This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7348364.stm

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Pair 'tried to blackmail royal' Pair 'tried to blackmail royal'
(about 1 hour later)
Two men tried to blackmail a member of the Royal Family with a sound recording containing claims he had performed a gay sex act, a court has heard.Two men tried to blackmail a member of the Royal Family with a sound recording containing claims he had performed a gay sex act, a court has heard.
The Old Bailey was told that Ian Strachan and Sean McGuigan demanded £50,000 from the unidentified royal, known in court as Witness A.The Old Bailey was told that Ian Strachan and Sean McGuigan demanded £50,000 from the unidentified royal, known in court as Witness A.
The recordings featured a man who had been employed by the royal.The recordings featured a man who had been employed by the royal.
Mr Strachan, 31, of Fulham, and Mr McGuigan, 41, of Battersea, both London, deny blackmail charges.Mr Strachan, 31, of Fulham, and Mr McGuigan, 41, of Battersea, both London, deny blackmail charges.
Mobile phoneMobile phone
Mark Ellison QC, prosecuting, said the recordings contained "scandalous and disparaging remarks" about other royals.Mark Ellison QC, prosecuting, said the recordings contained "scandalous and disparaging remarks" about other royals.
The recordings also featured allegations of "impropriety" in business by the royal.The recordings also featured allegations of "impropriety" in business by the royal.
The recordings were made by Mr Strachan on Mr McGuigan's mobile phone in early 2007 and downloaded on to a computer, the jury heard.The recordings were made by Mr Strachan on Mr McGuigan's mobile phone in early 2007 and downloaded on to a computer, the jury heard.
The identity of those who featured in the material was clearly recognised to be integral to its value or 'selling point' Mark Ellison QCThe identity of those who featured in the material was clearly recognised to be integral to its value or 'selling point' Mark Ellison QC
The court heard that much of the eight hours of audio and video footage was made when the man was drunk or "under the influence of other substances".The court heard that much of the eight hours of audio and video footage was made when the man was drunk or "under the influence of other substances".
Mr Ellison said: "There were three audio files of the man apparently asserting that the member of the Royal Family who employed him had performed an act of oral sex on him."Mr Ellison said: "There were three audio files of the man apparently asserting that the member of the Royal Family who employed him had performed an act of oral sex on him."
The material would have the obvious potential to "cause embarrassment and hurt to his employer" and a number of other members of the extended Royal Family if it was published, Mr Ellison said.The material would have the obvious potential to "cause embarrassment and hurt to his employer" and a number of other members of the extended Royal Family if it was published, Mr Ellison said.
'Selling point' Mr Strachan is alleged to have approached the Sun, the News of the World, the Sunday Express, the Mail on Sunday and publicist Max Clifford in an attempt to sell the material between March and July 2007.
Mr Strachan is alleged to have approached newspapers and a leading publicist in an attempt to sell the material in March and July 2007.
Mr Ellison said: "The identity of those who featured in the material, as well as the salacious content of it, was clearly recognised to be integral to its value or 'selling point'."Mr Ellison said: "The identity of those who featured in the material, as well as the salacious content of it, was clearly recognised to be integral to its value or 'selling point'."
'Blatant lie'
When they had failed to sell the material the defendants decided to "turn their attention from the media to Witness A himself", Mr Ellison said.When they had failed to sell the material the defendants decided to "turn their attention from the media to Witness A himself", Mr Ellison said.
He said their actions from their first contact with Witness A until their arrest after a meeting with an undercover officer on 11 September "proves that they were together both engaged in blackmail". The court was told Mr Strachan contacted a friend of the royal and claimed to have been offered between £75,000 and £100,000 for the material, which was a "blatant lie" said Mr Ellison.
A meeting was arranged at the Hilton Hotel in London's Park Lane on 11 September.
But, unknown to Mr Strachan and Mr McGuigan, it was with an undercover police officer rather than a representative of the royal.
Mr Ellison said the actions of the men from their first contact with Witness A until their arrest after the meeting "proves that they were together both engaged in blackmail".
Mr Strachan and Mr McGuigan are charged with making "an unwarranted demand with menaces" of £50,000.Mr Strachan and Mr McGuigan are charged with making "an unwarranted demand with menaces" of £50,000.
The hearing continues.The hearing continues.