Why Did Mugford Pose In A Basque For The NOTW

[Jane]

It's the timing of the negotiations with each newspaper I am interested

I am just interested in the truth and facts

I think it's understood that whilst it may be morally reprehensible, because what she gave by way of testimony was previously set in stone, nothing illegal happened.

[JackiePreece]

It's not your opinion that I am interested in

[Jan]

I think it's understood that whilst it may be morally reprehensible, because what she gave by way of testimony was previously set in stone, nothing illegal happened.

if she lied to the judge and that was proven that would be contempt of court- so she could have been charged.

[Jane]

if she lied to the judge and that was proven that would be contempt of court- so she could have been charged.

If.

[JackiePreece]

if she lied to the judge and that was proven that would be contempt of court- so she could have been charged.

Jan I am absolutely sure there is evidence Mugford lied in court re NOTW contract

She would remember when she signed the contract, she is just not prepared to say

[guest154]

Jan I am absolutely sure there is evidence Mugford lied in court re NOTW contract

She would remember when she signed the contract, she is just not prepared to say

Your OPINION that she would remember when she signed the contract isn't evidence of anything.

[lookout]

Mata Hari.

[guest154]

Mata Hari.

What about her?

[JackiePreece]

Your OPINION that she would remember when she signed the contract isn't evidence of anything.

It's an opinion until it's available to his legal team

You are naive if you think that information is IMPOSSIBLE to find

[lookout]

What about her?

She was a " harlot " too.

[guest154]

It's an opinion until it's available to his legal team

You are naive if you think that information is IMPOSSIBLE to find

You're confused on what you are trying to prove. Finding a document that is signed and dated BEFORE the trial, which is apparently what has come up, doesn't prove she lied about forgetting when it was signed.

Finding the signed dated document would only prove her a liar if she had said she'd signed it AFTER the trial. But she didn't, she said she didn't remember.

[Jan]

You're confused on what you are trying to prove. Finding a document that is signed and dated BEFORE the trial, which is apparently what has come up, doesn't prove she lied about forgetting when it was signed.

Finding the signed dated document would only prove her a liar if she had said she'd signed it AFTER the trial. But she didn't, she said she didn't remember.

She quite clearly was speaking to her lawyer about it before the trial - she says that in her statements ,so to say she had no intention of selling her story was certainly stretching the truth a bit though.