Prince Harry trial – latest: Phone hacking claim looks at 147 articles on Duke of Sussex
Third day of Duke of Sussex’s trial against Mirror publisher is underway
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.As the third day of Prince Harry’s hearing against the Mirror Group Newspapers (MGM) resumed today, the court heard that there are 147 articles on the Duke of Sussex involved.
Discussing Harry’s case, his lawyer David Sherborne said out of the 147 articles, 33 are being examined in the trial - in his claim.
He said: “The Duke of Sussex, one of the most prominently covered individuals by the defendant’s titles... [MGN]’s case is throughout the entire period... there was only one occasion of unlawful information gathering.”
In written submissions, Mr Sherborne said the duke’s claim covered the period 1995 to 2011 and is “significant not just in terms of the span but also the range of activities”.
The barrister previously alleged that those responsible for management and finances of the company “were well aware of what was going on”.
The claims brought forward by four individuals, including Harry, include phone hacking, securing information through deception - also known as “blagging” - and hiring private investigators for unlawful activities.
‘Barely any evidence’ for ‘extraordinarily wide claims’, Mirror publisher’s lawyer says
The four claimants in the trial have made “extraordinarily wide claims” about phone hacking and unlawful information gathering, Mirror Group Newspapers’ lawyer Andrew Green KC told the court.
“The claimants now seek to make sweeping allegations of unlawful information gathering against a vast number of third party suppliers, private investigators or otherwise,” Mr Green said.
“Despite the obvious seriousness of these allegations, and the range of third parties against whom they are made, the claimants have served barely any evidence to support them, or the other claims of unlawful information gathering made against third party suppliers.”
The barrister added: “In the vast majority of cases, the allegations are denied and no evidence supporting them has been served.”
At the start of the case, an MGN spokesperson said: “Where historical wrongdoing has taken place we have made admissions, take full responsibility and apologise unreservedly, but we will vigorously defend against allegations of wrongdoing where our journalists acted lawfully.”
Meghan Markle is ‘cuckoo’ in royal nest and her ‘woke hang-ups’ will destroy marriage, claims Labour grandee
Away from the trial brought by Prince Harry, former Labour minister Chris Mullin has claimed that his wife Meghan Markle is a “cuckoo” in the royal nest and her “woke Californian hang-ups” are likely to destroy their marriage.
The claims are contained in Mullin’s latest memoir, Didn’t You Use To Be Chris Mullin?, which is being serialised exclusively in The Independent:
‘Prince Andrew’s official trade missions were like rugby club tours’
In the third exclusive extract of his secret political diaries, Chris Mullin reveals all about being stared at by a grumpy late Queen, a faux pas with Judy Murray... and his fears for Prince Harry’s future
Voices | Prince Harry is not going to settle
Giving his take from the High Court yesterday, our columnist Tom Peck wrote:
Sherborne’s opening speech could easily have been a casting meeting for I’m A Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here! circa 2003.
What was happening at the tabloids back then is not seriously contested. Private investigators used the well-known and regularly unchanged default PINs of the big mobile phone companies to secretly listen to the voicemails of celebrities to get stories about them. It was so laughably easy it barely felt like a crime, but sadly it was. And it had terrible consequences.
Almost all of its victims have settled out of court, taken the money, and most of it from News International. But not all of them. Some have taken it all the way to court, in which the actual human consequences of what must have seemed like a bit of fun at the time were made clear. Paul Gascoigne, for example, has spoken of the deeply troubling impact of, say, arranging to go to a restaurant with a close family member, and then turning up to find photographers hanging around outside. The only way they can possibly have known, he thought, is through deliberate betrayal. It is not long before you stop trusting everyone, which is simply no way to live.
But Harry is not going to settle. He is not interested in any kind of out-of-court payment. He is going to go on to the end, in a fight that he believes, with some justification, is a kind of vengeance for his mother’s death.
Watch: Piers Morgan says he refuses to take ‘lectures on privacy’ from Prince Harry
A timeline of Prince Harry’s legal battles
The legal battle with Mirror Group Newspapers is just one of several in which the Duke of Sussex has been involved in recent years.
In the below article, Jess Glass provides a timeline of the actions brought against the Splash News and Picture Agency, the Home Office, and the publishers of the Daily Mail, Sun and Daily Mirror:
Phone hacking and Home Office: What legal claims has Prince Harry been involved in?
Harry is involved in a number of legal actions, including a trial against Mirror Group Newspapers which restarts today
Harry “did not have an expectation of privacy” over Nazi punishment story
The Duke of Sussex did not have an “expectation of privacy” over a report he was allegedly punished by the King for dressing up as a Nazi, The Mirror’s publisher has told the High Court.
Several high-profile figures are bringing claims against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) over alleged unlawful information gathering at its titles The Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People.
Claims brought by four individuals, including the duke, are being heard in a seven-week trial as “representative” cases of the types of allegations facing the publisher – including voicemail interception, securing information through deception and hiring private investigators for unlawful activities.
The High Court in London previously heard the duke’s case is that 148 articles published between 1996 and 2010 by MGN titles included information that was allegedly obtained through unlawful means, including phone hacking.
Mr Justice Fancourt previously ruled that 33 of the articles should be considered at the trial.
On the second day of the case on Thursday, details of each of the 33 articles and MGN’s response to them were made public.
MGN denies Harry details were sourced unlawfully
The subjects of the articles in the case include Harry’s relationship with his family and ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy, a few injuries and illnesses, his military service and allegations of drug use.
MGN repeatedly denied that details contained in various articles published during Harry’s life was private information belonging to the duke.
It defended some of its reporting by alleging a “public interest” in stories or claimed published information was “trivial” in nature.
In the document put into the case by the publisher’s lawyers, the court heard that one of the articles in Harry’s claim, published in the Sunday Mirror in February 2005, said that the duke had been made to do farm work by Charles – the then-Prince of Wales – after wearing a Nazi uniform at a party.
Andrew Green KC, for MGN, denied the details in the article had been sourced unlawfully or through phone hacking.
He said: “The information complained of came from prior reports in the public domain. The other information in the article came from a confidential source.”
“Harry took drugs” story included in claim
Another article in the duke’s claim was published in the Sunday Mirror in January 2002 under the headline “Harry took drugs” which alleged the duke had smoked cannabis.
MGN said the information came from a set of articles published in the now-defunct News Of The World, which were widely followed up.
Mr Green continued: “The palace had confirmed the story to the News Of The World, after the Prince of Wales decided to co-operate with the title.”
The barrister said that quotes from royal sources and family friends “were, it is to be inferred, authorised by the palace … in an effort to manage the story”.
He added: “A senior member of the royal family does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in taking illegal drugs, particularly when he did so at a public house in combination with illegally drinking alcohol underage.”
More stories in Duke of Sussex claim
Other articles at the centre of Harry’s claim include:
– A September 1996 Daily Mirror story with the headline “Diana so sad on Harry’s big day” which the publisher said came from “prior reports” in the public domain.
– A Daily Mirror story from November 2000 about Harry breaking his thumb, which MGN said “came from extensive prior reports in the public domain and had been disclosed to the press by the palace”.
– A Sunday Mirror article entitled “Rugger Off Harry”, published in November 2001 about an injury he had is also in the duke’s claim and is attributed to a “confidential Eton source” and not illegal methods by MGN.
– A March 2002 piece in the Daily Mirror about Harry’s diagnosis with glandular fever, which MGN said it was “likely that information was discreetly released by the palace” in advance of a family trip to Switzerland.
Lawyers for the duke said that unlawful information gathering by MGN journalists was “habitual and widespread” amid a “flood of illegality” and that Harry’s case is “significant not just in terms of the span but also the range of activities”.
David Sherborne, for Harry, said on Wednesday: “We all remember the images of him walking behind his mother’s coffin.
“From that moment on, as a schoolboy and from his career in the army and as a young adult he was subjected, it was clear, to the most intrusive methods of obtaining his personal information.
“Prince or not, the blatantly unlawful and illegal methods used by the defendants … was quite frankly appalling.”
While today’s hearing has concluded, my colleagues will be back with further live updates tomorrow.
To read more of our articles on the trial, you can click here, or else simply keep scrolling to catch up on the day’s events, as we reported them.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments