Tag Archives: Hacking

Jennifer Lawrence: Nude Photo Hacking Was a “Sex Crime”

Posted on by

Jennifer Lawrence opens up about that nude photo hacking in Vanity Fair’s November issue, the digital edition will be available Wednesday, October 8 followed by the print edition.

Jennifer Lawrence speaks out about nude photo hacking

The 24-year-old actress said: “Just because I’m a public figure, just because I’m an actress, does not mean that I asked for this, It does not mean that it comes with the territory. It’s my body, and it should be my choice, and the fact that it is not my choice is absolutely disgusting. I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world. ”

She tried to write a statement about the incident but “every single thing that I tried to write made me cry or get angry. I started to write an apology, but I don’t have anything to say I’m sorry for. I was in a loving, healthy, great relationship for four years. It was long distance, and either your boyfriend is going to look at porn or he’s going to look at you.

It is not a scandal. It is a sex crime, It is a sexual violation. It’s disgusting. The law needs to be changed, and we need to change. That’s why these Web sites are responsible. Just the fact that somebody can be sexually exploited and violated, and the first thought that crosses somebody’s mind is to make a profit from it. It’s so beyond me. I just can’t imagine being that detached from humanity. I can’t imagine being that thoughtless and careless and so empty inside.

Anybody who looked at those pictures, you’re perpetuating a sexual offense. You should cower with shame. Even people who I know and love say, ‘Oh, yeah, I looked at the pictures.’ I don’t want to get mad, but at the same time I’m thinking, I didn’t tell you that you could look at my naked body.”

“Time does heal, you know, I’m not crying about it anymore. I can’t be angry anymore. I can’t have my happiness rest on these people being caught, because they might not be. I need to just find my own peace.”

People Who Shared Jennifer Lawrence Nude Photos ‘May Face Prosecution’

Posted on by

Jennifer LawrenceThe reaction to the leaking of nude photos of celebrities, including Jennifer Lawrence, was awful. Some put the blame on the victims and others shared liberally with disgusting comments. But in this new world of social media the law is always being rewritten and much like dealing in physical stolen property is a criminal act, sharing hacked photos is too. Representatives for Lawrence have already said that they will sue anyone who shares or hosts the stolen pictures.

“Retweeting your way to prosecution: Jennifer Lawrence scandal could result in a wave of prosecutions” Duncan Lamont, Partner in the Reputation Management team at Charles Russell LLP, commented:

“An individual found to be sharing, retweeting, or providing a link to material that has been hacked, could face the full force of the law. People syndicating and sharing hacked celebrity nude photos, which in the latest incident allegedly purports to feature a host of A-listers, could find themselves in serious trouble, whether here or abroad. The republication of obviously private material is a breach of privacy law, constitutes misuse of private data and is a copyright law issue. Individuals linking and sharing this material could even be prosecuted for conspiracy or obscene publication, which are criminal offences. Social media users searching for this material may want to question the morality of viewing stolen images, while those sharing them may face serious legal repercussions. People should avoid ‘retweeting their way to prosecution’. It can happen – just look at those who joked about bombing airports or tweeted information about ongoing jury trials.”

Daily Mail Accused of 'Intimidating' Hugh Grant After Leveson Testimony

Posted on by

The Leveson Inquiry has been warned that actor and activist Hugh Grant has been “punished” for his decision to speak out about press intrusion on Monday.

Associated Newspapers – publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday- hit out at Grant’s allegation that his phone had been hacked by the Mail on Sunday by claiming that he had lied under oath.

“Mr Grant’s allegations are mendacious smears driven by his hatred of the media,” the publisher said in a statement that also said that it “utterly refutes” Grant’s claims.

Barristers representing the Metropolitan Police and numerous hacking victims have said that the actor’s treatment after giving evidence would probably be “intimidating” to other witnesses.

The Daily Mail also “unequivocally denies” the paying of a hospital source to secure information about the birth of his first child.

Robert Sherborne, the legal counsel representing the hacking victims said the newspaper was using its power to bully the star.

“What was filed in the pages of the Daily Mail and the website was not a denial but a personal attack on Mr Grant as a witness…what they suggested is that he was deliberately lying.”

“There is a difference between a right of reply and a right of attack – if those you have been brave enough to come and give evidence receive this kind of treatment then witnesses will be unwilling to be that brave any longer,” Sherborne added.

Metropolitan Police QC Neil Garman was also concerned that Grant’s treatment could affect other witnesses

“Witnesses will be very cautious, we fear, if the likelihood is that they will face that kind of treatment the day after.

Other high profile witnesses who are expected to give evidence are Steve Coogan, Sienna Miller [one of the first people to sue News Corporation] and JK Rowling.

Jonathan Caplan QC, representing Associated Newspapers, said that the newspapers had made the statement “under pressure” in response to serious allegations of serious criminal misconduct, which it denied.

When asked about the attack on Grant, Caplan told Lord Justice Leveson:”I accept everything you say.”

Grant told the hearing he had tried to keep his ex-girlfriend Tinglan Hong’s pregnancy secret after the News of the World first speculated that she may be carrying his baby in April. Grant said: “my overwhelming motive throughout this whole episode was to protect the mother of my child”.

Grant said that Hong had been followed by paparazzi but the papers “seem not to have anything to print that could link her to me until I visited the hospital after the birth when again there seems to have been a leak from the hospital”

Grant said that he received a phone call the next day from the Daily Mail, and then the Daily Star. He said that he refused to comment, believing that to do so would give the paper confidence to publish.

He said that the Mail had adopted a “fishing technique and they didn’t want to print the story based solely on the hospital source because that might have been unethical or possibly illegal so they needed a comment from my side and that is why I said nothing”.

The Mail did not publish the item. The news was then published by US Weekly last month. The actor said the baby was the product of a “fleeting affair” and that Hong was “besieged” by photographers after the news was published and the actor was forced to take out an injunction to force them to go away.

When questioned by Robert Jay, QC to the Leveson inquiry, Grant said the only people who knew about he child were a female cousin, and Hong’s Chinese parents, “who spoke no English”.

The Mail issued a statement saying it “unequivocally denies Hugh Grant’s allegation that it secured information about the birth of his child from a source at the hospital” which instead came from “a source in his showbusiness circle more than two weeks after the birth”.

Grant said that he was sure the Mail had hacked his phone and referred to a report in the Mail on Sunday in February 2007, which said his relationship with his then girlfriend, Jemima Khan, was “on the rocks” because of “persistent late-night phone calls with a plummy-voiced executive from Warner Brothers” – a story he said was “completely untrue”. Jemima Khan also denied the story via her Twitter account.

Lord Justice Leveson also heard evidence from the parents of Milly Dowler, the murdered schoolgirl whose phone was appallingly hacked by the News of the World.

Bob and Sally Dowler spoke publicly for the first time about the moment they believed their daughter was picking up her voicemail messages, giving false hope that she was still alive.

Sally Dowler’s told the inquiry that after a period in which every time she rang her missing daughter’s mobile phone, it said the mailbox was full. She said: “It clicked through on to her voicemail so I heard her voice and [said]: ‘She’s picked up her voicemail Bob, she’s alive’.”

The couple also told the court that a private walk they took seven weeks after their daughter’s disappearance was pictured prominently in the News of the World. They claimed photographers were tipped off about the walk after the paper hacked their mobile phones.

Bob Dowler said: “The thing to remember is the walk was nothing to do with Milly’s phone.” His wife added: “That was our own home phone or own mobile phones.”

News International has paid £2m in compensation to the Dowler family, and the company said it had nothing further to add following their testimony.

James Murdoch Was 'Never Shown “For Neville” Email' Hacking Inquiry.

Posted on by

James Murdoch is in front of the Commons Committee again today. He is holding himself well and was ‘offended’ when MP Tom Watson compared News International to the mafia, Watson claimed that Mr Murdoch was the only mafia head who did not know he was running a mafia. To which Murdoch said the comment was ‘rude and inappropriate, [to the chairman] Chairman, please’.

James Murdoch claimed knowledge of the ‘For Neville’ email, but claims it was not shown to him.

He then went on to blame Colin Myler and Tom Crone for ‘misleading MPs’ at the Culture, Media and Sport Committee in testimony they gave about whether he was made aware of the extent of phone hacking at the paper.

Mr Murdoch said of the meeting with Mr Myler and Mr Crone that it had been to discuss increasing an offer to settle a legal claim by the chief executive of the Professional Footballers’ Association, Gordon Taylor.

“The meeting, which I remember quite well, was a short meeting, and I was given at that meeting sufficient information to authorise the increase of the settlement offers that had been made,” he said. “But I was given no more than that.”

“That second part, that importance, was not described to me in detail or at all,” Mr Murdoch said. “It was not described as the For Neville email, and I want to be very clear. No documents were shown to me at that meeting or were given to me at that meeting.”

Mr Murdoch said he could not recall discussing the Gordon Taylor case with Mr Myler before June 10 2008. “The first and only substantive meeting or conversation that I recall about the matter was the June 10 meeting with Mr Crone and Mr Myler, although I cannot rule out whether or not he called me or stopped me in the hallway, or something like that, for a brief conversation,”

Kelvin MacKenzie: I Was Hacked.

Posted on by

Kelvin MacKenzie has described how he felt after learning his phone was hacked by the News of the World. MacKenzie was writing in this week’s edition of The Spectator (out tomorrow)

MacKenzie, who is the former editor of The Sun, insisted he will not sue his former employer.

MacKenzie says he was invited to meet officers from the Met’s phone-hacking inquiry Operation Weeting because his name and private details were found in notebooks belonging to private investigator Glenn Mulcaire.

He said:

We went into a large empty room where the sergeant produced a tatty binder with my name down the side. By this time I was beginning to sweat. At that moment I would have even coughed to voting for Blair in 1997.

There was a dramatic pause as the sergeant opened up the binder. Sheet one had my name on it with a number by the side. Was it mine? Yes it was. The next page was more interesting. It had the pin code used to access my phone’s voice mails.

Up to this moment I had always believed that the pin codes of mobiles were 0000 or 1111 and that’s why it was so easy to crack. But no. In my case it was something like 367549V27418. That surely must kill the idea that the hackers guessed or blagged the number — they must have had inside help from the phone networks.

MacKenzie was going though a divorce and admitted that the experience made him feel ‘queasy’

He elaborated:

In any event, I won’t be taking News International’s money. That would be a betrayal of the many happy years I spent there, plus I have a sense that to pocket the cash — and one lawyer was anxious for me to know that it would be tax free, always attractive — would be to indicate I thought Rupert Murdoch would ever have turned a blind eye to the hackings.

I have an advantage over you. I know Rupert Murdoch and I know he would have gone ballistic at the very thought of such actions. At 81 he may be old but he’s not daft. I should be so daft.
Still, I do reflect that in those 60 minutes I spent with the two police officers by Putney Bridge that my previous hostile attitude to the hacked stars had changed forever. As has my pin number.

Phone Hacking: Goodman Letter Reveals 'Everyone Knew”

Posted on by

Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch and Andy Coulson face fresh embarrassment after an explosive letter from former News of the World Royal Correspondent, Clive Goodman was published today.

The four-year-old letter was only published on Tuesday, and it claims that phone hacking was “widely discussed” at editorial meetings at the News of the World until Andy Coulson banned any future references to them.

Goodman went on to claim that Coulson said he could keep his job if he agreed not to implicate the paper in court and that his hacking had “the full knowledge and support” of other senior journalists, who he named.

The Murdochs may now be recalled to parliament to give more evidence in the light of Goodman’s letter. Rupert Murdoch said that Andy Coulson knew nothing about the hacking during the hearing.

The letter was published by the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. One committee member, the Labour MP Tom Watson, said Goodman’s letter was “absolutely devastating.” He added: “Clive Goodman’s letter is the most significant piece of evidence that has been revealed so far. It completely removes News International’s defence. This is one of the largest cover-ups I have seen in my lifetime.”

Goodman’s letter is dated 2 March 2007, soon after he had served a four-month prison sentence. Addressed to News International’s Director of Human Resources, Daniel Cloke, Goodman writes: “This practice was widely discussed in the daily editorial conference, until explicit reference to it was banned by the editor.” He reveals that the paper’s then lawyer, Tom Crone, knew all the details of the case against him.

In another embarrassing allegation, he adds: “Tom Crone and the editor promised on many occasions that I could come back to a job at the newspaper if I did not implicate the paper or any of its staff in my mitigation plea. I did not, and I expect the paper to honour its promise to me.”

Anonymous: Damaging The Vital Cause Of Internet Freedom

Posted on by

Anonymous – the radical decentralised online community ostensibly associated with the goal of ‘free speech’ – has caused controversy by issuing a statement sympathising with the UK riots.

It is yet another example of action by the organisation that damages the vital cause of internet freedom. A cause which the organisation claims to defend.

The Anonymous collective has become increasingly prominent. It is most famous for its DDoS attacks which bombard a target webserver with so many requests that it is forced to shut down. The Mastercard and Visa websites have been victims.

Frost readers will know how much I believe in the freedom of the internet and it pains me to see the cause tarnished in this way. It was always wrong for Anonymous to take criminal action. Their actions only give governments further justification to clamp down on the internet further. This is now more the case than ever following their recent statement.

For a supposedly decentralised community, the comments on the UK riots were pretty categorical, worryingly and obviously so. There is an elite within Anonymous that has its own agenda. http://pastebin.com/V00tbr01

The comments can only be interpreted as seeking to incite a revolution, saying: ‘Your politicians mask the extent to which a significant section of society is stuck in an impoverished way of life with little hope for the future.

“It is time to take a stand and realise that solutions will not be found in today’s corrupt political landscape.”

Anonymous called for people to join them in a day of action on October 15th. Although Anonymous made clear it did not condone the violence, it was sympathetic to the rioters. It suggested the riots were as a result of political anger and resentment. Let’s get real here. These riots had no political point (save perhaps the initial riot in Tottenham), and everybody knows that. These riots were about self-gratifying violence and greedy opportunism.

Anonymous will point to the government response to the riots, potentially regulating and controlling social media sites. They will argue this makes it a legitimate target. Undoubtedly, the government is disgracefully jumping on the riots as an excuse for further regulation. No one truly blames twitter for the looting.

That doesn’t mean anarchy is the answer. It doesn’t make it right to incite a revolution. Internet regulation doesn’t have anything to do with anti-cuts protests or unions and it doesn’t mean ‘justice is only for the wealthy’. You have gone beyond your remit, Anonymous.

A revolution might sound romantic, but we only need to look back a few years to see the true horror they bring. They also never end in free speech.

Rupert Murdoch: This is the most humble day of my life.

Posted on by

Phone hacking Updates: Sean Hoare Dead, Murdochs, Yates and Stephenson Face committee.

 

In a sad development in the phone hacking juggernaut, Sean Hoare, 47, was found dead amidst ‘unexplained’ circumstances. Hoares, who accused his former editor, Andy Coulson, of illegal activity, was found dead at his home days after he made fresh allegations against executives who he worked for.

Police said they did not at this stage suspect foul play. Before his death he told the Guardian : “There’s more to come. This is not going to go away.” and the New York Times that Coulson’s claim that he knew nothing about the hacking was “simply a lie”.

 

Prime Minister David Cameron has cut short a trip to Africa as the crisis worsens, unlike Elisabeth Murdoch, who had went on holiday with husband Matthew Freud as her father Rupert, and brother James, face the select committee. Mr Cameron will face questions from MPs after Parliament summer recess was delayed so he could make an emergency Commons statement. Mr Cameron will be facing some tough questions over his decision to hire Andy Coulson as his media strategist.

Watch the live hacking commitee and the Murdoch’s being interviewed courtesy of the Telegraph

 

Other developments:

 

John Yates has resigned over his links to Neil Wallis, former deputy editor of the News of the World. Yates twice resisted requests to reopen the investigation into phone hacking.

 

Sir Paul Stephenson, head of the Metropolitan Police, also known as Scotland Yard, Resigned. Stephenson referred to his resignation saying; “It was my decision and my decision only.”

 

Boris Johnson has denied that he personally intervened in the resignation of Sir Paul Stephenson, the Met Commissioner and Mr Yates.

 

Rebekah Brooks was arrested on Sunday. She will still answer questions from the committee.

 

James Murdoch’s future looks uncertain and he will face the same panels of MPs as Brooks and his father.

 

Rupert Murdoch was mobbed by the press as he arrives at the Houses of Parliament. His wife, Wendi Deng, sat behind him as he was being interviewed and touched his arm in comfort a few times.

 

The scandal has rocked Britain and made the Murdochs, who were untouchable just last month, fair game. It is alleged the over 4000 people’s phones were hacked. Rupert Murdoch made an apologyy in newspapers over the weekend and also personallyapologiseded to Milly Dowler’s family after her phone was hacked.

James Murdoch perviously said: “We now have voluntarily given evidence to the police that I believe will prove that this was untrue and those who acted wrongly will have to face the consequences,This was not the only fault. The paper made statements to Parliament without being in the full possession of the facts. This was wrong.”

“I don’t see how he can survive,” Howell Raines, former executive editor of The New York Times told ABCNews.com. “Seems to me that the movement both politically and legally is ominous.”

 

Rupert Murdoch has defended his son by saying; “I think he acted as fast as he could, the moment he could,” he told the Wall Street Journal.