Friday, November 12, 2010

Bob Bird's Testimony


The next witness for the Crown on Friday morning was Robert (Bob) Bird, the Scottish editor of the News of the World (NotW) for the last 10 years. The Advocate Depute, Alex Prentice QC, began by asking Mr Bird about the relationship between the Scottish edition of the newspaper and the UK edition. Mr Bird told the court that the Scottish paper had a "fair degree of autonomy" and could "pick and choose" which London stories to run and produce their own content geared to the Scottish readership. Mr Bird was then shown three copies of the News of the World  dated 31st October, 14 November and 21 November 2004, and asked if he edited those. The witness stated he had.

Mr Bird was then asked about Mr Sheridan's action for defamation in relation to these three editions of the NotW. A case which was held at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in 2006. Mr Bird confirmed he had testified in that trial and in addition had been in the gallery and listened to "the majority of the evidence." He also told the court that when Mr Sheridan had been successful in that case the NotW had appealed the verdict "almost immediately"


Mr Prentice then moved on to the issue of the "McNeilage tape" and how Mr Bird had come into possession of it. Mr Bird told the court he had received a telephone call around a week after the trial from someone who told him he "had proof Tommy Sheridan lied in court." He had arranged to meet this unknown caller at an address in Pollok (a housing estate in the South side of Glasgow) and went alone. He stated that he had then been redirected over a railway bridge to another address, which he later discovered was that of George McNeilage. On arrival in the house Mr Bird told the court he was shown a handwritten sign saying that he was not to say anything and remove his clothes, which he did in the bathroom. He then returned to the living room where the person there asked "Do you know who I am? I'm Tommy Sheridan's best man" Mr Bird told the court that "his blood had run cold" and he expected "Tommy Sheridan to burst in with a video camera" However this did not occur and, clad only in his underwear, he watched the "McNeilage tape."


Mr Prentice then asked the witness what had happened after he watched the video. Mr Bird told the court that Mr McNeilage had asked for £250,000 and he had told him that he would need to authenticate the tape and get authorisation to hand over such a large sum of money. Mr Prentice put it to the witness that it had been suggested in court that the NotW had been involved in producing the tape. Mr Bird said there was no truth whatsoever in that suggestion. Mr Bird then told the court he had arranged to open negotiations with Mr McNeilage's lawyer and had then left the house. The witness added that later that evening he had spoken to Andrew Coulson, then National editor of the NotW and they had discussed paying for the tape. Mr Bird testified that Mr Coulson's response was that  £250,000 was "pricey."


Mr Bird then told the court that the final price agreed for the tape was £200,000, to be paid in two installments. The agreement also included the newspaper taking possession of the camera the tape was allegedly recorded on (which he identified in court) as well as the original micro cassette and various cables. The newspaper had also agreed to replace this camera which was the property of a local community centre. 


Finally Mr Prentice asked Mr Bird if previous Crown witness Katrine Trolle had ever been offered money by the NotW for her story. The witness told the court that although he had testified in the 2006 civil case  that Ms Trolle was never offered money, he had later discovered that in fact she had been offered a payment by one of his journalists, Andrea Vance. Mr Bird added that while an offer had been made Ms Trolle had not accepted it.


With that the Crown ended it's evidence in chief, and Mr Sheridan was free to begin his cross-examination, which we will cover in our next report.

19 comments:

Bill S said...

Isnt that just a tad convenient?

NotW denies offering payment, Sheridan uncovers in court that they did, and Bird turns up to have an explanation of why his evidence, like many before him, has changed since 2006.

It's beginning to be clear why the police investigation took so long, most of the people we have seen so far have offered evidence that differs from previous testimony in court or in police statements.

The police must have had to spend a lot of time just sorting out which of the 'mistakes' were lies and which were deliberate attempts to pervert the course of justice.

Seamus Doleboy said...

I am assuming that everyone has heard?

About the Bird that is

Anonymous said...

Factoid: Bod Bird is the ex-husband of BBC presenter Jackie Bird.

Anonymous said...

How did GMcN explain away the change-over of video camera to the community centre? Who did he mention if to?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bunc said...

Sensible move by the NOTW to secure the camera , tapes and cables. Should make it easier to establish that the tape is genuine.

Victor English said...

Factoid 2 - When Andy Coulson takes the stand he will be facing Alastair Campbell!

(Lord Bracadale's weekend name)

Anonymous said...

Does this community centre also have video edit equipment for use by the community?

A rural Socialist said...

Bunc
Why do you think that by securing the camera and associated equipment will make it easier to establish it to be genuine.
The tape was sold as seen as a complete entity the other equipment along with the camera belonged to the community was simply a freebie a sort of bogof.
Given that it was community owned equipment surely this community should also benifit from this sale.
It is only in the capitalist system that they use such things as community to enhance the individual.

Bobby said...

@Victor English
I wish you'd post on here more often.. makes a change from some of the posters on here who are so dogmatic it would make Brezhnev spin in his grave...

Psyche said...

Sort of thing you would do really. Go to an address in Pollock, Easterhouse or Craigmillar on your own. Meet a complete stranger in the dark at his house, go in and take your clothes of under silent instruction.....
Totally believable story.

Anonymous said...

Psyche: I would say that your comment comes a bit close to casting doubt on witness testimony, which I was under the impression James was being more careful about. However to respond at face value: do you not think it not be far weirder to make up having the News of the World editor stripping to his boxers in your living room as part of a cover story, than for it to have actually happened?

Jessica Fletcher P.I. said...

Did you get my email a while back James?

I'm not really looking for a response as such. I just wondered if it was the right one. sheridanwatch@gmail.com

Ominous title, if you don't mind me saying so. ;)

Where's Magnum these days? This place needs a bit of colour and panache. Or perhaps just some moustache?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNYDNtVs1PE

James Doleman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
James Doleman said...

Just realised address is sheridantrial@gmail.com

Jessica Fletcher P.I. said...

I'll send again.
Even though it is a little out of date now.

Jessica Fletcher P.I. said...

I've reread it. It's very much out of date now but I sent it anyway. I wouldn't want a ramble to go to waste.

Jess xx

Jim said...

"and Bird turns up to have an explanation of why his evidence, like many before him, has changed since 2006.

It's beginning to be clear why the police investigation took so long, most of the people we have seen so far have offered evidence that differs from previous testimony in court or in police statements.

The police must have had to spend a lot of time just sorting out which of the 'mistakes' were lies and which were deliberate attempts to pervert the course of justice."

But does that not perhaps indicate that many witnesses were not trying to say too much in the first court case and even with the police. Perhaps people didn't think it would come to this. I know I didn't!! It sort of undermines the idea there is a plot.

Glad Mr Bird was humiliated by George by being made to take his clothes off!

Magnum P.I. said...

Hi Jessica

Magnum P.I. is still around, up to my hairy chest in homicide cases so don't have as much time to post as I'd like - you know how long toxicology tests can take to come back from the lab.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWz9lpxv3NM

Magnum P.I.xx