Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Timing is everything, part 2

There are some interesting new pieces of written evidence on the DCMS committee website, published today. Following on from the Linklaters email evidence (which suggests James Murdoch knew more than he has claimed) submitted before xmas, the committee has sought to determine exactly when the key June 2008 emails were discovered. (By lucky chance for Murdoch they were submitted to the committee after he faced a shareholder vote at BSkyB).

Anyhow, Linklaters has submitted a not entirely straightforward answer suggesting that a junior reviewer first discovered the email trail "on or about 18 November 2011". The letter also says that the significance of the email should have been recognised immediately. Instead, only when a second reviewer spotted the email was the alarm sounded, on 7th December.
Ok, but then explain how the Daily Mail was able to write a story on 12 November about the discovery of emails damaging James Murdoch? And how did a source close to Murdoch Snr know enough to tell Andrew Neil they were potentially devastating to James at least three weeks before Linklaters realised their importance? Either there are other emails we haven't seen yet, or it looks like someone is telling porkies.

No comments: