The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that they, along with four others, will become the first to face criminal prosecution over a scandal which has rocked the British establishment.

In a statement, Mr and Mrs Brooks described the decision as ‘weak and unjust’.
The other four also charged are Mrs Brooks’ former PA Cheryl Carter, Head of Security at News International Mark Hanna, News International chauffeur Paul Edwards and security consultant Daryl Jorsling.

In a statement, Mr and Mrs Brooks said: ‘We have this morning been informed by the Office of the Department of Public Prosecutions that we are to be charged with perverting the course of justice.

‘We deplore this weak and unjust decision.

‘After the further unprecedented posturing of the CPS we will respond later today after our return from the police station.’

In a statement to the press ethics probe last week, Brooks, who quit last July as the phone-hacking furore engulfed News International, said she was horrified by revelations about the News of the World.

She told the inquiry that she had close contacts with politicians even though the hacking scandal was gathering steam and David Cameron was among those who indirectly conveyed sympathy to her when she resigned.

The former Sun editor and Murdoch’s chief lieutenant and her racehorse trainer husband were among six who were waiting to hear if they would face charges today, including the company’s head of security Mark Hanna.

Mrs Brooks, a Warrington-born high-flyer in Rupert Murdoch’s media empire, is one of the most high profile figures in the newspaper industry.

The decision from prosecutors comes just days after she gave almost an entire day’s evidence at the Leveson Inquiry into press standards.

She also revealed how the Prime Minister regularly signed of his text messages with the acronym ‘LOL, thinking it meant ‘lots of love’, until she told him it meant ‘laugh out loud’.
Mrs Brooks became News of the World editor in 2000 aged 31, landed the top job at The Sun in 2003 and was appointed chief executive of News International in 2009 before resigning in July last year.

Days later the 43-year-old was arrested over alleged phone hacking and corruption, offences for which she remains on bail without charge.

She was arrested again in March in connection with the separate perverting the course of justice allegation, with her husband and the five others.

Mr Brooks, who has been a columnist for the Daily Telegraph as well as writing a novel entitled Citizen, met his wife at a party with Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson.
Ms Carter, who was personal assistant for Mrs Brooks during 19 years service before she left News International last summer, was arrested on January 6.

The charges relate to one of five files handed to the director of public prosecutions.
Keir Starmer QC said he was facing ‘very difficult and sensitive decisions’ as he predicted more cases were coming his way.

Police launched Weeting, the inquiry devoted specifically to phone hacking, after receiving ‘significant new information’ from News International on January 26 last year.
Elveden was launched months later after officers were given documents suggesting News International journalists made illegal payments to police officers.

Officers also launched three other related operations, the Sasha perverting the course of justice inquiry, Kilo, an inquiry into police leaks, and Tuleta, the investigation into computer-related offences, as the inquiry escalated.

Metropolitan Police figures showed that there were 829 potential victims of phone hacking, of whom 231 were said to be uncontactable.

The scandal has already led to the closure of the News of the World after 168 years, prompted a major public inquiry, and forced the resignation of Met Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and his assistant John Yates.

NB: We will not be accepting any comments for legal reasons.

With the Olympics fast approaching, the security of the nation is becoming an increasing concern. As will all major events extra security measures have to be in place due to the threat of terror and also the sheer volumes of people that will be visiting the nation’s capital. There have been lot of extra measures put in place in order to avoid a terror situation.

During the last week, security exercise Olympic Guardian has been taking place on land, sea and in the air and involves the Royal Navy and the RAF. These are practice measures put in place to deal with a major terror threat and more importantly preventing it from happening in the first place.

There have been a number of security measures put in place which include; HMS Ocean being berthed at Greenwich carry a number of Navy helicopters on board, ships being deployed to Portland Harbour and Weymouth Bay and RAF jets and helicopters carrying snipers based at RAF Northolt. 13500 Military personnel will also be involved to ensure safety during the games.

There is also a possibility that surface-to-air missiles will be located at several points in London and dummy missiles planted too. This is causing some fears and concerns as some people think that debris could be strewn all over London should be missiles have to deployed. Due to their locations in residential areas the risk of this happening is quite high. However it is hoped that none of these should need to be used and are only there as a precautionary measure.

Anti-terror police swooped on a series of different addresses before dawn as part of a ‘pre-planned, intelligence-led’ operation.

The men, aged 21, 23, 24, 25 and 30, were all arrested at separate homes in Luton this morning and have been taken to a central London police station for questioning.

Searches under the Terrorism Act 2000 are taking place at all five of the addresses and inquiries are ongoing, Scotland Yard said.

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism command said: ‘Officers from the counter-terrorism command have today, Tuesday April 24, arrested five men on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

‘All five were arrested at separate residential addresses in Luton. They have been taken to a central London police station where they remain in custody.

‘The arrests were a part of a pre-planned, intelligence-led operation.

‘Search warrants were also executed under the Terrorism Act 2000 at five residential addresses in Luton in connection with this inquiry and searches are ongoing.’

The raids come the same week that mass killer Anders Breivik, on trial for the massacre of 77 people, told a Norwegian court that Muslims want sharia law in ‘places like Luton’.

Please note that for legal reasons we will not be accepting comments on this blog entry.

Simon Cowell last night told of his horror after coming face to face with a woman who broke into his mansion ‘armed with a brick’.

In an astonishing security lapse, the intruder is believed to have wandered around the pop mogul’s West London home, even lying on his bed.

Cowell, 52, was said to be ‘pretty shaken up’ after the incident on Saturday night.
The woman is understood to have broken into the house through a downstairs window as the star was watching television in his lounge.

He told a friend: ‘It was an absolutely terrifying experience. Seeing this woman standing there in my house was like something out of a horror movie.

‘It was frightening but I’m going to take it as a warning. In some ways I’ve been lucky. You have to look on the positive side because it could have been a whole lot worse. I now know that I need to improve my security. She could have had a gun.’

It was initially believed by those close to Cowell that the intruder was an ‘over-zealous fan.’

After getting into the £9million property – once described by Cowell as ‘safe as the Bank of England’ – the woman is said to have gone from room to room. According to a source, at one point she was ‘lying on Simon’s bed in his bedroom’. She also managed to get into a bathroom.

The intruder was eventually detained by some of Cowell’s staff and security. Nothing is believed to have been taken from the property. Following the arrest, the police continued to search the grounds of the house.

Cowell – whose entertainment empire includes Britain’s Got Talent and The X Factor as well as stars Leona Lewis and boy band One Direction – is estimated to be worth as much as £300million.

The incident took place just after 10pm, not long after the ITV screening of Cowell’s return to the judging panel of Britain’s Got Talent.

One friend said: ‘It was a frightening experience. Simon’s fine but shaken up. He didn’t expect something like that to happen.’

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: ‘Police were called at approximately 22:35 on Saturday to reports of a disturbance. Officers attended the address and found a woman had forced entry to the premises. She was arrested on suspicion of burglary and taken to a West London police station.’

The TV judge apparently suffered a previous security lapse in 2008 when his £140,000 luxury car was found to have been bugged with a magnetic tracking device. He had called his full-time security team in to investigate after he noticed a mysterious motorcyclist – clad in a crash helmet and leathers – kept appearing outside the buildings where his meetings were being held. After experts swept his £140,000 Bentley Continental, they discovered that a tracker magnetically attached to the car’s undercarriage.

A spokesman for Cowell yesterday said: ‘This is a police matter.’

Last night police charged Leanne Zaloumis, 29, from South East London, with one count of aggravated burglary. She is due to appear before West London Magistrates’ Court today.

There are a couple of points to consider here. Regarding the electronic tracking device on the car, this is easy enough to fit yet relatively easily found when his vehicle was swept by the electronics and IT experts. Easy to prevent by regular checks and sweeps so the security team did their job well there.

On the matter of an intruder getting into his property and allegedly at one point lying on his bed, this is unforgivable. It would appear that someone has blundered terribly to allow an intruder to enter the property by simply breaking a downstairs window. Maybe you need a full security review by an independent company to verify the integrity of your current security provision Mr. Cowell?

The Sunday Mail today reported that George Osborne’s plan to cut tax on high earners in this week’s Budget is opposed by the majority of Britons.

According to a Sunday Mirror/ComRes poll published today well over half of voters (58 per cent) believe the Chancellor should NOT abolish the 50p tax rate on incomes over £150,000.

Among Labour voters, 67% oppose the plan to cut the 50p rate while 70% of Lib Dems oppose it. Only 21% of voters back the move.

The poll findings will put further pressure on Mr Osborne as a row rages behind the scenes over his proposal to help the wealthy. The Lib Dems are furious over reports the Tories are preparing to cut the top rate of income tax while doing little to clamp down on super-rich tax dodgers.

I received an email recently from a colleague which I think demonstrates one side of the argument perfectly and I’d like to share it with you. It was written by David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. Professor of Economics at University of Georgia. Prof. Kamerschen’s piece is called:

Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100 and If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curved ball.
“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20.” so drinks for the ten now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected…They would still drink for free…But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the
£20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33…But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay £5 instead of £7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before…And the first four continued to drink for free…But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a pound out of the £20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got £10!” “Yeah, that’s right” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a pound, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than me!” “That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison,
“We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

This initial contract will be monitored by police authorities up and down the country to see how this contract pans out and how the private contractor performs. Police authorities must cut back their budgets significantly and may well follow suit in the future.

I sincerely hope that I am not the only person in the UK who has grave, grave reservations about this new ‘initiative’!

Outsourcing things such as cleaning, building maintenance, vehicle fleet servicing and repairs, canteen provision, landscape upkeep, photocopiers, telephony equipment, no problem at all.

However I have a massive problem with crimes being investigated by a private contractor. What on earth are the government, the home office and the police authorities thinking about here?

I agree wholeheartedly with Ben Priestley of Unison’s national office for police and justice, which covers many police civilian staff who said it was alarmed by the programme:

“Bringing the private sector into policing is a dangerous experiment with local safety and taxpayers’ money,” he said. “We are urging police authorities not to fall into the trap of thinking the private sector is the answer to the coalition’s cuts. The fact that the Home Office is refusing to publish its business case – even under FOI [the Freedom of Information Act] – speaks for itself.

“Privatisation means that the police will be less accountable to the public. And people will no longer be able to go to the Independent Police Complaints Commission if they have a problem. When a critical incident happens, a force’s ability to respond will be severely compromised. The only winners are private companies and shareholders who make profits at the expense of local services.”

Instead of spending £1.5 Billion with a private security company whose sole aim will be profit why not let that money be spent wisely and sensibly on front line policing. The taxpaying public want a pro-active police service that is professional, polite, diligent and most importantly effective. What is being proposed will result in uniformed police, uniformed police community support workers and now private security contractors all policing the streets with only the police having the full powers to deal with any incident they attend. Potentially very confusing for the public and wholly unnecessary.

I am a former police officer myself. I took and oath to uphold the law, to protect life and property. I believe that the Police service in the UK, even with its faults, is still the best in the world. Don’t get me wrong, corrupt officers need to be rooted out and booted out (for example any officer found to have received money in the phone hacking scandal – must face the full force of the judicial system for their crime). Poor police management should be identified and changed for the better. Any waste of taxpayers money needs to be identified and stopped.

I say stop the cutbacks to policing, yes cut out waste and ensure that every penny is wisely spent, but lets have more police on our streets, not private contractors working alongside.

This whole concept bears striking resemblances to the science fiction film Robocop where a large billion dollar security company worked alongside the police service who were severely cash strapped. Consequently there was a power shift which allowed the large private corporation to start to dictate to the police service resulting in its demands and wishes being met and it’s changes to practices adopted. Far fetched ? No I don’t think so! It appears to be uncomfortably closer to the truth than we could have imagined.

Furthermore some of these very large security companies have former senior politicians on their board of directors, or are retained as advisors, consultants or ambassadors; perhaps I am closer to the truth here than those in authority would wish to admit.

Outsourcing to this level and scale is fundamentally wrong and will seriously damage the effectiveness, efficiency and reputation of the police service long term and if a company gets this contract with a who’s who of former politicians on their books then can we honestly say that the decision has been made in the best interests of the British public whom the Police exist to serve?

Please, please, please let the Police service be. It is the envy of the rest of the world. Please fund it properly, manage it correctly and don’t destroy it in the name of profit.

Eighteen months after the week long massive police manhunt for the fugitive Raoul Moat ended in the Northumberland town of Rothbury, when Moat was cornered and contained by armed police, with Moat choosing to take his own life rather then surrender, another tragic death from this incident has occurred with the report of David’s passing.

It is very sad news, and it had been reported of course that since being blinded by Moat with a shotgun David Rathband had struggled to come to terms with the loss of his eyesight as well as matrimonial difficulties caused by the stress of it all.

I hope that he is now at peace and also that his estranged family may also find some comfort in the knowledge that he is no longer tormented by those tragic events of 2010.

May he rest in peace.

Apparently there is just a week to go until Google controversially changes its privacy policy to allow it to gather, store and use personal information about its users. But there is one way to stymie the web giant’s attempts to build a permanent profile of you that could include personal information including age, gender, locality and even sexuality.

From March 1, you won’t be able to opt out of the new policy, which has been criticised by privacy campaigners who have filed a complaint to U.S. regulators.

But before that date you can delete your browsing history and, which will limit the extent to which Google records your every move – including your embarrassing secrets. If you want to know how to delete your browsing history then you can go to the Daily Mail article by clicking on the link below.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2105435/Three-simple-steps-delete-Google-browsing-history–late.html

Although disabling web history will not prevent Google from gathering and storing this information and using it for internal purposes, but it mean the Web giant will anonymise the data in 18 months. It will also prevent it from certain kinds of uses, including sending you customized search results.

Justice spokesman: ‘Common sense has prevailed’

A man who became a global internet sensation after he was caught on camera throwing an apparent fare-dodger off a train will not be prosecuted, it emerged last night.

Alan Pollock was captured hauling Sam Main out his seat and hurling him onto the station platform after intervening in an argument between the student and a conductor.
Rail worker Alan Mitchell claimed the teenager did not have a valid ticket for the journey – sparking a foul-mouthed rant from the student, who insisted he did.

The incident was captured on a camera-phone by a fellow passenger and quickly appeared on on-line video-sharing website YouTube, where it has been viewed more than two million times.

Mr Pollock, 35, who soon became known as the ‘Big Man’, was applauded by most of his fellow passengers for stepping in but he was landed with an assault charge after 19-year-old Mr Main reported him to the police.

But yesterday, after almost two months with a potential court case hanging over his head, the Crown Office announced its decision to drop the charge as it was not in the public interest.

Mr Main was never charged but was reported to the procurator fiscal for threatening and abusive behaviour and trespass. He will also escape prosecution.

The reprieve for businessman and father of three Mr Pollock was met with delight by his thousands of supporters.

Labour justice spokesman Lewis Macdonald said: ‘I am pleased that common sense has finally prevailed.

‘Too many people suffer abuse and intimidation at work and it would be a sad day if members of the public were sent the message that it is wrong to stand up for workers.’
Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said: ‘I’m glad this is over. Respect between staff and passengers is something we should all encourage. I’m sure this incident will be a reminder to us all of the importance of this traditional value.’

Meanwhole, Conservative justice spokesman David McLetchie added: ‘The Procurator Fiscal has come to a very sensible decision on this matter and I welcome that there will not be a prosecution.’
Mr Pollock could not be contacted last night. He has moved from his rented home in Queens Haugh, Stirling, after becoming an unwitting local celebrity.

But his father, retired accountant Jim, from Wishaw, Lanarkshire, said: ‘It’s like the nightmare is over. It’s very good news, I’m glad to hear it.
‘We don’t have this hanging over our heads any more.’

The video of the events, which unfolded on December 9 on the Edinburgh to Perth train, has now been watched on YouTube an astonishing two million times, by people all around the world.
It was captured on a mobile phone by fellow passenger Ian Hems, who looked on as building surveying student Mr Main argued with 63-year-old conductor Alan Mitchell.

‘We don’t have this hanging over our heads anymore’

Mr Main did not have a ticket, which he later blamed on a mistake at Edinburgh Waverley, where he boarded a train after an exam at Heriot Watt University.

He was asked to get off the train but refused – launching into a foul-mouthed rant in front of a mother and two young children sat nearby.

The conductor is shown reasoning with the teenager before Mr Pollock stands up, asking: ‘Do you want me to get him off for you?’

The investment manager at Black Rock in Edinburgh then bundles Mr Main off the train, twice pushing him back, when he tries to reboard. The video ends with the train carriage erupting in applause.

Many have championed Mr Pollock, claiming his was an act of public service and even offering to pay his legal bills if the assault charge made it to court.
However, others argued that he went too far.

Mr Pollock has stayed silent, even after being charged with assault by British Transport Police.

The conductor, 63-year-old Alan Mitchell, was back at work this week after being signed off for six weeks on sick leave, but faces no disciplinary action.

Off and away: The ‘big man’ hoists the youth up from his seat and throws him off the train

And out you go: The passenger pushes the teenager on to the platform. Each time he tries to get back in, he pushes him back out again

Mr Main was the subject of a report to the procurator fiscal under section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing Act 2010 (threatening and abusive behaviour) and trespass, after apparently going onto the railway line to retrieve a lost possession.
In the wake of the incident, he launched a media offensive to defend himself, claiming he was just desperate to get home, being diabetic and having not eaten all day.

He has repeatedly called for Mr Pollock to face prosecution but was not at home last night to give his reaction. His mother, Angela, speaking from their Falkirk home, said he had believed the older man would face court but would not be commenting further – adding ‘he’s been through enough’.

The Crown Office confirmed neither Mr Main nor Pollock would be given any warning or fine.

A spokesman said: ‘The Procurator Fiscal at Livingston received reports concerning two males aged 35 and 19, in connection with an incident in Linlithgow on Friday 9 December 2011.

‘After full and careful consideration of the reports by Crown Counsel, it was decided that it is not in the public interest to prosecute either male and the cases are now closed.’

Well I’m delighted to see that common sense has prevailed and that Public spirited Alan Pollock hasn’t been prosecuted for behaving like a good spirited, decent member of public ought to.

As for Mr. Main, well, consider this. There are more ways to get an education than sitting in a University lecture theatre so you’d be wise to regard this as part of your education. If you don’t have a valid ticket then don’t get stroppy and start to bully a ticket collector the same age as your Grandad because he was right and you were wrong. Furthermore if you do, someone twice your size like the ‘Big Man’ may well appear and spoil your day. Now to millions of people Alan Pollock is known as the ‘Big Man’ and you are known as the obnoxious ‘Fare dodging student’ who bullied an old man. Stop blaming everyone else will you, grow up and admit you were wrong!

Pair hugged as the jury cleared them both of all counts in less than 3 hours

Redknapp: ‘This case should never have come to court’

Marks end of £8m police investigation which failed to yield a single conviction

Hopes of Redknapp leading the England team receive a major boost

Football boss Harry Redknapp spoke of his ‘nightmare’ after being cleared today of taking ‘bungs’ in an offshore tax dodge.

Speaking on the steps outside London’s Southwark Crown Court, the Tottenham Hotspur manager said: ‘It really has been a nightmare. I’ve got to be honest. It’s been five years and this is a case that should never have come to court because it’s unbelievable, really.
‘It was horrendous, you know, but it was a unanimous decision. The jury were absolutely unanimous that there was no case to answer. I’m pleased now we can go home and get on with our lives.’

Jurors accepted Redknapp’s angry denials that he avoided tax on any payments over £189,000 found in a Monaco account.

His acquittal alongside co-defendant former Portsmouth chairman Milan Mandaric blows the final whistle on an exhaustive £8 million City of London Police investigation which failed to yield a single conviction after five years.

The pair hugged as the jury cleared them of all counts after deliberating for less than three hours.

Mandaric and former Portsmouth chief executive Peter Storrie were also cleared of £600,000 tax dodge claims at a previous trial, it can be reported for the first time.
The verdicts mark a disastrous conclusion to the protracted inquiry into football corruption by the tax authorities and City of London Police.

Chris Martin, from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), said outside Southwark Crown Court that the taxman had ‘no regrets’ about pursuing the case.

He said: ‘We accept the verdicts of the jury but I would like to remind those who are evading tax by using offshore tax havens that it always makes sense to come to talk to us before we come to talk to you.’

City of London Police began their investigation into money laundering in 2006. A force spokesman said HMRC was involved from the start of the inquiry, and took the lead role when alleged tax-related offences came to light. He added that it was not possible to ‘accurately calculate’ the salary costs of the investigation.

Redknapp was at times moved to the verge of tears as the Crown alleged that he told a pack of lies in an attempt to get off the hook.
But jurors accepted Redknapp and Mandaric’s evidence that the Monaco account in the name of Redknapp’s dog, Rosie, was nothing to do with footballing matters.

The two-week trial threatened to derail Redknapp’s progress at the pinnacle of his 30-year managerial career.
Having led Spurs through their most successful period in the Premier League era, the Londoner was tipped as the outstanding favourite to replace Fabio Capello as England manager this summer.

With his name cleared in the courts, nothing would now appear to stand in the way for the Football Association to hire him.
A recorded telephone conversation between News of the World reporter Rob Beasley and the pair in 2009 was a pivotal element in the Crown’s case.

Redknapp telling Mr Beasley it was money for transfer bonuses was ‘the most compelling and important evidence’, prosecutor John Black QC said.

But defence barrister John Kelsey-Fry QC said the Sunday tabloid’s evidence was ‘primarily despicable’.
‘I do not shrink from suggesting to you it is repugnant to all our basic instincts of fairness in the criminal justice process,’ he said.

The case served up high courtroom drama with Redknapp giving an impassioned display in the witness box.
He told the jury he still struggled with literacy, wrote ‘like a two-year-old’ and claimed he was framed because his name was Harry and he was a Cockney.

Pushed to the verge of tears in the witness box as he denied claims he had told a ‘pack of lies’, Redknapp then turned furiously to shout at a police inspector sitting in court.

‘Will you please stop staring at me,’ he shouted at Detective Inspector Dave Manley. ‘I know you are trying to cause me a problem, ok.’
Redknapp had been accused of opening an account called Rosie 47, a combination of his dog’s name and the year of his birth, when he was working for Mandaric at Portsmouth.

The prosecution claimed he had hidden two ‘off-the-record’ payments in American dollars in the Mediterranean principality, an offshore tax haven.

The cash was ‘deliberately and dishonestly’ concealed with the prime purpose of avoiding the payment of tax, the jury was told.
The allegations against Redknapp, who lives in Poole, Dorset, centred around a series of lucrative bonuses built into this Portsmouth contract when he was made director of football in 2001.

These included ten per cent of any profit made from any players he bought and sold, bonuses which could total up to £500,000 depending on profits the club made from transfers.

However, the court heard that in 2002 – when Redknapp went from being director of football to the club’s team manager – the bonus for trading players was halved to five per cent.

Eight days after Redknapp joined Portsmouth in June 2001, England striker Peter Crouch was bought from Queen’s Park Rangers for £1.25million. Crouch stayed at Portsmouth for nine months before being sold to Aston Villa for more than £4million in 2002, the court heard.
The net profit of the sale was £2.3million, but, because of the revised terms of Redknapp’s new contract, he was due only 5 per cent of that, which was £115,473. This was paid to him via his wages.

But the prosecution said Mandaric made an ‘off-the-record’ arrangement to compensate Redknapp for taking a smaller cut after the deal had gone through.

The court heard Redknapp waited just four days after receiving the legal bonus from the Crouch sale before taking steps to ensure that he would receive ‘what he regarded was his due’.

He flew to Monaco to open the private Rosie 47 HSBC account, the jury was told. It was alleged that Mandaric, a Serbian billionaire, made two payments into the account.

The first charge related to £93,000 allegedly paid by Mandaric to Redknapp’s account between April 1, 2002, and November 28, 2007, without paying NI contributions or tax. The second related to £96,500 allegedly paid by Mandaric to Redknapp between May 1, 2004, and November 28, 2007, again into the Monaco account without paying NI contributions or tax.

The jury were not told why the second payment was made.

But the Monaco bank account eventually came to light during an inquiry into alleged illicit payments in football led by Lord Stevens, the former Metropolitan Police commissioner.

The results of that investigation, known as the Quest inquiry, was handed to the Premier League chief executive, Richard Scudamore, in July 2007.

Redknapp had been investigated by HM Revenue & Customs officials over his transfer dealings at one of his previous clubs, West Ham United, the court heard. But he made no mention of the Monaco account when interviewed in November 2006.

Both Redknapp and Mandaric, of Oadby, Leicestershire, had denied two counts of cheating the public revenue.

Redknapp, who underwent heart surgery last year to unblock his arteries, is the most successful English manager in the modern game. He led Portsmouth to FA Cup success and Spurs into last season’s Uefa Champions’ League.

Unlike other managers, he had voluntarily disclosed details of the account at the centre of the investigation.

Redknapp was first held in November 2007 by detectives investigating transfer deals at Portsmouth and at Birmingham City.
The Redknapp case was part of a wider inquiry dubbed Operation Apprentice, into alleged football corruption.
Other figures to come under the police spotlight were Birmingham City’s former managing director Karren Brady, and former co-owner, David Sullivan. Both denied wrongdoing and were not charged.