News

Daily Mail chief Paul Dacre recalled to Leveson Inquiry

07/02/2012

The editor in chief of the Daily Mail has been recalled to give evidence before the Leveson Inquiry this week.Lord Justice Leveson said he expected Paul Dacre, who appeared before the inquiry yesterday, to answer further questions about issues relating to Hugh Grant.He is due be asked about a Mail on Sunday story regarding a “plummy-voiced executive” leaving voicemail messages for the actor, who claimed the Mail on Sunday may have hacked his phone, and the harassment suffered by the mother of Grant's child.David Sherborne, the barrister representing core participant victims, said Grant had been accused of perjury by Associated Newspaper, adding the conflict was an "illustrative example of the press as whole”.Jonathan Caplan QC, counsel to Associated Newspapers said the editor had co-operated fully with the inquiry and should not be expected to return. He said these issues should be dealt with in writing.He added: “This is going to create an imbalance and avert from the way in which this inquiry has been conducted.”The chairman apologised but said the issues should be heard before the inquiry in the interests of fairness. He told the core participants they had until 2pm this afternoon to decide how to proceed with the matter.He added: “I am not willing to allow what is an obvious conflict between one of the core participants and another to divert attention from my concern about the customs practices and ethics of the press. To some extent that conflict may evidence customs, practices and ethics, but there is a limit.“I am not entirely happy that the inquiry was bombarded on Friday with a variety of statements dealing with historical and other issues going to the conflict.”

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

A year and two days: the story of one complaint to IPSO
Guest blog: Chris Goodall's complaint about fifteen errors in a Daily Mail article took IPSO a year and two days to decide. Here he publishes the full timeline — more than 80 emails, hundreds of hours of work, and one correction.
9/22/26
News
SLAPPs and the press: why the Anti-SLAPP Bill is the wrong answer
The private members Bill promoted by Baroness Stowell and Sir John Whittingdale would apply to any claim touching a matter of public interest, however meritorious and however properly brought. Hacked Off sets out why it would harm victims of press abuse, and why section 40 was the better answer.
9/21/26
News
Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News