Question: What did The Sun fear would result from election of the Labour Party?

Answer: disaster

<hl> On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from " disaster " which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. <hl> The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "<hl> disaster <hl>" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from " <hl> disaster <hl> " which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected.


Question: What was the outcome of the general election?

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

Answer: hung parliament

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. <hl> The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. <hl> They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first <hl> hung parliament <hl> after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.


Question: Which party came to power after the election?

Answer: Tories

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. <hl> The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. <hl> They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the <hl> Tories <hl> gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.


Question: Who did David Cameron align with in order to become Prime Minister?

Answer: Liberal Democrats

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. <hl> They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats . <hl>

On election day (6 May 2010), The Sun urged its readers to vote for David Cameron's "modern and positive" Conservatives in order to save Britain from "disaster" which the paper thought the country would face if the Labour government was re-elected. The election ended in the first hung parliament after an election for 36 years, with the Tories gaining the most seats and votes but being 20 seats short of an overall majority. They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the <hl> Liberal Democrats <hl>.

They finally came to power on 11 May when Gordon Brown stepped down as prime minister, paving the way for David Cameron to become prime minister by forming a coalition with the <hl> Liberal Democrats <hl> .


Question: Why were former Sun staff members put in police custody in early 2012?

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

Answer: as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information

<hl> On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information ; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. <hl> The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, <hl> as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information <hl>; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, <hl> as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information <hl> ; a police officer was also arrested in the probe.


Question: What was the charge against those arrested?

Answer: suspicion of corruption

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. <hl> All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption . <hl> Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on <hl> suspicion of corruption <hl>. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

All five arrested were held on <hl> suspicion of corruption <hl> .


Question: What greater scandal was this investigation a part of?

Answer: the News of the World scandal

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. <hl> Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal . <hl>

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into <hl> the News of the World scandal <hl>.

Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into <hl> the News of the World scandal <hl> .


Question: Which Sun staffers were arrested?

Answer: crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. <hl> The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman , who since became a columnist and media writer. <hl> All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were <hl> crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman <hl>, who since became a columnist and media writer. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

The Sun staffers arrested were <hl> crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman <hl> , who since became a columnist and media writer.


Question: What role had Graham Dudman taken after serving as The Sun managing editor?

Answer: columnist and media writer

a columnist and media writer .

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became <hl> a columnist and media writer . <hl> All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

On 28 January 2012, police arrested four current and former staff members of The Sun, as part of a probe in which journalists paid police officers for information; a police officer was also arrested in the probe. The Sun staffers arrested were crime editor Mike Sullivan, head of news Chris Pharo, former deputy editor Fergus Shanahan, and former managing editor Graham Dudman, who since became a <hl> columnist and media writer <hl>. All five arrested were held on suspicion of corruption. Police also searched the offices of News International, the publishers of The Sun, as part of a continuing investigation into the News of the World scandal.

a <hl> columnist and media writer <hl> .


Question: Who were the main leaders of the ruling party?

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

Answer: David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband

<hl> The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband , were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. <hl> Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

The main party leaders, <hl> David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband <hl>, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

The main party leaders, <hl> David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband <hl> , were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material.


Question: Who criticized Milliband for posing with a copy of The Sun showing the Hillsborough disaster?

Answer: Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. <hl> Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson . <hl> A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from <hl> Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson <hl>. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from <hl> Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson <hl> .


Question: How did Milliband explain posing with this newspaper?

Answer: promoting England's bid to win the World Cup

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. <hl> A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup ", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended." <hl>

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was <hl> promoting England's bid to win the World Cup <hl>", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was <hl> promoting England's bid to win the World Cup <hl> ", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."


Question: Who was the Labour Mayour of Liverpool?

Answer: Joe Anderson

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. <hl> Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson . <hl> A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, <hl> Joe Anderson <hl>. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, <hl> Joe Anderson <hl> .


Question: What emotion did many people feel over The Sun's coverage of Hillsborough?

Answer: anger

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. <hl> A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the anger that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside <hl> and he is sorry to those who feel offended."

The main party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, were all depicted holding a copy of the special issue in publicity material. Miliband's decision to pose with a copy of The Sun received a strong response. Organisations representing the relatives of Hillsborough victims described Miliband's action as an "absolute disgrace" and he faced criticism too from Liverpool Labour MPs and the city's Labour Mayor, Joe Anderson. A statement was issued on 13 June explaining that Miliband "was promoting England's bid to win the World Cup", although "he understands the <hl> anger <hl> that is felt towards the Sun over Hillsborough by many people in Merseyside and he is sorry to those who feel offended."


Question: Who was the subject of an early June 2013 front page story?

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

Answer: Tulisa Contostavlos

<hl> On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos . <hl> The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter <hl> Tulisa Contostavlos <hl>. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter <hl> Tulisa Contostavlos <hl> .


Question: Who wrote the story on Tulisa Contostavlos?

Answer: Mahzer Mahmood

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. <hl> The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood , who had previously worked for the News of the World. <hl> It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter <hl> Mahzer Mahmood <hl>, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter <hl> Mahzer Mahmood <hl> , who had previously worked for the News of the World.


Question: What was the main allegation in The Sun's story on Contostavlos?

Answer: that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. <hl> It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal . <hl> The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed <hl> that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal <hl>. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

It was claimed <hl> that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal <hl> .


Question: What did The Sun reporters make Contostavlos believe?

Answer: that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. <hl> The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film . <hl>

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "Tulisa's cocaine deal shame"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing <hl> that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film <hl>.

The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing <hl> that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film <hl> .


Question: What was the title of the front page story on Contostavlos?

Answer: Tulisa's cocaine deal shame

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. <hl> The front page read: " Tulisa's cocaine deal shame "; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. <hl> It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

On 2 June 2013, The Sun on Sunday ran a front page story on singer-songwriter Tulisa Contostavlos. The front page read: "<hl> Tulisa's cocaine deal shame <hl>"; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World. It was claimed that Tulisa introduced three film producers (actually Mahmood and two other Sun journalists) to a drug dealer and set up a £800 deal. The subterfuge involved conning the singer into believing that she was being considered for a role in an £8 million Bollywood film.

The front page read: " <hl> Tulisa's cocaine deal shame <hl> "; this story was written by The Sun On Sunday's undercover reporter Mahzer Mahmood, who had previously worked for the News of the World.


Question: How did the case against Tulisa fare?

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

Answer: collapsed

<hl> At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. <hl> Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa <hl> collapsed <hl> at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."


Question: What did the judge in the case state?

Answer: Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa

<hl> At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa . <hl> Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that <hl> Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa <hl>. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that <hl> Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa <hl> .


Question: What type of drugs was Tulisa accused of supplying?

Answer: Class A drugs

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. <hl> Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs . <hl> After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying <hl> Class A drugs <hl>. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

Tulisa was cleared of supplying <hl> Class A drugs <hl> .


Question: What action did The Sun take against Mahmood?

Answer: suspended

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. <hl> Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation." <hl>

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been <hl> suspended <hl> pending an immediate internal investigation."


Question: When was the case against Tulisa tried?

Answer: July 2014

<hl> At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in July 2014 , with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. <hl> Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in <hl> July 2014 <hl>, with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa. Tulisa was cleared of supplying Class A drugs. After these events, The Sun released a statement saying that the newspaper "takes the Judge's remarks very seriously. Mahmood has been suspended pending an immediate internal investigation."

At her subsequent trial, the case against Tulisa collapsed at Southwark Crown Court in <hl> July 2014 <hl> , with the judge commenting that there were "strong grounds" to believe that Mahmood had lied at a pre-trial hearing and tried to manipulate evidence against the co-defendant Tulisa.


Question: What were Sun staff accused of in a 2014 trial?

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

Answer: conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. <hl> All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office . <hl> They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with <hl> conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office <hl>. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

All six were charged with <hl> conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office <hl> .


Question: What was at issue in the 2014 trial?

Answer: illegal payments allegedly made to public officials

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. <hl> The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials , with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. <hl> They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to <hl> illegal payments allegedly made to public officials <hl>, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

The trial related to <hl> illegal payments allegedly made to public officials <hl> , with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers.


Question: Who were The Sun staffers accused of buying information about?

Answer: the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. <hl> They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates . <hl> They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about <hl> the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates <hl>. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

They were accused of buying confidential information about <hl> the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates <hl> .


Question: Who was the judge in this particular case?

Answer: Richard Marks

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. <hl> On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks , that he would accept majority verdicts. <hl> Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, <hl> Richard Marks <hl>, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, <hl> Richard Marks <hl> , that he would accept majority verdicts.


Question: What was the outcome of the jury's deliberation in the trial?

Answer: failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". <hl> On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges . <hl> The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

In October 2014, the trial of six senior staff and journalists at The Sun newspaper began. All six were charged with conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office. They included The Sun's head of news Chris Pharo, who faced six charges, while ex-managing editor Graham Dudman and ex-Sun deputy news editor Ben O'Driscoll were accused of four charges each. Thames Valley district reporter Jamie Pyatt and picture editor John Edwards were charged with three counts each, while ex-reporter John Troup was accused of two counts. The trial related to illegal payments allegedly made to public officials, with prosecutors saying the men conspired to pay officials from 2002–11, including police, prison officers and soldiers. They were accused of buying confidential information about the Royal Family, public figures and prison inmates. They all denied the charges. On 16 January 2015, Troup and Edwards were cleared by the jury of all charges against them. The jury also partially cleared O'Driscoll and Dudman but continued deliberating over other counts faced by them, as well as the charges against Pharo and Pyatt. On 21 January 2015, the jury told the court that it was unable to reach unanimous verdicts on any of the outstanding charges and was told by the judge, Richard Marks, that he would accept majority verdicts. Shortly afterwards, one of the jurors sent a note to the judge and was discharged. The judge told the remaining 11 jurors that their colleague had been "feeling unwell and feeling under a great deal of pressure and stress from the situation you are in", and that under the circumstances he was prepared to accept majority verdicts of "11 to zero or 10 to 1". On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after <hl> failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges <hl>. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that it would seek a retrial.

On 22 January 2015, the jury was discharged after <hl> failing to reach verdicts on the outstanding charges <hl> .


Question: Who was appointed presiding judge over the retrial in 2015?

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

Answer: Charles Wide

<hl> On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. <hl> Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge <hl> Charles Wide <hl> at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.


Question: In which newspaper did Lisa O'Carroll report the choice of judge?

Answer: The Guardian

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". <hl> Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian , Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. <hl> The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper <hl> The Guardian <hl>, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

Reporting the decision in UK newspaper <hl> The Guardian <hl> , Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories.


Question: Who was Pharo's lawyer in the case?

Answer: Nigel Rumfitt QC

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". <hl> Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC , saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". <hl> He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, <hl> Nigel Rumfitt QC <hl>, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, <hl> Nigel Rumfitt QC <hl> , saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently".


Question: What did Rumfit state that the defendants should have been informed about?

Answer: why Marks was being replaced by Wide

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". <hl> He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide . <hl>

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know <hl> why Marks was being replaced by Wide <hl>.

He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know <hl> why Marks was being replaced by Wide <hl> .


Question: What did the lawyers for the defendants threaten to do?

Answer: take the decision to judicial review

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". <hl> Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to take the decision to judicial review , with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". <hl> He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

On 6 February 2015, it was announced that Judge Richard Marks is to be replaced by Judge Charles Wide at the retrial. Two days earlier, Marks had emailed counsel for the defendants telling them: "It has been decided (not by me but by my elders and betters) that I am not going to be doing the retrial". Reporting the decision in UK newspaper The Guardian, Lisa O’Carroll wrote: "Wide is the only judge so far to have presided in a case which has seen a conviction of a journalist in relation to allegations of unlawful payments to public officials for stories. The journalist, who cannot be named for legal reasons, is appealing the verdict". Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to <hl> take the decision to judicial review <hl>, with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently". He added that the defendants were "extremely concerned" and "entitled" to know why Marks was being replaced by Wide.

Defence counsel for the four journalists threatened to <hl> take the decision to judicial review <hl> , with the barrister representing Pharo, Nigel Rumfitt QC, saying: "The way this has come about gives rise to the impression that something has been going on behind the scenes which should not have been going on behind the scenes and which should have been dealt with transparently".


Question: Who was found guilty in 2015?

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

Answer: Anthony France

<hl> On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. <hl> France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter <hl> Anthony France <hl> was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".


Question: Who was responsible for Operation Elveden?

Answer: the London Metropolitan Police

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. <hl> France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police 's <hl> Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed <hl> the London Metropolitan Police <hl>'s Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

France’s trial followed <hl> the London Metropolitan Police <hl> 's


Question: Which Sun reporter was found guilty in 2015?

Answer: Anthony France

<hl> On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. <hl> France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter <hl> Anthony France <hl> was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".


Question: Who was responsible for Operation Elveden?

Answer: London Metropolitan Police

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. <hl> France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police 's <hl> Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the <hl> London Metropolitan Police <hl>'s Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

France’s trial followed the <hl> London Metropolitan Police <hl> 's


Question: How much did Anthony France pay to a police officer?

Answer: more than £22,000

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. <hl> He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. <hl> The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of <hl> more than £22,000 <hl> to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".


Question: Who was the policeman leading Operation Elveden?

Answer: Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. <hl> Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship". <hl>

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, <hl> Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs <hl> said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship".


Question: How did Briggs characterize the relationship between France and Edwards?

Answer: "long-term, corrupt relationship"

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. <hl> Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a "long-term, corrupt relationship" . <hl>

On 22 May 2015, Sun reporter Anthony France was found guilty of aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office between 2008 and 2011. France’s trial followed the London Metropolitan Police's Operation Elveden, an ongoing investigation into alleged payments to police and officials in exchange for information. He had paid a total of more than £22,000 to PC Timothy Edwards, an anti-terrorism police officer based at Heathrow Airport. The police officer had already pleaded guilty to misconduct in a public office and given a two-year gaol sentence in 2014, but the jury in France’s trial was not informed of this. Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a <hl> "long-term, corrupt relationship" <hl>.

Following the passing of the guilty verdict, the officer leading Operation Elveden, Detective Chief Superintendent Gordon Briggs said France and Edwards had been in a <hl> "long-term, corrupt relationship" <hl> .


Question: Who was the first journalist convicted as a result of Operation Elveden since it had been revised?

The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time. As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.

Answer: France

<hl> The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time. <hl> As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.

The BBC reported that <hl> France <hl> was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time. As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.


Question: What was the change made to Operation Elveden by the Crown Prosecution Service?

Answer: prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time

The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 <hl> so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time . <hl> As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.

The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that <hl> prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time <hl>. As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.

so that <hl> prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time <hl> .


Question: Which judge commented on France's unlawful activities?

Answer: Timothy Pontius

The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time. As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. <hl> Judge Timothy Pontius said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". <hl> The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.

The BBC reported that France was the first journalist to face trial and be convicted under Operation Elveden since the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had revised its guidance in April 2015 so that prosecutions would only be brought against journalists who had made payments to police officers over a period of time. As a result of the change in the CPS’ policy, charges against several journalists who had made payments to other types of public officials – including civil servants, health workers and prison staff - had been dropped. In July 2015, Private Eye magazine reported that at a costs hearing at the Old Bailey The Sun's parent company had refused to pay for the prosecution costs relating to France’s trial, leading the presiding judge to express his "considerable disappointment" at this state of affairs. Judge <hl> Timothy Pontius <hl> said in court that France’s illegal actions had been part of a "clearly recognised procedure at The Sun", adding that, "There can be no doubt that News International bears some measure of moral responsibility if not legal culpability for the acts of the defendant". The Private Eye report noted that despite this The Sun's parent organisation was "considering disciplinary actions" against France whilst at the same time it was also preparing to bring a case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal against the London Metropolitan Police Service for its actions relating to him and two other journalists.