:00:08. > :00:12.Declared sane - Norway's mass murderer is made accountable for
:00:13. > :00:17.his actions. Victims greets the verdict with relief - but so does
:00:17. > :00:24.Breivik. How should a liberal society respond to killings that
:00:24. > :00:28.came from within? I wish to apologise to all militant
:00:29. > :00:33.nationalistness Norway and Europe, that I wasn't able to kill more
:00:33. > :00:38.people. 850 complaints to the press
:00:38. > :00:45.commission, after the Sun newspapers publishes nude photos of
:00:45. > :00:48.Harry. Has the papers actions made Leveson's job easier. It did the
:00:48. > :00:52.death nel for people who print on trees.
:00:52. > :01:02.And Lance Armstrong is striped off his Tour de France title and banned
:01:02. > :01:05.
:01:05. > :01:12.for life. What proof of doping did Hello, good evening, can a man who
:01:12. > :01:16.killed 77 people in cold blood ever be deemed sane? Yes, came the
:01:16. > :01:20.emphatic answer from a nor weepbl court today. Judging the raveings
:01:20. > :01:24.of Anders Breivik to be world views, not psychotic delusions. The
:01:24. > :01:29.hearings in Oslo put not just one man but entire country's legal
:01:29. > :01:37.system on trial before the world. The court sentence, Breivik 21
:01:37. > :01:39.years in prison, but he sees him as a political prisoner and vows to
:01:39. > :01:43.continue his extremist cause under lock and key.
:01:43. > :01:49.It is the victims we should be talking about today. There were 77
:01:49. > :01:54.of them. Some blown up by a car bomb, most gunned down at a summer
:01:54. > :02:00.camp. People whose names most of us still haven't learned. People
:02:00. > :02:06.murdered by a former nobody whose name is known right around the
:02:06. > :02:12.world. In the mind of brick brick brick, that alone is a victory -
:02:12. > :02:18.Anders Breivik is a victory. So too using a courtroom as a platform for
:02:18. > :02:22.his hate-filled views. Something the judge prevented him doing today.
:02:22. > :02:28.TRANSLATION: I wish to apologise to all militant nationalists in Norway
:02:28. > :02:38.and Europe, that I wasn't able to kill more people...
:02:38. > :02:38.
:02:39. > :02:44.TRANSLATION: No wonder he left the courtroom pleased. As far as he's
:02:44. > :02:48.concerned he is a political prisoner, he avoided being declared
:02:48. > :02:53.insane, a fate he would be worse than death n jail, where he will
:02:53. > :02:56.spend 21 years, he will have three cells to himself. One is for
:02:56. > :03:01.exercise, another is to for reading and writing, and though his
:03:01. > :03:05.computer won't be on-line, he can use it to write messages, his
:03:05. > :03:09.followers can take away and distribute around the globe. So is
:03:09. > :03:16.this trial a fiasco, a triumph for the man in the dock? Actually no.
:03:16. > :03:20.I don't think it is a victory for him, no. If it is a victory for him,
:03:20. > :03:23.it is not important. Primarily it is a victory for the system and
:03:23. > :03:28.accepting that he is a political terrorist, and not a mad man. You
:03:28. > :03:35.could say that's a victory for him but it is the truth. We can't deny
:03:35. > :03:40.the truth just because he wants it. Some people athe system bent over
:03:40. > :03:43.backwards, was it too generous, with standards for somebody who
:03:43. > :03:49.hates those standards? You could say so. But it is proud we didn't
:03:49. > :03:54.choing our laws, after this incident. Every democratic society
:03:54. > :04:02.faces the same delema. How far to apply its own tolerant values, to
:04:02. > :04:06.people who despise those values, and would destroy them. This case,
:04:06. > :04:11.where unusually liberal country faced an enemy highlighted that
:04:11. > :04:17.dilemma in an extreme form. Today's result has seen Norway reaffirm its
:04:17. > :04:22.own values. Even the decision to declare Breivik sane, as he himself
:04:22. > :04:28.wanted has been good, many believe, for society, forcing it to confront
:04:28. > :04:33.his views, and not dismiss them. The demise of his views, doesn't
:04:33. > :04:39.come from the court, but it comes from the blowings, the debates, the
:04:39. > :04:42.public discourse, all over Europe these days, that claims many of the
:04:42. > :04:48.ideas that Anders Breivik claims. It claims we are at war and Muslims
:04:48. > :04:54.are taking over. Hopefully, this verdict will take Norwegian society
:04:54. > :04:59.face up to the political aspects of his deeds. How Breivik became the
:04:59. > :05:03.man responsible for this cold- blooded carnage. Was much analysed
:05:03. > :05:08.in court. How he lost contact with his father,
:05:08. > :05:14.frightened his own mother, spent years without a job, obsess civil
:05:15. > :05:19.playing video Games. And claimed to be an member of a anti-Islamic
:05:19. > :05:25.group, but something, his biographies irrelevant. We've
:05:25. > :05:29.looked in his eyes and asked who are you. We should ask how did you
:05:29. > :05:35.become a right-wing extremist terrorist, what is in our society
:05:35. > :05:38.that made you become that. After the massacre, Norwegians came
:05:38. > :05:44.together to denounce any intolerance in their midst. Their
:05:44. > :05:49.reply, many said would be more openness, more multi-culturalism.
:05:49. > :05:53.We survived Breivik, we did better at integrating more immigrants,
:05:53. > :06:00.having more tolerance and democracy. Many say, hostility to immigrants
:06:00. > :06:03.is on the rise again. With demands for refugees to be deported.
:06:03. > :06:09.hasn't changed Norway at all. What's happened is these, this
:06:09. > :06:14.debate has become more cemented, harder and also, strangely enough
:06:15. > :06:19.the people who agree with Anders Breivik, like to blowing a few, in
:06:19. > :06:23.the defence league, they have now become a part of mainstream media
:06:23. > :06:29.in Norway. It is natural to want something good to come out of such
:06:29. > :06:34.horror. But nor weeks will have to summon up all the virtues to keep
:06:34. > :06:42.asking of themselves, and their society, and not remain, as we all
:06:42. > :06:45.so often are fixated by the killer. Joining us from Oslo now is Asne
:06:45. > :06:52.Seierstad award winning aur author and journalist, who is writing
:06:52. > :06:56.about this case. Thanks for joining us. That same verdict then, broadly
:06:56. > :07:02.welcomeed by victims and also, by Breivik himself. But, it allows
:07:02. > :07:06.himself to treat himself as a political prisoner, a legitimacy?
:07:06. > :07:14.Yes. But this was not a political trial. It was not a political
:07:14. > :07:19.verdict. And I think it was the right verdict. It was actually a
:07:19. > :07:22.sane verdict because this was a sane man. It didn't mean he did
:07:22. > :07:27.good actions, the opposite, he executed this, planned this, and
:07:27. > :07:31.knew what he was doing, he was not psychotic, and this was the right
:07:31. > :07:38.verdict and this is a verdict that Norway can be at peace with.
:07:38. > :07:44.Does it worry you, that he can still use a political platform from
:07:44. > :07:48.inside prison, he can talk to those who calls his followers?
:07:48. > :07:51.definitely worries me if that will be as it has been from tomorrow on.
:07:51. > :07:58.We don't know that. Nobody has been able to answer us that, but the
:07:58. > :08:04.fact is that until now, he has had his computer, personal printer, he
:08:04. > :08:09.has been able to post, with stamps to communicate with bloggerers with
:08:09. > :08:14.followers, around the world, to put his opinions on the web. But, I
:08:14. > :08:19.hope, and most Norwegians with me, hope now, this computer will be
:08:19. > :08:24.taken from him, because it is rare, a prisoner has a computer in his
:08:24. > :08:29.cell. It is only at the end of the sentence, if he does education, or
:08:29. > :08:33.if he is preparing to get back to ordinary life. But the reason why
:08:33. > :08:37.he's had so many privileges in the cell S that he is a good
:08:37. > :08:43.manipulator and negotiator, and the first thing he said, when he was
:08:43. > :08:47.captured on the island, was a policeman sitting on on top of him,
:08:47. > :08:54.he said as soon as we start talking we can negotiate. What he wanted
:08:54. > :09:00.was a computer, a printer, and another, a certain other demands.
:09:00. > :09:04.And he got that, until now. I think maybe now that was the right
:09:05. > :09:08.decision to make him co-operate. But it is a new reality now. It's
:09:08. > :09:14.very interesting, because what we've heard in the piece S a man
:09:14. > :09:19.who has unfortunately as this may be, got his own way. You've given
:09:19. > :09:24.an example. We heard about hostility, potentially on the rise
:09:24. > :09:28.towards immigrants, that some of these slightly extremist bloggers,
:09:28. > :09:36.are encourageed into the mainstream immediatea. Are these changes that,
:09:36. > :09:41.Norway welcomes? Well, I I don't really agree with that report. I
:09:41. > :09:47.don't think we have more hostility in Norway, than towards immigrants
:09:47. > :09:50.than any other country. I think this man, Breivik, he could have
:09:50. > :09:56.appeared in any European country. He did appear in our country so. We
:09:56. > :10:00.have to deal with it. And we have to take it seriously. But, I don't
:10:00. > :10:04.really say that, I wouldn't say there's hostility on the rise
:10:04. > :10:10.against immigration, yes there is tension, there are different
:10:10. > :10:14.opinions, in Norwegian society, but this is still, the most non-violent
:10:14. > :10:18.society in Europe, with a less murders, and crime. So I don't
:10:18. > :10:22.think we should exaggerate and think Norway has become any more
:10:22. > :10:28.dangerous, because of this one person. Do you think Norway has
:10:28. > :10:32.changed? It is a cliche to say, that it has emerged stronger
:10:32. > :10:38.through this. But do you think there has been a fundamental shift
:10:38. > :10:44.in the country and the way it cease itself? We have changed, because
:10:44. > :10:50.this is a wound that struck us, and we will have to try and heal it. Of
:10:50. > :10:55.course, a heart of a country doesn't really change so quickly.
:10:55. > :10:59.But, definitely, we have, we now have to question ourselves, serious
:10:59. > :11:04.questions about how we deal with the others, the immigrants, those
:11:04. > :11:11.from the outside world. And definitely, this is one of the core
:11:11. > :11:17.issues across Europe. I think that whether we emerge stronger, it's
:11:17. > :11:20.too early to tell. We're in the middle of it. Let me ask you one
:11:20. > :11:26.last thought, he said he wants to destroy the Labour Party, this has
:11:26. > :11:33.been one of his goals. Do you think he is succeeding? Is there a sense
:11:33. > :11:39.that the Labour Party is in trouble as a result of the actions it's
:11:39. > :11:44.witnessed? Well, the Labour Party is definitely in trouble for the
:11:44. > :11:49.moment. The Government is in trouble. For several reasons, it's
:11:49. > :11:56.in office for eight years, but also the devastating inquiry, the
:11:56. > :11:59.independent inquiry looking at how Norway, the nor week police forces
:11:59. > :12:03.and Norwegian authorities and crisis committees, they did not
:12:03. > :12:10.work. There was a total failure and collapse of the system.
:12:10. > :12:16.Unfortunately, so many lives were lost, also, because of the failure
:12:16. > :12:20.of the system. Of course, the Government is taking part of the
:12:20. > :12:25.blame. And whether Breivik is sitting there rejoicing in his cell,
:12:25. > :12:29.in the next election, which is in a year's time, seeing the Labour
:12:29. > :12:33.Party going down to a right-wing Government, there's still a year to
:12:33. > :12:42.go, to see that. It really depends, it is important what the Labour
:12:42. > :12:49.Party is doing within the next year. Thank you very much. Riding to the
:12:49. > :12:54.rescue of press freedom came the Sun. Its symbol sawed truth, trusty
:12:54. > :12:58.shield of fair play was nude pictures of a Prince, most people
:12:58. > :13:04.had seen on-line. 850 people complained to the Press Complaints
:13:04. > :13:10.Commission for the decision to run them. While Boris Johnson said it
:13:10. > :13:14.was deafings indifference, many people in the industry expressed
:13:14. > :13:21.frustration, as it would give ammunition to the Leveson, with new
:13:21. > :13:25.regulation. It was the Sun, what done it. Today, three days after
:13:25. > :13:29.the pictures first appeared on-line, the best selling tabloid decide
:13:29. > :13:33.today publish and be damned. But by that time, more tan 13 million
:13:33. > :13:37.Brits had searched for Harry's nude pictures on the internet. Whether
:13:37. > :13:44.or not this is in the public interest, there's no doubt the
:13:44. > :13:49.prick are interested. Well, most of us, anyway. It is a kind of
:13:49. > :13:53.deafening indifference, I don't know what my view, a kind of
:13:53. > :13:59.spectacular... A scandal would be if you went to Las Vagas, and
:13:59. > :14:03.didn't misbehave in some trivial way. Now the pictures have rld of a
:14:03. > :14:09.an old-fashioned press, the debate of privacy has ratcheted up again.
:14:09. > :14:13.The Sun said readers had a right to see the pictures, because they're
:14:13. > :14:16.already on-line The pictures are a mouse click away from 77% of
:14:16. > :14:20.households with internet access, it is absurd in the internet age
:14:20. > :14:23.newspapers like the Sun could be stopped from publishing stories and
:14:23. > :14:30.pictures, already seen by millions on the free-for-all that is the
:14:30. > :14:35.web". Jiefplt this shows us from 2004:. Some digital gurus, agree.
:14:35. > :14:38.Public interest is the public interest. And while we may say they
:14:38. > :14:42.breached the laws or privacy concerns around this, when we see
:14:42. > :14:46.the massive indication and people absorbing the news story from all
:14:46. > :14:49.over the news, journalist integrity requires that they do this story
:14:49. > :14:54.and they cover it appropriately, because the public declared their
:14:54. > :14:59.interest, we have the tools to monitor that and track it. Now we
:14:59. > :15:03.have those available, we should be using them in setting our news
:15:03. > :15:07.agendas. There's a sense of editors the Sun has not only thumbed its
:15:07. > :15:11.nose at the law, but the rest of the industry. None of the tabloid
:15:11. > :15:15.editors I spoke to would go on the record but privately they were
:15:15. > :15:19.furious. One editor said to me "we all decided together that none of
:15:19. > :15:23.the papers were going to publish these pictures, now the Sun has
:15:23. > :15:28.broken rank, for purely commercial reasons. At a time when we're
:15:28. > :15:34.desperately trying to prove we can be trust today regulate ourselves".
:15:34. > :15:39.Another one said "they've handed Leveson a loaded gun." 850 people
:15:39. > :15:44.have tkphraind to the PCC but there are others who say somebody had to
:15:45. > :15:49.break rank before the UK began to look like a dictatorship. As far as
:15:49. > :15:54.the photographs are evidence to that story, on balance, it has to
:15:54. > :15:57.be published. Imagine the Leveson Lion, the post-Leveson Lion, were
:15:57. > :16:04.drawn here, in other words you couldn't publish privacy
:16:04. > :16:08.infringeing material, even where there was an argueable case in the
:16:08. > :16:17.public interest, even where there was an argueable interest, you
:16:17. > :16:24.would leapfrog France and end up in abduer zie stand. There's a clear
:16:24. > :16:29.law of privacy here, there was a case, jofg Jamie theeck son, and
:16:29. > :16:33.that established the fact that newspapers, publishing images, is
:16:33. > :16:36.far more intrusive than telling a story. As a result if you were
:16:36. > :16:40.going to publish an intrusive image of somebody, you have to have a
:16:40. > :16:44.very clear, public interest, which justifies not just the telling of
:16:44. > :16:48.the story, but also, the publication of that image. In this
:16:48. > :16:52.case, everybody has told thetor story but nobody has been able to
:16:52. > :16:55.cast around and find a public interest which justifies the
:16:55. > :17:02.publication of the actual image. That's a clear distinction in the
:17:02. > :17:07.law and which one the Sun has chosen to ignore. While Harry
:17:07. > :17:14.kavortd in red Bermudas, lit does he know, what happens in Vegas,
:17:14. > :17:18.doesn't always stay in Vegas. Who needs the paparazzi, when you have
:17:18. > :17:21.new best friend with camera phones. The regulators need to catch up
:17:21. > :17:25.with the Facebook generation. They're looking at the issues to
:17:25. > :17:28.find a new framework. And then instead of focusing on the
:17:28. > :17:32.negatives around that, they should be looking at the positive aspects
:17:32. > :17:36.what it could mean to open up this news agenda and allow media
:17:36. > :17:39.organisation toss make those ethical choices. It is difficult in
:17:39. > :17:42.the context of the Leveson Inquiry and phone hacking and all the
:17:42. > :17:46.things that have come before, recently, but it is about time we
:17:46. > :17:53.look at this. Back at the palace this afternoon it was keep calm and
:17:53. > :18:00.carry on as they released a video of Harry, fully clothed, paying
:18:00. > :18:05.tribute to Paralympians. Paralympics torve relay is a
:18:05. > :18:10.curtain to the Games, :. It was a stark contrast the image on the
:18:10. > :18:15.fropt page of the Sun. So was their decision to defy the PCC a bold
:18:15. > :18:24.move to show the regulators there's life in the old tabloid dog yet? Or
:18:24. > :18:28.have they, just handed Lord Leveson a loaded gun? John Prescott who
:18:28. > :18:32.suffered privacy invasion, joining us from Hull. Here in the studio,
:18:32. > :18:36.the former executive of News of the World, currently on police bail as
:18:36. > :18:42.part of the phone hacking investigation, thus unable to
:18:42. > :18:45.answer questions related to that this evening Neil Wallace do you
:18:45. > :18:52.feel News International have done a whole British press a service
:18:52. > :18:56.today? Yes. Of course I do. Yes. It is interesting to see that the BBC
:18:56. > :19:00.take ago typical neutral stance? The way we're presenting this
:19:00. > :19:04.discussion tonight. What I think is the truth of the matter is this is
:19:04. > :19:07.Leveson's worse night mare. It is exactly the situation he wouldn't
:19:07. > :19:13.have wanted, because the truth of the matter is these pictures were
:19:13. > :19:16.published all over the world, and it is bonkers, and affront to
:19:16. > :19:22.natural justice to suggest you can't print them on paper in this
:19:22. > :19:28.country, when the rest of the world is looking at them. Lord Prescott?
:19:28. > :19:32.Well, Neil Wallace was in the News of the World which got closed down
:19:32. > :19:35.because of its activities of releasing information on to the
:19:35. > :19:43.internet and using as a justification, in the Max Moseley
:19:43. > :19:47.case to print. What is going on here? 8 70 people complained,
:19:47. > :19:52.they're useless as we've been pointing out zsh the PCC but the
:19:52. > :19:57.editors actually said, what they wanted to do was shorpen up the
:19:58. > :20:02.editors code, they were going to act together, get a definite of
:20:02. > :20:07.public interest. As soon as they meet one day, and agree this is a
:20:07. > :20:12.breach of the editor's code, and wouldn't print, some agreed and
:20:12. > :20:17.changed its mind. And now talks about public interest. Do you
:20:17. > :20:20.concede Neil's point we end up looking ridiculous, when we make a
:20:20. > :20:25.difference pictures circulating you will over the place on the internet,
:20:25. > :20:29.and one newspaper, one bit of paper. Leveson is beginning to look at
:20:29. > :20:34.these things. Don't lose sight, all the editors got together and agreed
:20:34. > :20:37.this was a breach of the editors code. The industry still wants to
:20:37. > :20:43.keep self-regulation and work the editors code. So obviously they
:20:43. > :20:47.want to put the best face on. The Sun changes its minds, within a 24
:20:47. > :20:52.hours, and Murdoch, who is upset how they're treated here. They've
:20:53. > :20:56.changed and raised the question now, can the editors code work in self-
:20:56. > :21:02.regulation? No it cannot Why would you break rank when the industry is
:21:02. > :21:08.over trouble over an issue like this? Can I just say, that that is
:21:08. > :21:12.the biggest load of garbage I have heard in a long time. You come from
:21:12. > :21:16.the News of the World, God blimey. What you have is here, a news
:21:16. > :21:21.reporter who says she's spoken to a number of editors. I spoken to
:21:21. > :21:24.those editors over the last two days, and let me tell you, they
:21:24. > :21:28.gave me a different version. You have a group of editors, who
:21:28. > :21:34.haven't run the story. Most of them didn't run the story because they
:21:34. > :21:37.were told note to. As indeed the sup was by the xeef executive.
:21:37. > :21:40.These journalists all champing at the bit, and all in the bidding for
:21:40. > :21:49.the pictures, but the decision came from on high, because of Leveson,
:21:49. > :21:54.they should not do it. You're on high as well, Murdoch. Let's just
:21:54. > :21:58.cut to the chase, our reporter talked to people, saying you have
:21:58. > :22:04.done Leveson's job for them. I say you, News International, because
:22:04. > :22:08.you made it easy for him This is leaf Leveson's night mare, because
:22:08. > :22:14.how can you castigate newspapers, that are simply following the rest
:22:14. > :22:16.of the world's media? It wasn't the Sun, the Mirror, the BBC the
:22:17. > :22:21.Telegraph who discovered these pictures, they were published,
:22:21. > :22:24.there will 200 million hits on the pictures around the world. Are you
:22:25. > :22:30.trying to intelligently tell me, they shouldn't be print on bits of
:22:30. > :22:33.paper in this country. It is farcical, and the idea you have an
:22:33. > :22:38.elderly politician trying to say that young people of today should
:22:38. > :22:42.not enjoy the privileges of, that he did of a free press is frankly
:22:42. > :22:48.insulting and stupid. Lord Prescott you can come back on that one,
:22:48. > :22:53.isn't it better to defend the big problems, than to worry about this
:22:54. > :22:57.one. We have Leveson to look at it. Is Neil saying ignore the law and
:22:57. > :23:01.whatever our law says privacy and public interest, as long as it is
:23:01. > :23:06.on the internet and they push it in the internet sometimes ahead of the
:23:06. > :23:09.story, it is our law cannot apply. It is hard, isn't it, to make an
:23:09. > :23:13.argument about privacy, when he clearly invited a lot of people he
:23:13. > :23:18.didn't know, into a public space? Well, I mean, that sounds silly to
:23:18. > :23:24.me, but it happened. The editors code, which the editors agreed,
:23:24. > :23:27.presumably, Neil should be aware of it, you cannot without consent
:23:27. > :23:32.print a picture, without the private circumstances. That isn't
:23:32. > :23:38.true. It is untrue, that's not what the code says. Tifplt does. Read
:23:38. > :23:41.the code. I've read the code. not what it says. It is use useless
:23:41. > :23:44.in controlling you guys, and everybody accepted we have to
:23:45. > :23:51.change it. Because you people in the News of the World and Murdoch,
:23:51. > :23:56.didn't care a damn about the law. If you were now waveed goodbye to
:23:56. > :24:03.self-regulation over over a case like this, would it be a waste?
:24:03. > :24:08.Please, let's be sensible. Around the world, the British press have
:24:08. > :24:12.followed, a story that went around the world. This is what Leveson has
:24:12. > :24:18.stood there and said. So everyone had seen it. What's the point of
:24:18. > :24:22.coming in there so late? So the BBC are suggesting along with elderly
:24:22. > :24:29.Labour politicians that we should now cens sore the press S that
:24:29. > :24:38.where you're coming from? This is ageism. Why did the Sun change its
:24:38. > :24:42.mind tell us that? Because Rupert Murdoch realised how Murdoch was
:24:42. > :24:49.the one who gave instruction, the man before our courts and inquiries.
:24:49. > :24:54.For God sake. Thank you very much. There are thierd American cyclist
:24:54. > :25:01.has been striped of the seven titles, banned from competitive
:25:01. > :25:07.cycling for life, the OCDA. The cyclist declares his innocence but
:25:07. > :25:12.weary of fighting the allegations. Allegations he has been fighting
:25:12. > :25:17.for years. Lance Armstrong's never failed an official drugs test we
:25:17. > :25:22.know off, except when he was cleared in '99. The evidence
:25:22. > :25:27.against him has yet to be published. But it may be the testimony of
:25:27. > :25:32.other cyclists, and fresh examination of old samples. US
:25:32. > :25:36.doping authorities of course say it is them who have the authority and
:25:36. > :25:40.so does the sports governing body who have yet to comment and see the
:25:40. > :25:49.evidence. The anti-doping boss, described that as the fox guarding
:25:49. > :25:54.the hen house. It is not clear the US za, can clear, there's eight
:25:54. > :25:58.year of statistics, only two of the titles fall within that window.
:25:58. > :26:02.And will the runners up to Armstrong inherit his titles? Well,
:26:02. > :26:06.probably not. Apart from anything else, some of the cyclists have
:26:06. > :26:12.also been banned for doping, it looks like there are no winners
:26:12. > :26:16.here. Well, Andy Parkinson, Chief Executive of UK anti-doping, is
:26:16. > :26:20.here. Are you surprised he pulled out of the fight? I am somewhat
:26:20. > :26:23.surprised. If I was a clean athlete, what I would want to do, is test
:26:23. > :26:27.the evidence put against me. And obviously, as of today, that's not
:26:27. > :26:32.going to happen. But he says, he's innocent and taken numerous tests,
:26:32. > :26:36.nothing has actually been found, there's about no evidence against
:26:36. > :26:41.him. If he says he's weary, you'd have sympathy wouldn't you? Yeah, I
:26:41. > :26:44.can see that argument. I think the flip side of that, is gone are the
:26:44. > :26:48.days when anti-doping authorities relied on positive tests. We rely
:26:48. > :26:54.on a multitude of different evidence we package up. And the
:26:54. > :26:58.United States authoritys have said they've got overwhelming evidence,
:26:58. > :27:01.from eyewitness statements that, corob rate doping. It can't be
:27:01. > :27:05.enough to take eyewitness statements when you have scientific
:27:05. > :27:09.ways of proving or disapproving can it? It is a balance. What you
:27:09. > :27:13.ideally have a positive test, because it is simple to prosecute.
:27:13. > :27:19.But, in the criminal justice system, you rely on eyewitness statements
:27:19. > :27:26.and test the evidence, and that was the purpose of the tribunal that
:27:26. > :27:30.Lens has opted out tf. The US za, asked a question to hand over the
:27:30. > :27:35.anti-doping case, they say it is like a fox guarding the hen house,
:27:35. > :27:38.so essentially what the authorities, are part of the problem? What the
:27:38. > :27:42.United States authorities said is we have the evidence, we've got
:27:42. > :27:46.joust diction to prosecute, we don't need you the cycling
:27:46. > :27:52.federation, and also, we have to bear in mind there's a wider
:27:52. > :27:57.conspiracy case going on, and the cycling federation has an appeal of
:27:57. > :28:02.any result of that. Do you think they're part of the problem?
:28:02. > :28:06.don't know. And what we haven't seen is that evidence tested
:28:06. > :28:10.because Mr Armstrong has withdrawn from the case. When you take, into
:28:10. > :28:13.account the idea you can't even hand those titles, to the sort of
:28:13. > :28:20.next in line, necessarily, because there are doping problems, all over
:28:20. > :28:25.the place, I mean, what a murky period, potentially, for cycling,
:28:25. > :28:30.that whole time was? Yeah it is probable matic, I have to say, the
:28:30. > :28:34.redistribution of those titles. But, it was murky. The late 90s, was a
:28:34. > :28:39.very difficult time for cycling. Can we not trust any of the tests
:28:39. > :28:46.that are being done? What we can do is trust the, that at the time the
:28:46. > :28:51.test was taken with the substances we were able to analyse this were
:28:51. > :28:57.negative tests. What we cannot say is negative test means no doping.
:28:58. > :29:01.We had the same example around the Olympic Games. The only people who
:29:01. > :29:05.can tkpwrarn tee the performance sincere the athletes. If Lance
:29:05. > :29:09.Armstrong is not willing to clear his name, and he backed out, what
:29:09. > :29:13.happens, does that investigation go on without him, will you still
:29:13. > :29:17.bother to pursue that now? United States authorities, remember
:29:17. > :29:25.there's a conspiracy case of five other individuals, all based on the
:29:25. > :29:29.same evidence, so that case will continue. And, in tirms of the
:29:29. > :29:34.again public, we'll start to see the transparency once the hearings
:29:34. > :29:39.have been held. Thank you very much for coming in. We're going to bring
:29:39. > :29:45.you the front of the papers in a second. But I haven't got them. So
:29:45. > :29:49.second. But I haven't got them. So this will be interesting. Telegraph
:29:49. > :29:53.is first, minister signals Heathrow expansion, and the hen party
:29:53. > :29:55.surprised by lack of security to the Prince, that's the Vegas story
:29:55. > :30:02.there. The stiems, the Government sends in
:30:02. > :30:07.the Scouts to right hot spots. Scouts guides and police, to go
:30:07. > :30:17.into private hot spoots. The start of the countdown to the Paralympics
:30:17. > :30:17.
:30:17. > :30:23.Independent, GCSE row, Michael Gove threatened with legal action over
:30:23. > :30:31.the C/ D boundary, we had last night. And Charles summons Harry
:30:31. > :30:36.for crisis talks. A heart to heart talk. The FT weekend, Greece has
:30:36. > :30:40.not been written off as Merkel welcomes Samaras to Berlin. That's