31/10/2013 Newsnight


With Kirsty Wark. The latest revelations in the phone hacking trial, music streaming service Spotify on its relationship with musicians, and Chile's presidential elections.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 31/10/2013. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The lead QC in the phone hacking trial reveals that Rebekah Brooks


and Andy Coulson had a long affair while both at the News of the World.


Did that mean they told each other everything? The man in charge of


artist liaison at Spotify says musicians should have nothing to


fear from the music streaming service. I would encourage all


artists to weigh it up, make the best decision for their band.


Ultimately there is almost no case for an artist not putting their


music on Spotify. Moby will be joining us for his ideas for making


money out of music. The rabid right, was David Cameron wrong to shun the


grassroots and euro-sceptics. One influential Tory thinks so. Europe,


welfare, immigration, on all the big issues of the last decade, the right


has been right. And in Chile, how the Pinochet dictatorship still


lives in the memory of those involved in the up coming pecks


elections. TRANSLATION: There was a particular torture they used against


women like me who refused to talk. It involves violent sexual abuse. I


was pregnant at the time and I lost my


Good evening, Anthony and Cleopatra, JFK and Marylin, John and Edwina,


today in the phone hacking trial the court heard the revelation that


Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson had Anne fair until since 2004, and may


have lasted six years. Of course Andrew Edis QC said he was making no


moral judgment or intruding into their privacy. But the fact of the


affair meant that what Rebekah Brooks knew, Andy Coulson knew, and


visa versa. That is what he wanted to put in the Mobitz of the jurors.


This report contains flash photography.


"The fact is you are my very best friend, I tell you everything, I


confide in you, I seek your advice, I love you, care about you, worry


about you, we laugh and cry together." The intimate details of


an fair between two hugely high-profile public figures that had


remained secret for years. A tale in fact that could have graced the


front page of any edition of the News of the World. When the jury in


court 12 of the Old Bailey heard those words today, they were being


told a story that never made it into print. The revelation that this


trial's two highest-profile defendant, Brooks Brookes and Andy


Coulson had been illicit lovers for years. A fact that prosecutor Andrew


Edis QC made much of. He raised it in connection with the


hacking of Milly Dowler's voicemail. That the News of the World hacked


Milly Dowler's phone is not disputed. The question before the


jury is who knew? Rebekah Brooks was on holiday in Dubai, leaving Coulson


in charge, when the News of the World published a story that came


straight from Milly's voicemail, quoting verbatim a message that had


been left on it. The jury were told there was a string of calls and


messages between Brooks in Dubai and the editor's desk in London in the


lead up to publication. Such was the intimacy of her relationship with


Coulson, Edis said, Brooks simply must have known what was going on.


And it wasn't just Coulson, Brooks, reporter Neville Thurlbeck, news


editor Greg Miskiw and Glenn Mulcaire who allegedly knew about


the hacking of Milly Dowler's voicemail. The paper's managing


editor, Stuart Kuttner, also a defendant in the case, even told


Surrey Police that the newspaper had Milly Dowler's voicemails. All of


which was evidence of how senior figures at the News of the World


were taking a very keen interest in the Milly Dowler story. Edis summed


it up thus. These are very senior journalists on the News of the World


who are pursuing this story and devoting time to it. We say in all


the circumstances it is simply incredible that the editors did not


know what was going on that week. Earlier it had been payments to


private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, amounting to more than


?100,000 a year, and who now admits phone hacking, that Mr Edis focussed


on the jury were told that Brooks, Coulson and Cutler kept a tight rein


on spending at the News of the World, and personally signing off


amounts as low as ?1,000. It was inconceivable that they didn't know


the paper was paying Mullany so much money. Cutler had signed -- Kuttner


had signed off payments to Glenn Mulcaire of over ?400,000, or that


they didn't know what they were paying them for, which boiled down,


to phone hacking. What


Shh Edis also sought to persuade the jury Assenor he had -- as Senior


editors they all routinely asked what he called "the editor's


question", in other words, how do I know the story is true. The answer


to which at the News of the World was all too often, phone hacking. On


all three points, managing the money, overseeing the paper's


journalism, and the very close relationship between Coulson and


Brooks, Edis argued that it was inconceivable that they didn't know


about and embrace the cripple flail practice of phone -- criminal


practice of phone hacking. If yesterday's proceedings lacked


drama, today's certainly didn't. Having had the details of their


secret affair laid bare before the jury, Coulson and Brooks, sitting


next to each other in the dock, then had to listen to prosecutor Edis


running through how they had exposed others, namely fire brigades' union


leader, Andy Gilchrist, and former Home Secretary, David Blunkett, for


illicit affairs of their own, apparently on the basis of illegally


hacked voice mails. There was a tangible sense in court and outside


afterwards, of two Titans of tabloid journalism enduring some of what


they often dished out to others. All the accused deny the charges. Coming


up. At the end of the day Spotify helps record companies, big record


companies and it helps investors. Emerging artists don't get a look


in. Now just when you thought it was safe to go back into the City of


London, several banks have become embroilled in an international probe


into possible manipulation of the currency trading forex business. The


justice investigators are investigating whether nine traders


included with partners and other banks to rig rates. News of


suspensions among bank staff tonight. We have been looking at it.


What has been going on? The global foreign exchange market is really


very big business. There are some staggeringly large numbers involved.


Let's take a look at one of them. That is this one. $5. 3 trillion


daily is trade around the world in dollars and all sorts of other


currencies. Of that more than 40% is traded in London. That is the


biggest centre for Foreign exchange. A really important story around this


emerging over the last couple of weeks. Each day there is an


important procedure, a rate setting, so that rates are set for benchmark,


for pension funds and contracts and all that sort of thing. For example


today one pound was set at $1. 60. That happens at 6.00pm in London.


There is a 60 second window, and all the trades over that 60 seconds are


compiled by an organisation called WM Reuters, it is the WM Reuters


Fix. The investigations are around whether that setting could have in


some way been manipulated. You are saying 40% of the business is


conducted through London. Any names emerging? There are major banks,


which have confirmed that actually they have been approached by


regulators, or they have conducted their own investigations, you can


see some of the names, including RBS and Barclays, as well as Deutsche


Bank. And also Citigroup. Names have named, row Hann Ranjandani and


others from JP Morgan on a sub-committee on foreign exchange


dealing, they have been sent on leave by their employers, there is


no suggestion at all they were involved in any wrongdoing, and also


Matt Gardener. RBS has suspended two traders. If it turns out to be a


major scandal, could it be as big as LIBOR? At the moment nobody is


actually suggesting that any wrongdoing is taking place. It is a


preliminary investigation. But I think it has the potential to be


very significant indeed. Various e-mails and instant messaging data


being looked at by regulators suggests there may have been


activity up to August this year. That will shock other people if


anything untoward has been proved. I'm joined by the research director


at the on-line trading company forex.com. Are you surprised? Since


2008 the regulatory landscape has changed so much, it has gone from


the mortgage business to LIBOR, because the foreign exchange


business is so huge it was in line for scrutiny. The make name for the


foreign exchange business is the "wild west" because it isn't


regulated like the others? It can sometimes get a bad press for that.


But I think you have seen it with individual companies that might be


on an exchange. Or maybe considered to be more highly regulated than the


FX market and still things happen to them. Yes it is unregulated but that


doesn't mean it is always working on its own. But if there have been


problems with it, is it likely to emerge through big trades, small


trade, I mean this minute window that Hugh was talking about, is it


major currencies or lesser currencies? It is probably likely to


be the major currencies, and in a second, in a matter of a few


seconds, when you have a $5. 3 market you can push a lot of trades


through in that time. It will be small increments that any changes


were made if they can be detected. They are hard to detect I would


imagine. The source suggests though that it is the smaller currencies


not the bigger currencies? Sure. So it is the smaller currencies, in


this case, if there is any wrongdoing, not that we think at the


moment there is? They are the less liquid ones as well. Is it the case


even if there is a major problem, coming on top of all the FREEF


problems that the City of London is too big to fail? It is absolutely


true, it is 40% of the whole market. We have a good reputation, but these


continual regulatory probes they are chipping away at that. It was only a


few months ago we signed up with China to trade for RNB and make


London a trading hub. The problem is if George Osborne has signed up with


the Chinese, then it is embarrassing so soon afterwards to announce an


investigation? It is incredibly em-Bartsing, it is good that it is


the FAC A and the UK has taken a lead on it, if we are staying the


centre of the FX world we have to make sure we are managing and


policing it well and being fair to both sides of the trade. Thank you


very much indeed. The last desperate fart of a dying corpse, Thom Yorke


on what some are talking up as the saviour of the record industry. The


Radiohead front man might not be keen on Spotify, with six million


paying customer, it can't match the might of the YouTube and iTunes, it


is big in business. Whether it is a malign or benign influence is hotly


debated. We have been asking what artists really get out of it. Is


this the White Knight of the music industry? A way for people to gorge


on as many tracks as they want, while giving record labels and


artists a steady stream of income. Spotify lets users listen to music


over the Internet for free. A paid subscription gives you mobile access


and the ability to download individual tracks. The site is now


passing millions of pounds to record labels each year. For many this and


similar firms like Deezer and Napster are the future for an


industry that once looked like it might topple over. Some people in


the music industry, passionately believe that Spotify is eating into


piracy, it is bringing more money into the industry and boosting


artists' career. Other people believe that Spotify is drawing


customers who spend a lot on buying music to a new model in which they


are actually spending less. Cannibalising the existing healthy


business model. Whichever of those is true will ultimately decide the


music industry's fate in the future. The latest financial figures show


how the site is growing. The firm's sales doubled last year to ?370


million. It now has 24 million users in 32 different countries. The


Spotify model is now being talked up as a key factor in the industry's


fightback, in countries like Norway and Sweden, where the company was


founded. Revenues there are now rising strongly, after a decade of


slumping CD sales and soaring piracy. Spotify's top brass


certainly talk the talk. At an industry event run by Virgin,


Newsnight caught up with their unfeesably fashionable executive,


keen to talk up his new business model. I think in new ideas at


Spotify is a meritocracy, meaning we have a pool of revenue, we are


paying back almost 70% to artists. If you have 1% of all the streams on


Spotify, you will see 1% of the revenue paid back to rights holders.


That is the exciting part for me. This pot will grow and grow and grow


and your revenues increasing daily. If you look at traditional models it


wasn't a pro-rat at that system, that is a new and exciting idea for


me. So for such an industry success


story, why does Spotify seem to be turning into a lightning rod for


some very upset artistso a lightning rod for some very upset artists.


Thom Yorke has pulled most of his solo material off Spotify in


response to the rates they pay out. He called them the last fart of a


dying corpse, and the reason for the relaxes of relationships between


music labels and artists. You are seeing the music industry responding


to technology and habits by new listeners. While his heart is in the


right place, I would sit down with him and explain to him why his facts


may be misinformed. Hasn't he got a point that because, to a certain


extent, some of your shareholders, the major label, had you to do deals


with the major labels that you are not forward looking but an


electronic form of the industry as it exists 15, 20 years ago? I


disagree, Radiohead had issues with iTunes when it came out, they had


issues about breaking up the CD, there will always be qualms about


change. Bands like the Beatle, AC/DC and Led Zeplin have long refused to


put their music on streaming sites. And others, like last night's


mercury nominees, Faols, are now speaking out. Irrespective of


whether it brings people to your music or as a spin off you sell more


ticket, the business model itself means you have music you have worked


your heart out for you are paid what I deem to be an immoral amount. And


that's it, that's just for me it is an inarguable fact the royalty rate


musicians receive from Spotify is just not fair. Spotify pays artists,


not directly, but through their music label or management company,


that means different musicians can receive completely different


amounts. Each time a user plays a track. Patterns are an up and coming


Manchester band with just four songs so far available on Spotify. The


lead singer said the site can be good for exposure, but once you try


to earn proper money it becomes more difficult. We use streaming services


like Sound Cloud and things like Band Camp, we think it is really


important people listen to our music. What is different with


Spotify is now you have these premium accounts where not only can


people stream your music but take it away with them. What's the point for


them to buy us on iTunes or any kind of MP 3. Here we have a spread sheet


that shows all the streams to date that Patterns have received via


Spotify. Crunching the numbers, the boss of the band's label say after


two years and 150,000 plays on Spotify the four members have paid


?65 each. That is after the label itself takes its ?50% share. For an


indie label like us that equates to 00. 2p per stream on Spotify. The


artist is getting 00. 1p per stream, that is not much at all. If you are


an artist without a large audience and fan base, it is hard to do well


on any service, whether iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, in my opinion it


is pretty straight forward. You engage with your label, you are in a


business relationship with your label. You are making a decision


based upon an element of trust. You engage your label and get as much


information as possible, you make sure you understand your situation,


and you receive the payments that are deserved.


After 14 years of upheaval and falling sales, it looks like the


music industry is back on its feet. Spotify and services like it will


probably continue to grow. They might, though, make more enemies


along the way. Joining us now from Los Angeles is the mu six Moby who


has told -- musician Moby who has sold 20 million albums worldwide.


How are you, good evening. When you heard Faols talking last night at


Mercury saying artists receive an immoral amount and the royalty rate


is so poor, by and large, do you think he has a point? I think what


the journalist was also talking about is it is hard to generalise, a


lot of it has do with the artist relationship with the record


company. Some artists are making more money from Spotify than others.


It is hard to come up with a comprehensive generalised amoral or


moral statement about the royalties people are receiving. The more


powerful the band and the better deal they do with their record


company, obviously, the better their rate will be when it comes to


Spotify. You have gone a different road now, because your new album,


The Innocence, you are issuing a download and streaming, is that the


way of the future? Well, my, I don't know maybe I'm a simplen to, but my


-- simpleton, my thoughts are musicians' main job is making music


they love and other people love. You have to figure out how to pay the


rent and be fiscally responsible, but the goal should really be


focussing on the music. One of the things I love about the digital


present we live in, with institutions like Spotify, or Sound


Cloud or YouTube, it is almost like this democratic anarchy, it is very


chaotic, you put music into the world and you have no idea how


people will experience it or listen to it. I actually find that really


compelling. I accept that argument, and funnily enough Lou Reed always


said it didn't matter about the business it was the music. You can


speak of the advantage of somebody who has sold 20 million albums world


wild, the young band from Manchester said the people who win out are the


label, if the artists are cutting deals where they might get 7% not


70%ho win out are the label, if the artists are cutting deals where they


might get 7% not 70%. The state of technology six months from now, a


year from now, five years from now might make Spotify look very


antiquated. Having too strong an opinion about streaming services


like Spotify, you look it is kind of like having a strong opinion about


Napster which barely exists now. I really feel like when I see people


criticising the digital present we live. It kind of reminds me at old


guys yelling at trains going too fast. There is nothing you can do


about it. You talk about Napster which was a flash in the pan, do you


think Spotify is only on the way to somewhere else, that this is a very


shallow stepping stone? It is almost impossible to say. So many of us are


accustomed to owning music. But yet there is answer tire new generation


of people where it - an entire new generation of people who never owned


music. It is a weird overlap between the two. People complaining about


Spotify they are not complaining about the same music being played on


the radio. Yet that same music is coming out of the same speakers, I


don't the radio, I don't understand how people want different


compensations for music coming out of different places. They are


creating their own sense of music by whatever they are streaming and


downloading, does that essentially mean the idea of a curated series


and pieces of music like an album is essentially going to be an old man


and old woman's tool? I'm speaking as an old man. I know! There is some


bias. But I think that there is room for things to coexist. You can have,


I look at the world of book publishing, and some things just


show up on a digital e-read e you read it and throw away and don't


think about it. If you really love a book maybe you want the hard cover


version. A coffee table version of it. With music there might be some


disposable pop songs you stream a few times and never think about,


when your favourite band puts out a new album you might want to buy a


version of it. What do you want to be, the five-time played popstar --


what do you want to be, the five-time played popstar or the


long-term artist? That is up to each artist, some people want the


disposable popstar and other people want to make albums people will come


back to 50 years hence. You put it out there that almost whoever is


listening to it can curate changes and listen in their own way, is that


a future? I did a thing with an organisation called BitTorn, we took


individual tracks from my album, the drum, the vocals and bass and


released them as multitracks where everyone can download it for free,


remix it and do what they want with it. I love that democratic chaos.


The fact that you put this music out into the world, once it leaves my


hands I don't own it and I can't control it. I personally maybe there


is something wrong with me, I love the lack of control I have over


music once I put it out into the world. Great luxury. Thank you very


much indeed Moby. Pleasure, thank you.


Is there a quiet reproachment taking place on the political right. After


the election David Cameron and George Osborne put clear water, an


ocean even between the Tory leadership and much of the party's


grassroots, and certainly the euro-sceptics. But was that distance


to do with policies or the perceived extreme attitudes of those who


expressed them. Swivel-eyed oon, the one who called for British jobs for


British workers, a cap on immigration and no, no never to the


euro. Are they the ones having the last laugh. Our reporter thinks so.


Doesn't he feel faintly embarrassed that in five short years he has gone


from "hug a husky" to "gas a badger "(voice of Ed Miliband) The only


embarrassing thing is this tortured performance. (Voice of David


Cameron. It is hard to get attention, we all lead busy lives,


even I a political anorack has stopped watching Prime Minister's


question times. Occasionally some interesting things happens, like


last week. We need to roll back some of the green regulations and charges


putting up bills. The man who promised the greenest Government


ever, doesn't sound so green any more. The man who said he would stop


banging on about Europe has had to bang on a bit about Europe. On


immigration, welfare and tax, David Cameron has steadily moved to the


right. Or has he? Some in the parliamentary Conservative Party


don't see things in such simple terms. I don't really see it quite


as right and left. What I think is really important is that we as a


party don't know those distinctions but actually make a very common


cause which is being on people's side. Works on the side of families


and just being there for them. Changing our language, making sure


that we are seen to be on the side of the consumer, not vested


interest. I think we need an optimistic message, I think we need


to be up for things that are out there in both globally and


nationally. The right gets a bad press, grassroots Tory members were


rag worms called "swivel-eyed loons", who are the sanest people in


politics. Is it the people who supported the euro, or those on the


right who always said it would cause the economic problems it has? What


about the people who welcomed mass immigration into this country, or


was it the right who calls said that immigration of the kind we saw would


cause wages to fall and house prices to rise? Some people on the right of


the Conservative Party are certainly feeling vindicated by the way events


have moved on. I think it is fairly extraordinary on so many of the


macro issues on, for example, the question of Europe, whether Britain


should be part of the euro or whether we should have a referendum,


on the way of immigration, on the question of welfare reform,


positions that were once dismissed as beyond the pale, as the preserve


of free market right-wingers like me, are increasingly mainstream.


They are increasingly accepted as being sensible, normal and essential


reform. The traditional right isn't perfect,


it needs to learn from the people around David Cameron, the Cameroons,


about the importance of public services and changing social


attitudes. The Conservative Party has to become a broad centre right


church again. Stretching from the centre to the traditional right. The


party has to speak to Sun, Daily Mail and Times readers. It is what


Margaret Thatcher did with her appeal to the housewives of the


1970s. Can we have two pounds of the smaller ones.


It is what John Major did in 1992 with his message of opportunity for


all. Steak pie boiled. He offered red meat to voters in the form of a


tax cut, but he also represented upwards mobility and classlessness.


Party that didn't just listen to liberals' boom but also heard the


roar of Middle England. My guests are with me now. You set


out your case there, but never the Twain shall actually meet. David


Cameron, it is the social attitudes that he perceives as much as he


finds so difficult to deal with? That is absolutely true. But a lot


of people I think when they are losing arguments start decribing


people in negative pejorative terms. The writer described the


"swivel-eyed loons" and nutcases and so on. I wanted to say in the film


that the right have a problem because they can be caricatured in


that way, but the impact of the welfare state on the poor or


immigration on houses prices or Europe, the right has been


vindicated and must be part of the Conservative coalition. Why do you


think that David Cameron and the modernisers were so unwilling to


listen in the early day, when of course they had not won an election


but gone into a coalition. Why were they so unwilling to listen? We had


reached a stage in this country where a lot of people were


culturally inoculated towards ever voting Conservatives. People thought


there was a nasty mean-spirited element of the party that simply


wasn't reconciled with cultural demographic changes that had


happened in Britain. There are two important things going on here.


First of all I'm interested in the fact that Tim says the right has


been vindicated about all the good things that happened. In the film


and what you just said he didn't mention the single biggest thing


that happened in the British economy in a generation which is the


financial crisis. Just as many people on the left would say the


left is vindicated, and Marxists would say this was a crisis in


capitalism and what did the right say about that. If you go into that


you have the situation where the left, Labour were never going to


take us into the euro, were in favour of welfare reform, all these


things. But the point surely is that David Cameron in a sense is as much


as one end of the spectrum as he would say originally the right was


at the other end of the spectrum. Who so moves? It will be David


Cameron who moves? A dot of the problem, and you're exactly right to


say that the Conservative Party had a big problems. David Cameron


diagnosed it incorrectly from the beginning. He thought the


Conservative Party was too right-wing, that was the bigger


Yorks on all the issues we were discussing those issues are popular.


The problem with the Conservative Party, and that is why John Major


was so successful, they are not seen as the side of the people who are


poor, on the side of the people affected by the financial crisis the


low paid. It is that concern for the blue collar vote, that is when the


Conservative Party dominates the poll. The problem that the


Conservatives have had isn't, the reason they didn't win majority in


2010 isn't because people thought David Cameron was secretly in love


with the European Union or the Conservatives had a real affection


for mass immigration. The situation you have got now isn't that people


think David Cameron believes something that they don't believe,


it is they don't think he believes in anything at all. That is


something people in the Conservative Party also believe? The Conservative


Party hasn't convinced that we understand how tough life for people


is. They like our positions on Europe, crime and immigration, but


who will look after us in tough times. That is the question they are


worried about. Is it not the case to say many grassroots Tories don't


care about same-sex marriage or women bishops in the Church of


England, and annoyed about the delay in the married tax allowance. They


see David Cameron as being of a completely different ilk and that


they can't relate to, and he in a sense can't relate to them. I think


the traditional right has stuff to learn from David Cameron on those


issues. In 2050 Michael Howard says the way t party is going, we have


tested this and we don't have the right model. It seems what you are


saying is they don't have the right model to win majority. They still


don't have the right model. The election to learn from is 1992, when


John Major combined a pretty traditional Conservative recipe on


tax cuts. Remember the tax bombshell campaign, a very Tory message. But


people looked at him and thought that is the upwardly mobile


classless Conservative Party I want to support. They don't see that at


the moment. It is the combination of those da things that will transform


the Conservative Party. In 1992 you didn't have UKIP. There is an


important point here. You had the Referendum Party. The important


point in your film you made the point that the Conservative Party


has to reach out to people voting for UKIP, but there is an enormous


danger that people will see that as the Conservative Party reaching out


to UKIP itself. If there are Lib Dem strategists or Millennium Dome


around Ed Miliband watching this -- or people around Ed Miliband


watching this they will be praying for this. The right themselves are


very divided? They are, and now David Cameron's biggest problem.


Margaret Thatcher won elections in the 1980s because the right was


united and the left divide. If it stays disunited will he win another


election? It would be very hard, he must unite the right to win the next


election. He's doing good things in that direction. It is finding issues


that will appeal to the UKIP voter and the Lib Dem vote e which


includes cost of living and other issues that aren't just the typical


predictable issues. Chel le's presidential elections this year


comes exactly 40 years after the military coup that brought General


Pinochet to power. And the military dictatorship ruled for 17 years. As


much as Chile wants to move on and forget the horrors of this that era.


The shadows are present and amongst the presidential candidates


themselves. The campaign is well under way, with two clear front


runners emerging in the polls. Former President Michelle Bachelet


of the Socialist Party, elected President eight years ago and served


for four. And her main right-wing rival, Evelyn Matthei. That there


are two women running for the top job in a Latin American country is


extraordinary enough. The tale of friendship, betrayal and death


behind the two of them, both daughters of general, brought up


together in the same military base, , however, even stranger.


But the story that links the two presidential candidates is a very


real part of the most turbulent episode of Chile's 20th century


history, that began here at the Presidential Palace 40 years ago.


On September 1 th General Pinochet ordered the bombing of the palace,


at the start of the coup that brought down the democratically


elected Government and socialist president Allende, who died in the


attack. Like most of the military, the then kern knell Fernando


Matadores, father of Evelyn, supported General Pinochet. Before


the coup the family were friends and neighbours of the Bachelet, but


General Alberto Bachelet, here with his family, the young Michelle at


the front, remained loyal to Allende. The era of terror began.


Thousands of supporters of the legitimate Government were rounded


up, imprisoned, tortured and killed. They are all now honoured at the


Museum of Memory in Santiagon. I met with a fellow prisoner with Alberto


Bachelet when he died of a heart attack in 1974. TRANSLATION: Finding


himself striped of his medals and tortured and abused by his


subordinates was a terrible psychological torture in itself.


More painful than any physical abuse he suffered. They carried on, even


though they knew he had already suffered two heart attacks. General


Bachelet died of that torture? TRANSLATION: Absolutely. The for


theure took place at this academy. Evelyn's father was put in charge


here a month before Alberto Bacholet died. Today General Fernando Matti


lives behind the gates here. He turned down the request for an


interview and has denied any involvement in the for theure --


torture and death of his friend, either by act or omission.


TRANSLATION: The accusation against him is not for being the direct


perpetrator of the murder of General Bacholet, but he was obliged under


law to stop or report what was happening. This man is a legal


adviser in the Allende Government, and has failed to get the General to


court. He says the country's laws of immunity make it hard and this is a


particular difficult case. TRANSLATION: If you take into the


account that until there are two presidential candidates, the


daughter of the General and the daughter of the victim, there is a


whole political dynamic involved, which explains why judges refuse to


enforce the law and indict. It is unfair, arbitary, but in Chile we


are used to this kind of thing. Santiagon is littered with grim


reminders of the past. This woman is the director of another former


torture centre. Where, in the garden every rose represents a woman


killed. She barely survived the torture, which involved beatings,


electric shocks and more. TRANSLATION: There was a particular


torture they used against women, like me, who refused to talk, which


involved McVie lent sexual abuse -- violent sexual abuse, I was pregnant


at the time and I lost my baby. They said the country did not need


another baby of a Marxist. The buildings of the time have been


destroyed, but they have built a model of the cell where she was held


blindfolded for weeks at a time, with four others. Michelle Bachelet,


then in her 20s was also held in one of these cells and tortured for her


left-wing beliefs. Which brings us to another mystery in this story.


The reluck tense of so many in Chile, including Michelle Bachelet


herself to talk about what happened in the Pinochet years. Is it an


advantage to your campaign that your main rival's father is being


implicated in the death of yours? I have been speaking about this for


some time, I think it is, I think it is the, I mean we believe that every


candidate has their own history, my history is completely different from


her history. And I hope that our citizens will make the best decision


in terms of who is the person who can interpret better the Chilean


needs. Would Evelyn Matthei say any more?


(Speaks in Spanish) I asked her about the events of 40 years ago and


in particular the case of General Bacholet and her father.


TRANSLATION: I'm not going to answer questions on this topic, obviously


angry. For the past 30 years widows like


Gabriella have performed in public the solitary version of a national


dance that is normally for a couple. To draw attention to Chile's over


1,000 disappeared. TRON My partner was a political secretary in the


Communist Party. They grabbed him off the street and held him in the


prison. I thought they might arrest him, but I never thought they could


make him disappear. Never. There is a monument for those who


were killed but who have no grave, and grieving relatives are angry


that there are members of the military around today who know where


the bodies are. Some people have been in denial for


40 years. The drama of this story of this nightmare is that many of them


are still alive, and do have the information that they are not


willing to give away and to speak. Michelle Bachelet is almost certain


to win this election. Will she do something. TRANSLATION: I think she


should, afterall she's part of this, she had family who died. Let's hope


she does. The call for accountability comes


not only from those who were alive at the time, but as I discovered,


talking to a group of student, from the young as well. TRANSLATION: This


year's elections are strongly connected with the events of the


past. Matthei could be seen as the face of the military Government,


where as Batchelet can be seen as the representative of Allende, it


opens all the old wounds of supporters.


Pinochet's office is now a museum, the general himself was arrested in


London, but never brought to trial in Chile to face charges of torture


and murder. Other senior military figures are in jail, but many more


have not been tried for crimes even with Pinochet's own spokesman


admits. TRANSLATION: The internal conflicts of a country are usually


tremenduously cruel. And we try to avoid excesses all all times. But we


had to fight the extremist movement, and in this kind of fight, you


always make mistakes and commit atrocities and excesses. The odds


are on Michelle Bachelet returning here as President, this time there


will be a lot more pressure on her to tackle the Pinochet legacy.


That's just about all for this Hallowe'en night. Be careful out


there, good night. (Michael Jackson's thriller)


# The foulest stench is in the air # The funk of 40,000 years


# And grizzly ghouls from every tomb # Are closing in to seal your doom


# And though you fight # To stay alive


# Your body starts to shiver # For no mere mortal can resist


# The evil of the Thriller (scary laughter)


Further bouts of wet and windy weather will sweep across all areas


over the next few day, the rain on Friday will eratically head its way


north and eastwards across England and Wales. Where as for a good part


of Scotland and Northern Ireland, the winds will be lighter than today


and spells of sunshine. Maybe just one or two scattered showers,


frequent showers in western Scotland where the wind will remain strong.


For eastern and southern Scotland dry and bright with sunshine. Good


to start off with sunshine over north-east England, the rain will


trickle in here come the afternoon. It will be dull and damp for most of


the day across the Midlands. Dryer spells across East Anglia and the


south-east, here the rain could get quite heavy on Friday evening. And


the wind will start to strengthen also along the south coast. It will


be overcast with outbreaks of rain, for most of the day across


south-west England and also a fairly wet day for Wales. As I said that


rain could get heavy across the south-east on Friday evening before


clearing away. Which will allow another batch of wet weather to


sweep across areas on Saturday. It will also be accompanied by strong


and gusty winds. Sunshine developing later on Saturday, but only once we


have got rid of the heavy downpour, which will sweep in it looks like


from the Atlantic, a dry start on the east the rain will soon come and


accompanied by the wind, getting stronger and


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Kirsty Wark, including the latest revelations in the phone hacking trial, music streaming service Spotify on its relationship with musicians, and Chile's presidential elections.

Download Subtitles