Talk:Murder of Daniel Morgan

News of the World - DS Cook surveillance

According to BBC Newsnight and Channel 4 News reports, the News of the World were operating surveillance on DS Dave Cook while he was conducting the 5th police enquiry and that it was found necessary for him to have police protection. His relationship with his wife Jacqui Haymes, presenter of CrimeWatch, was also investigated and her police personnel file appears to have been leaked to journalists. Once further details have been clarified this latest episode should be incorporated in the section of the article dealing with the 2011 NoW scandals. Opbeith (talk) 11:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Jonathan Rees

A lot of this page, especially the '2011 News of the World "investigative journalism" scandal' section is about Jonathan Rees, shouldn't it be moved there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie Kitson (talk • contribs) 09:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

It wouldn't be a bad idea for someone to do a Jonathan Rees article, I didn't find one, but the reason why I put this article together here was because I was interested in Daniel Morgan and the campaigning that his relatives and the Guardian have done to investigate the truth about his death, and there was no article when I looked. There are a lot more issues relating to Jonathan Rees, so I don't see any problem in information from here being reproduced at a Jonathan Rees article if you want to create one, but not so that specific information about Daniel Morgan is more difficult to find. Opbeith (talk) 13:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy to start a Jonathan Rees article if you like, It seams a sensible thing to do - otherwise the 2011 stuff might completely overtake everything else on the page. I'm likely to be copy and pasting a lot of the existing cotent though - how about I put up a draft and we'll see how we feel? Failedwizard (talk) 14:31, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, there is a draft up at User:Failedwizard/Jonathan_Rees - it needs work (at the moment it's nothing more than an editied down copy and paste), but it's got most of the bits, I need to copy edit and summerise the references to the murder and do some other bits but it should stand on it's own feet shortly. My plan would be to relese the draft and remove the phone hacking stuff from this article, but it would be nice to have a bit of consensus... what do you guys think? Failedwizard (talk) 14:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

worth mentioning the BBC report 8.00 Thursday radio 4....they stated that one of the investigatins, all the detectives on the case had to signe a statment that they were not members of any masonic lodge. A lot of other interesting details as well. Engineman (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Murder of Daniel Morgan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140710071833/http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Baroness-cold-case-inquiry/story-21331764-detail/story.html to http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Baroness-cold-case-inquiry/story-21331764-detail/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Publication of independent report

I've added a link to the Press Gazette, which states that the independent enquiry's report has finally been published: however, so far it doesn't look like any news agencies have covered it, and I can't find any details of the report's content. Hopefully there'll be some media coverage over the next few days. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

The Press Gazette piece is a round-up of forthcoming media events - the Daniel Morgan report will be published on Tuesday 15th June. JezGrove (talk) 22:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Only four investigations

The article lists five investigations into Morgan's murder, but the Independent Panel writes in its 2021 report (Introduction, footnote 1, page 4): "The Terms of Reference [of the Panel] refers to 'five' successive investigations. The Panel has found that there were four investigations, plus two reviews by the Metropolitan Police, and an intelligence-gathering operation (Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges)".

For clarity, I suggest that the article adopts the Independent Panel's terminology to refer to the various investigations and reports, namely: Morgan One Investigation; Hampshire/Police Complaints Authority Investigation; Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges (an intelligence-gathering operation, and not an investigation); Abelard One/Morgan Two Investigation; and Abelard Two Investigation.

The Panel names the 2000 cold case review the "2000 Murder Review" and the 2006 Report from the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service to the Metropolitan Police Authority "the 2006 Report". JezGrove (talk) 08:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

That's a very sensible suggestion. Wholly support. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Martin - I'll try to make the changes when I get the chance. The Independent Panel report is highly recommended (Chapter One alone is jaw-dropping) - it makes Line of Duty look like a teddy bears' picnic...! JezGrove (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm, something to dip into at bedtime, perhaps? "If you go down in Sydenham Woods today, You're sure of a big surprise... " Martinevans123 (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Indeed! I just passed page 800 (so two-thirds of the way through) and the failings must be heartbreaking from the point of view of the family. (Chapter 12 is dedicated to how they were treated and let down, although I haven't reached it yet.) The repeated inability of the police - across multiple investigations - to spell the names of the prime suspects correctly is extremely worrying. (A Crown Prosecution Service barrister with the exact same name as one of the key suspects also makes an appearance, although the expected Keystone Cops confusion hasn't ensued - yet...!) JezGrove (talk) 17:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Gosh. The "corrupt/corruption" word-count in this article is a meagre 23. Must be few that have been hidden away by mistake? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

"Chapter 10: Corruption: Venality to lack of candour" takes just over 100 pages (1015-1116). Given the earlier chapters, "hidden in plain sight" seems to have been the modus operandi. JezGrove (talk) 18:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Expansion/revision?

I suspect that much of the article needs significantly revising in light of the very thorough Independent Panel report. (Presumably the definitive take on the murder and the surrounding issues to date?) Any such efforts (if so, I'll try to make a start ASAP) will need to bear in mind factors like, "The hearing, originally scheduled to last for a few days, continued for almost two months, such was the complexity and scale of the material which was required to be considered". (Chapter 8 - The Abelard Two Investigation, 11.3.1, page 829) JezGrove (talk) 23:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• AlastairMorgan.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:53, 11 September 2021 (UTC)