Amelia Hill

A busy time for Amelia Hill, Special Investigations Correspondent for The Guardian. Amelia, 37, seems to have started in journalism at the Glasgow Herald and Scotland on Sunday, where she spent three years, before moving to The Observer in 2000.

This week it was revealed that she was interviewed under caution (not arrested) by officers from Operation Weeting. A Guardian spokesman said "We can confirm Amelia Hill has been questioned in connection with an investigation into alleged leaks. On a broader point, journalists would no doubt be concerned if the police sought to criminalise conversations between off-record sources and reporters.” Last month a 51-year-old detective was arrested and suspended by the Met.

Here's one of Amelia's tweets from April.

Amelia's due to speak at the International Press Institute's World Congress in Taipei at the end of the month, explaining how she gets "inside access to normally confidential situations".

And if you (or Amelia) miss that session, there's a chance to sign up for her Workshop on October 18th on how to get stories into papers - £375 plus VAT will give you all the answers.

29.05.2012 Update: Alison Levitt for the DPP has decided Amelia will face no charges:

Between 4 April 2011 and 18 August 2011, Ms. Hill wrote ten articles which were published in The Guardian. I am satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to establish that these articles contained confidential information derived from Operation Weeting, including the names of those who had been arrested. I am also satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to establish that the police officer disclosed that information to Ms Hill..... 


 So far as Ms Hill is concerned, the public interest served by her alleged conduct was that she was working with other journalists on a series of articles which, taken together, were capable of disclosing the commission of criminal offences, were intended to hold others to account, including the Metropolitan Police Service and the Crown Prosecution Service, and were capable of raising and contributing to an important matter of public debate, namely the nature and extent of the influence of the media. The alleged overall criminality is the breach of the Data Protection Act, but, as already noted, any damage caused by Ms. Hill's alleged disclosure was minimal. In the circumstances, I have decided that in her case, the public interest outweighs the overall criminality alleged.