Introduction
Last Friday the hacking trial
culminated in the sentencing of Andy Coulson and four other individuals for
conspiracy to hack phones.
The 46 year old, who had served
as the editor of the News of the World and as Director of Communications for
Prime Minister David Cameron, was found guilty at the Old Bailey in June. For
more information, see this earlier article.
Coulson was sentenced alongside
four ex-journalists at the tabloid, as well as private investigator Glenn
Mulcaire. They had all pleaded guilty to conspiracy to hack phones.
The sentences were as follows:
- Coulson, 46, of Canterbury – 18
months imprisonment.
- Former chief reporter Neville
Thurlbeck, 52, of Esher, Surrey – six months imprisonment.
- Former news editor Greg Miskiw,
64, of Leeds – six months imprisonment.
- Private investigator Glenn
Mulcaire, 43, of Sutton, Surrey – six months imprisonment suspended for twelve
months with 200 hours of unpaid work (community service).
- Former reporter James
Weatherup, 58, of Brentwood, Essex – four months imprisonment suspended for
twelve months with 200 hours of unpaid work.
Sentencing Remarks
Sentencing the group, the judge,
Mr Justice Saunders, said there was ‘a very great deal of phone hacking while
Andy Coulson was editor’. It was ‘unforgivable’ how the News of the World had
acted in relation to phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler. The defendants
were all respected journalists whose careers were now ‘irreparably damaged’.
Andy Coulson had to take ‘the major share of the blame for the hacking at the
News of the World’. It was no defence, and no mitigation, that the individuals
did not know they were behaving criminally; they all knew hacking was morally
wrong.
Specifically in relation to
Coulson, Mr Justice Saunders, said that the starting point for his sentence would
be two years, the maximum sentence for the offence (on which, see below), because
of the quantity of phone hacking he was involved in and because he was the
editor controlling the investigative methods used by his reporters. However,
that would be reduced by six months to reflect his former good character and
that there had been delay in the matter coming to trial for which he was not
responsible.
The Offence
The group were convicted of
conspiracy to hack phones or, more technically, conspiracy to intercept
communications in the course of their transmission.
This is an offence under section 1(1) of
the Criminal Law Act 1977. Section 1(1) of the 1977 provides it is an
offence for a person to agree with others to follow a course of conduct which,
if it is carried out as they intended, would involve an offence being
committed. In essence, it is planning to carry out another offence.
The offence that was planned and
committed was the unlawful interception of communications, or ‘hacking’, under section 1 of the
Regulation of the Investigatory Powers Act 2000. This provides it is an
offence for a person to intentionally intercept communications in the course of
their transmission without lawful authority.
Under section 3 of the
1977 Act, the maximum sentence for conspiracy is the maximum sentence of
the offence planned. The maximum sentence for unlawful interception is two
years imprisonment under section 1(7) of
the 2000 Act. Thus the maximum sentence for conspiracy here was two years
imprisonment.
Notes on the Sentence
Having been sentenced to imprisonment
for 18 months Coulson will be entitled to be released on licence after serving
one half of the sentence, under section 244 of
the Criminal Justice Act 2003. So long as he complies with the licence
conditions he will not then return to prison. However, it is likely that he
will be released even sooner than the halfway point of his sentence under the Home
Detention Curfew scheme, in accordance with section 246 of
the 2003 Act. Under this scheme, Coulson will be subject to a curfew and
electronically monitored (known as ‘tagging’). The scheme is designed to help
the reintegration of prisoners back in to society.
What are your thoughts on the
sentence?
