Mazher Mahmood
The CPS explained “After carefully considering all of the evidence the CPS has decided that there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and it is in the public interest to charge both men. This decision comes after it was alleged that Mr Smith agreed with Mr Mahmood to change his statement to police as part of a trial in July 2014, and that Mr Mahmood then misled the court”. Maz’ court date is at the end of next month.
6 comments:
I don't suppose they would have much room to spare to report this given the space required they need to report the ongoing trial of Pyatt and Pharo with all those lurid details of the conduct of a former editor in chief?
They are reporting it aren't they? Didn't they supply most of the evidence against the accused?
There is a small report in my edition of today's Times on page 14.
"both Mr Mahmood and Mr Smith have a right to a fair trial." As did the victims of his stings.
He is of course innocent until found guilty.
But in the possible event of the latter, I hope he has a quick introduction to Sweet Pants in the shower. It might help his memory.
Do you suppose that that nice Mr. Murdoch will pay for his defence as he did for Rebekah?
Bwahahahahahhah!
The Sun had a small report in at least one edition and the Daily Star had a fair-sized one. Big pic of Tulisa
Further to your point about legal fees, the Indie said News UK wouldn't confirm or deny that it was footing the bill.
Post a Comment