Lord Prescott is one of several figures calling for a judicial review The man who oversaw the police inquiry into phone hacking allegations has dismissed Lord Prescott’s calls for it to be reviewed as a “rant”.
Former Met Police chief Andy Hayman told LBC radio a judicial review could “end up being a waste of public money” and find nothing new.
But former deputy PM Lord Prescott said Mr Hayman’s comments were “remarkable”.
The Labour peer says police did not provide him with material related to him uncovered during its 2006 inquiry.
Lord Prescott is the latest in a series of people, who include former Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner Brian Paddick, to say they will ask for a judicial review of the way police handled the investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World.
“My understanding is, there is absolutely no evidence from that initial investigation of his phone being hacked, so why he thinks he is anything special, I do not know.”
Andy Hayman Former Met chief
The investigation led to the conviction of the newspaper’s royal editor Clive Goodman, and private detective Glenn Mulcaire.
But police have been criticised for saying there was insufficient evidence to pursue allegations a host of public figures were targeted.
Lord Prescott announced earlier he would seek a judicial review of the inquiry, claiming police had failed to carry out an effective investigation and would not supply him with all information concerning him found in Glenn Mulcaire’s office.
But Mr Hayman, a former assistant commissioner at the Metropolitan Police, told LBC Radio: “We have to get real over this. This is just another episode of Lord Prescott’s rants.
“You know, he’s nothing special, he was on a list, along with lots of other celebrities and well-known people, held by a journalist – and that’s no different to a contact list that’s being held by any other journalist, come to that.”
He said he would eat his words if he was proved wrong but added: “My understanding is, there is absolutely no evidence from that initial investigation of his phone being hacked, so why he thinks he is anything special, I do not know.
“I don’t believe that a judicial review will reveal anything more than what has already been reviewed by my successor, also by the Crown Prosecution Service and by other bodies.
“It could actually end up being a waste of public money.”
Lord Prescott’s office said the application for a judicial review centred on the police’s failure to hand over a document with his name on when requested – not about whether his own phone had been hacked.
The peer says police found a piece of paper with his name on it at Glenn Mulcaire’s office, alongside “two self-billing tax invoices for £250 each from News International Supply Company Ltd”. On Friday he said he would apply for a judicial review of the police’s handling of the case because the Metropolitan Police had refused to supply him with all the information related to him they had gathered.
Responding to Mr Hayman’s comments, he said: “I find it quite remarkable that the man responsible for the original investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World should accuse me of ‘ranting’.'”
He said Mr Mulcaire’s office had been searched, and the two invoices with his name on found in 2006 – but he only found out about it in 2009 when contacted by the Guardian.
“It took a further five months before the police confirmed the existence of the invoices and the paper.
“This is not ranting. This is a desire to uncover why the Metropolitan Police failed to notify the thousands of people targeted by Mulcaire and the News of the World, why they failed to follow the evidence and why they fundamentally failed to do their job.”
He also said Mr Hayman had worked for News International – which owns the News of the World – after leaving the force.
Earlier this month Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner John Yates told MPs that of the 91 to 120 people who might have been targeted, only 10 to 12 cases could be proven and those people had been contacted.
He also warned MPs it was a “dangerous assumption” to believe individuals named on the list were victims of eavesdropping.
Scotland Yard declined to comment on Lord Prescott’s application for a judicial review.
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.