Former News of the World editor Andy Coulson was not even in London on the day he was supposed to have listened to a phone hacking tape in the newspaper's offices in the capital, the Old Bailey has been told.
Former reporter Dan Evans, who has been testifying against his old boss in the trial, admitted yesterday he may have got the dates wrong during earlier evidence.
Yesterday, Mr Evans was cross-examined by Mr Coulson's defence QC Timothy Langdale over his claim that the editor had said 'brilliant' after listening to the message left for Daniel Craig by Sienna Miller. The paper later published a story about their affair.
Mr Langdale claimed at the trial this could not be true because Mr Coulson was not there that day.
Mr Evans insisted that Mr Coulson definitely heard the tape but said that maybe his recollection of which actual day this was on was "flawed".
"These events happened a long time ago and there are salient things in my mind about what I did," Evans told the court.
"I am not here to make things up like I listened to Daniel Craig's voicemail. Why would I bother? This is not a fun experience for me.
"I had the guy's phone. I taped a message."
Mr Evans, who admits Mr Craig was among several celebrities whose phone he hacked and perverting the course of justice, said it had been arranged for the tape to be dropped off anonymously at the paper "sanitise the taint".
Mr Coulson, 46, of Kent, former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks, 45, of Oxfordshire, and former NotW managing editor Stuart Kuttner, 73, of Essex, deny conspiring to hack phones.
Seven defendants in the case deny all the charges against them.
The trial continues.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article