NI’s manager (legal), disputed his testimony. Yesterday, Murdoch sought to clarify the nine-word statement. “My recollection of the meeting regarding the Gordon Taylor settlement is absolutely clear and consistent. I stand by my testimony, which is an accurate account of events,” he said. [caption id=“attachment_84073” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Unless there is clear evidence that disproves James Murdoch’s statements, the Select Committee, might, at best, pull up Murdoch of poor corporate governance. Getty Images”]  [/caption] “I was told by Mr Crone and Mr Myler when we met, in that short meeting, that the civil litigation related to the interception of Mr Taylor’s voicemails to which Mulcaire had pleaded guilty the previous year. I was informed, for the first time, that there was evidence that Mulcaire had carried out this interception on behalf of the News of the World. It was for this reason alone that Mr Crone and Mr Myler recommended settlement. It was in this context that the evidence was discussed. They did not show me the email, nor did they refer to Neville Thurlbeck,” he added in a statement. “Neither Mr Myler nor Mr Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr Goodman or Mr Mulcaire.” “As I said in my testimony, there was nothing discussed in the meeting that led me to believe that a further investigation was necessary,” he said. This statement is a far more defined and black-and-white account of the conversations between Murdoch, Myler and Crone. “ Mr Crone told the MPs he was “certain” he told James Murdoch about the email which indicated phone hacking at the paper went beyond one rogue reporter. He said “it was the reason that we had to settle the case” with football executive Gordon Taylor,” reports BBC.com. However, “the pair (Myler and Crone) said that they had told Mr Murdoch about the email in a 15 minute meeting in 2008 although Mr Crone could not remember whether he had shown him a copy,” reports The Telegraph. It appears that much will rest on who the Select Committee will believe – in the absence of proof. James Murdoch definitive statement suggests that there is no e-mail trail of the developments which led to the decision to settle with Gordon Taylor. Myler and Crone state that they are ‘certain’ Murdoch was aware of the extent of the hacking, while Murdoch’s is equally confident that no such comment was made. Someone is lying; Murdoch or Myler and Crone. While the Select Committee might make themselves popular by making an anti-James Murdoch inference, it appears that available evidence will not allow them to do so. Unless there is clear evidence that disproves Murdoch’s statements, the Select Committee, might, at best, pull up Murdoch of poor corporate governance. And we might yet see James Murdoch live to fight another media battle.