News

Jury sent out to consider verdicts after 3 month “Sun Six” conspiracy trial

06/01/2015

By Martin HickmanThe jurors at The Sun corruption case at Kingston Crown Court retired to consider their verdicts this afternoon.They are due to return 14 separate verdicts in the case of six current and former Sun journalists accused of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office. The Crown alleges there was a culture at Britain's best-selling newspaper of paying police officers and other officials.Before sending out the jury at 2.51pm, the judge, Richard Marks QC, told them: "This is a serious and a very important case as far as all the defendants are concerned. You must give – as I know you will – the utmost attention, and deal with it fairly in a calm dispassionate and analytic evaluation of the evidence.” He told the jury there was no pressure of time on them. Although the jury may have heard of majority verdicts, they were "not the position in this case at this time," he added.After the judge finished making his final remarks, one juror asked about the requirement for there to have been a "single agreement" [a conspiracy] to reach a guilty verdict each count. He asked whether there still be a single agreement if conspirators had come and gone during the length of the conspiracy. The judge told the jury that there could be – and gave the example of a plan to rob the Bank of England. Judge Marks said: "That might be a plan that by reason of its complexity went on over a number of years. To be guilty of the conspiracy you don't have to be in on day one and stay for the entirety of the agreement."However, he added, if, for instance, the jury decided that reporter Jamie Pyatt had entered into a series of discrete, separate arrangements with the Surrey police officer Simon Quinn, rather than a single agreement, then the prosecution case would not be made out.All the defendants - Chris Pharo, Ben O'Driscoll, John Edwards, Graham Dudman, Jamie Pyatt and John Troup – deny the charges.

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