Skip to content or view screen version

Why did police declare death of News of the World whistleblower “not suspicious?”

Chris Marsden | 20.07.2011 09:42 | Other Press | Repression | Technology | Sheffield | World

When the former News of the World reporter Sean Hoare was found dead Monday at his home in Watford, north of London, the immediate response of the Hertfordshire police was to issue a public statement declaring his death to be “unexplained but not thought to be suspicious.”

The statement is at the very least extraordinary, and at worst sinister in its implications. Hoare is the man who broke silence on the corrupt practices at the News of the World and, most specifically, alleged that former editor Andy Coulson, who later became Prime Minister David Cameron’s director of communications, was fully aware of phone hacking that took place on an “industrial scale.”

Under these circumstances, before either a post-mortem or any investigation had been mounted, how could such a claim be made by the police?

The morning after Hoare’s body was found, former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and his former deputy, John Yates, were to give evidence before a home affairs select committee. Stephenson had tendered his resignation Sunday and Yates Monday. They were to be quizzed by MPs on their failure to pursue any serious investigation into phone hacking or on the bribing of police officers. This was to be followed by the quizzing of News Corporation head Rupert Murdoch, his son James, chairman of News International, and former News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks.

The death of Hoare means that his testimony will never be heard by any such inquiry or, more importantly, by any criminal investigation that may arise.

His public statements to date—coming from within News International, News Corp’s UK arm—are highly damaging. Last year, Hoare gave interviews to the New York Times and the BBC in which he said Coulson knew about hacking that was “endemic” and part of the “culture at News International.”

In September, he told the New York Times that Coulson had “actively encouraged” him to intercept mobile phone messages. On BBC Radio 4’s PM programme he said: “I've stood by Andy and been requested to tap phones, to hack into them and so on. He was well aware that the practice exists. To deny it is a lie. It's simply a lie.”

Hoare’s claims were passed on to the Metropolitan Police, who said he declined to give evidence. The Guardian’s Nick Davies paints a fuller picture more damaging to the police. He writes that Hoare was “offended when Scotland Yard's former assistant commissioner, John Yates, assigned officers to interview him, not as a witness but as a suspect. They told him anything he said could be used against him, and, to his credit, he refused to have anything to do with them.”

A week ago, Hoare told the New York Times about journalists making payments to the police, and about the use of “pinging”—locating people via their mobile phone signals, a technology supposedly to be used only for anti-terror purposes. He alleged that News of the World executive Greg Miskiw had used such techniques. He said journalists were able to purchase the mobile phone tracking data from police for £300.

Hoare’s health was bad after years of alcohol and cocaine abuse, but he was in rehab. He was just 47 years old.

The Daily Mail ran a piece specifically seeking to dismiss any and all questions of possible wrongdoing in Hoare’s death. It described him as “a paranoid recluse who believed someone was out to get him,” citing an unnamed “friend and neighbour.”

The newspaper added that he had “spent much of the last weeks of his life ‘hiding’ in his flat with the curtains drawn.” It quoted Hoare’s friend as saying, “He would talk about someone from the Government coming to get him. He’d say to me, ‘If anyone comes by, don’t say I’m in.’”

Given that he was involved in a scandal that is threatening the government, the police and one of the world’s major news corporations—and the treatment already meted out to him—such caution was not paranoia, but common sense.

A Guardian report also notes that Hoare’s body was found at 10:40 am, but “It was not until after 9 pm, two hours after news broke that the phone hacking whistleblower had been found dead, that more uniformed and plainclothes police arrived at the scene. At about 9:15 pm, a police van marked Scientific Services Unit pulled up at the address, where a police car was already parked.”

The report continues, “Two officers emerged carrying evidence bags, clipboards, torches and laptop-style bags and entered the building. Three officers carrying cameras and in white forensic suits followed at 9:30 pm.”

Hoare’s death was clearly, operationally at least, being treated as possibly suspicious, despite official statements to the contrary. Late yesterday, police stated that there was “no evidence” of third party involvement in Hoare’s death and that further toxicology tests are taking place.

Chris Marsden
- Homepage: http://wsws.org/articles/2011/jul2011/hoar-j20.shtml

Comments

Hide the following 5 comments

Maybe he was found in a locked room?

20.07.2011 11:56

Just guessing, but I imagine they would look for signs of a struggle, forced entry, etc. If he was in a room that was bolted from the inside, for example, that would rule out a lot of things.

Or maybe he left a suicide note?

I know we all love a conspiracy, but would someone risk murder just to avoid a few year inside for hacking emails?

Remember this scumbag was one of the same people screwing over the vulnerable members of society a few years back, so I've no real sympathy for him.

anon


because

20.07.2011 15:57

if you care to study such things...

The decleration of "suspicious" is done localy, this is declared if there are no obvious marks to the body, no obvious means of assault or nothing obvious to say that it was suspicious.

As the person in question died alone an autopsy is mandatory.

Therefor until there is something to declare suspicious then its not, if something is found then a case is opened.

Oh.... and as the "scandel" is out now, please cant the conspiricy theorists please supply a reason for the "state" to kill off the spark when a forrest fire is rageing?


anon


british state feels no problem in murder

20.07.2011 20:40

if this happened in a 3rd world country, people would be quick to see the obvious. for some reason, people seem to think that state sanctioned murder does not happen in this country. please my friends, remember we are living in britain, a country whose history is built on murder. do you really think that a country that does not hesitate to kill over a million in Iraq, will have any qualms in offing a journalist who knew the dirty secrets of much of the scum in power today. come off it! the british state is where it is today because of centuries of mass murder!

@narch@


...grone

22.07.2011 05:34

Er HAW et all loitered on parliament square for years, if the "STATE" was so quick to murder, etc then how come 2 years into him demo did a drunk police lorry driver not overcook the bend and wipe him out?
Plausable, easy, chance of muliple targets taken out....

Your argument falls down whaen placed next to the other oppotunities the "STATE" has had to get rid of opposition, say how come demos arnt broken up with tear gas and batton rounds (however much pre armed cocks from back block try to get them to do so)

If the state is anything its incompetant and over large, like a fat panicing old fool who cant see his feet and is being told where to walk by anyone who shouts loudly.

The "state" murders people and the agent provocotour line is not only false by counter productive, it demonises one side in an argument, it becomes a self fullfilling proficy and although that is the wet dream of some contributers here it is not mine.
Been to cuba,Guatamala and south america generaly, and frankly that is not the way I want this country to become

anon by right


Higher

22.07.2011 08:06

Gordan Browns phone was hacked, how come the security services did not know about this? Maybe it goes higher, maybe the security services did know.

Not televised