It was their -- the opinion was given to them. I would expect them to come back to me if they were going to disseminate any further than to them, any further than -- well, any further.

I don't believe it was done -- I don't recall any further conversation. There's no reference in the time records to any further conversation, so the best evidence I have is no.

That's right. We hadn't been asked to consider grounds (iii) or (iv), so there might be any number of evidence there that might have been relevant to those grounds that we just hadn't looked at.

Yes.

I think the short answer is it wasn't the exercise we'd been asked to conduct. We'd been asked to look for whether there was evidence in emails that supported specific allegations, and to have then signed off on an opinion that was much wider than the exercise ...

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes, I am.

Yes.

Different.

Yes.

"Sure" is a high threshold to apply to something which happened four and a half years ago, but to my best recollection, I don't believe I saw those emails.

Yes.

Yes.

No, I don't believe they were.

They did, yes.

Yes.

Yes.

My advice was limited to the content of the emails. So I don't think it would have been.

Yes.

Yes.

We got the transcript of the -- what I would call the judgment first, and then -- I wasn't aware of this until very recently, but it does appear that we got the full transcript of that day as well.

Yes.

In the emails that I had seen at that point, probably not. I don't think there would have been.

Yes. Yes, I can see -- well, there's plainly a difference in the two formulations.

Yes. I see the difference in the wording, yes.

Yes.

Yes, I do.

Yes.

That's right, yes.

Yes, I think that's right.

Absolutely. I'd brought in another assistant to provide the advice on that.

Yes.

Yes, I believe that's right.

No.

They revealed quite an active involvement in Clive Goodman's prosecution. They showed the -- trying to influence the way the prosecution was being conducted -- or the defence was being conducted. And there is one email that's been redacted that I thought would not reflect well on --

I'm hesitating because I know you don't want to go into the content of the emails. They showed confidential sources, concerns not to reveal sources. They revealed cash payments -- will you stop me if you say something you don't want -- I'm not supposed to --

Yes.

Yes. I'm sorry, which paragraphs did you say?

Yes.

My concern, sir, was that I was aware that there was a possibility that this matter might reach an employment tribunal and that News would have much wider disclosure obligations if that happened than they would have just responding to the documents that Clive Goodman had asked for, and I ...

It's not that they fell outside -- at this stage, the ones I'm talking to Mr Chapman about on 24 May don't fall outside the date range. They fell outside what I had been asked to consider because they did not support Mr Goodman's allegations of others ...

Yes.

Yes.

The emails I saw were those that were brought to my attention by the junior lawyers. They did the initial trawl and they would bring to my attention anything that they were concerned about, using quite a conservative approach to make sure that nothing fell through the net.

There were ...

The emails I -- at this stage? None. I went onto the server just to check that it worked. Are you asking me during the course of the exercise?