Getting under the skin of a big story like this would be great reading. Hope you pen it.

From memory, Ms Loos had a penchant for publicity herself, which no doubt helped a great deal afterwards ;^)

Neville - can you do us a post on scoops gone wrong? E.g. where you invested a lot of time and money in something that didn't come off? Thanks

Yes, I would be very interested in such a story.

but its still a case of his word against hers. Loos claimed at the time that she was forced to sell her story because NOTW had gotten hold of the story and would print it with or without her. We now see that this was a lie. According to your entry above, she worked with you for months to prove that the story was "true".

Do you think the fact that you had personally invested so much money into the story made you want the story to be true?

I’m on record in various interviews I’ve given over the years on TV, radio and the press that Rebecca came to help us out after the first splash story.
Rebecca wasn’t “forced” to do anything either and she remains a dear friend of me and my family eight years later.
I didn’t personally invest a penny in the venture. I incurred expenses while on the road during an extended period of time abroad.
Finally, as to the “truth” of the story. The evidence satisfied a whole raft of lawyers at the News of the World and outside. And ultimately the Beckham’s lawyers, who chose not to sue us for libel.
Thanks for taking the time to read my blog and give your opinion.

"The evidence satisfied a whole raft of lawyers at the News of the World and outside. And ultimately the Beckham’s lawyers, who chose not to sue us for libel".

Is that a statement of fact or opinion?

Hiya, I submitted two comments yesterday but can only see one above. Was the first comment not approved? Interested to hear your responses to my points. Thanks

Can you kindly resubmit KT?

Loos is on record as stating that she had no choice but to sell her story to NOTW as NOTW had the story and stated that they would have printed the story with or without her – with the obvious benefits to her if she co-operated. She may have changed her tune since.

Of course you guys remain “dear friends”- she became an instant millionaire as a result of the allegations ….you didn’t do too badly either. Whether or not you remain friends is irrelevant as to whether or not she was telling the truth or not. It simply suggests that you believed her.
Expenses – surely there was a lot riding on you producing something – a “splash” as you put it, given the extent of you expenses? If you failed to produce a splash, would your expenses have been paid in full?
As to the “truth” of the allegations – in civil cases, lawyers only need to be sure that there is a 50% chance that the allegations are true (on the balance of probabilities if you like). 50% chance of truth does not equate to 100% fact.

Presumably these lawyers will sign-off on stories which ultimately turn out to be untrue - the hideous allegations that the McCann's had killed Maddie for example. Sign-off from a lawyer is not a guarantee of accuracy.

There are a whole raft of reasons why someone will sue or not sue- the analysis is not as straightforward as your above response infers. And I’m not sure you can state that the Beckhams’ lawyers were satisfied with the evidence and present it as a matter of fact. You would not have been party to the discussions – at best this is your opinion.

Additionally, the Beckhams did bring legal action against NOTW in 2004 / 2005. The interim judgements are a matter of public record. NOTW were seeking disclosure of several items to help argue their case. This suggests that NOTW were not in possession of enough hard hitting evidence. Ultimately the matter was settled out of court with the settlement being subject to a confidentiality provision. It was interesting to note however, that the NOTW removed the stories from public websites. Why do this if their case was so water tight?

I also wondered why NOTW printed a front page splash in the aftermath of the original allegations claiming that Beckham had confessed when this wasn't true.

You should probably consult your former employers re the settlement before you say more, but my point is it is her word against his. You produced a story based on the best information you had, but that doesn’t mean that your information was 100% factual. But I respect people's right to have an opinion on issues.

"Rebecca came to help us out after the first splash story"

hahaha, out of the kindness of her heart? or did the (just under)
£1 million have anything to do with it? Supposed "affair" with no real evidence but her word.

Cheque book journalism is something that should be banned. See how many people are willing to make up stories for nowt (parden the pun!)

I can't for the life of me imagine why this story added so much to sales. It was, after all, just another dreary, predictable, sleazy NoW tale among thousands of others. Maybe (as Richard Desmond posited at the Leveson Inquiry) there just happened to be a free CD or cheap flight to Benidorm on offer that day...

Worth checking out, perhaps, before you slap yourself on the back too cheerily in your proposed chapter.

Thanks for your input Miranda. But this had no freebies. It was the story that put on the sales.

There's definitely a book in your exploits Neville. From what I've read of your blog so far it would be very entertaining.

There's been a lot of comment in some circles about whether the pressure put on NoTW reporters was such that they were prepared to break the law to get scoops.

I worked with NoTW reporters / feature writers on a series of stories and charity campaigns over many years. I was regularly phoned on deadline by reporters trying to stand stories up, looking for case studies for particular angles etc and not once was I pressured into saying something I didn't want to.

If I said someone had the wrong end of the stick and it wasn't worth pursuing, that was accepted. Every quote was also accurate.

In the day job, I've been a journalist for nearly 40 years and at least one of the recent NoTW reporters did his work experience on my newspaper. Most of them had a good grounding in provincial media before they moved on.

I get fed up with hearing NoTW reporters bad-mouthed in the media when the vast majority were getting good old fashioned scoops through their own talents and not illegal means.

this is cool

If there's further evidence (from a cardboard box?), then why haven't you published it?