In the Media

Rebekah Brooks: Charges are an 'expensive sideshow'

PUBLISHED May 15, 2012

Her husband, Charlie, said he doubted she could receive a fair trial and said she was being subjected to a "witch hunt".

Just hours after the Crown Prosecution Service announced the former News International Chief Executive, Mrs Brooks, was to be charged over claims she and others tried to destroy evidence of alleged wrong doing at the company, she came out fighting.

In a statement delivered outside the offices of their solicitors, in central London, Mrs Brooks and her husband both issued defiant statements.

Mr Brooks, the racehorse trainer spoke first, insisting he would be cleared, but expressing the fear that his wife would never be able to get a fair trial.

He said: "I feel today is an attempt to use me and others as scapegoats with the effect to ratchet up the pressure on my wife who I also believe is the subject of a witch-hunt.

"There are currently 172 police officers working on this case, the equivalent of eight murder squads, so it is no surprise to me that the pressure is on to bring prosecutions, however weak they may be.

"I have no doubt that the lack of evidence against me will be borne out in court, but I have grave reservations that my wife will ever get a fair trial given the huge volume of biased commentary that she is constantly subjected to. We will fight this in court."

Picking up from where her husband left off, Mrs Brooks added: "Whilst I have always respected the Criminal Justice System I have to question today whether a decision was made on a proper, impartial assessment of the evidence.

"I understand and know that there needs to be a proper and thorough investigation and I'm baffled by the decision to charge me today.

"However, more importantly I cannot express my anger enough that those closest to me have been dragged into this unfairly.

"One day the details of this case will emerge and people will see today as nothing more than an expensive sideshow, a waste of public money as a result of an unjust and weak decision.

"I was the editor of the News of the World, I was the chief executive of News International, and even News International's harshest critics cannot wish to see today people with no involvement with the central issues being treated like this and being involved like this."