Key Takeaways:
- Prince Harry is suing the Daily Mail and its sister newspaper for alleged privacy invasion and unlawful information gathering.
- The case, which is expected to last nine weeks, involves claims of phone hacking, bugging, and eavesdropping on phone calls.
- Harry is joined by other celebrities, including Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, and Sadie Frost, who also claim to have been victims of the tabloids’ alleged wrongdoing.
- The case is part of Harry’s mission to reform the media, which he blames for the death of his mother, Princess Diana, and the harassment of his wife, Meghan.
- The defense argues that the claims are based on weak inferences and that the newspapers’ sources were often "leaky" friends and associates of the claimants.
Introduction to the Case
The third and final round in Prince Harry’s battle with the British tabloids has begun, with his lawyer alleging that the Daily Mail and its sister newspaper engaged in a "clear, systematic and sustained use of unlawful information gathering" for two decades. Attorney David Sherborne said that a longstanding culture of hiring private investigators who practiced "dark arts" to spy on celebrities for scoops had left Harry distressed and isolated. The intrusions were "terrifying" for his loved ones, created a "massive strain" on his personal relationships, and the distrust and suspicion they caused left Harry "paranoid beyond belief," Sherborne said.
The Trial Begins
The trial in London’s High Court is expected to last nine weeks and will see the return of Harry to the witness box for the second time since he made history in 2023 by becoming the first senior member of the royal family to testify in more than a century. Harry, wearing a dark blue suit, cheerfully waved at reporters as he entered the court building via a side entrance. He took a seat in the back row of the courtroom near Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost as Elton John watched the proceedings online. The case in the High Court follows two cases Harry brought against the other major tabloids that grew out of the widespread phone hacking scandal in which some journalists intercepted voicemail messages around the turn of this century.
The Defense’s Argument
The defense argues that the lawsuits are based on weak inferences by trying to connect articles to payments made to investigators. Defense lawyer Antony White said that witnesses, from editors to reporters who have worked for the newspapers for decades, were "lining up" to dispute the allegations and explain their sources, which he said were often very close to the subjects of the articles. White wrote in his opening statement that the claims involve "jumping to conclusions based on insufficient evidence, or worse, artificially selecting and presenting evidence to fit the preconceived agenda." He also said that references in articles to a "friend" or similar as a source can be accurate, and that royal press officers, publicists, and freelance journalists and photographers were also good sources.
The Claimants’ Case
Sherborne said that the company’s vigorous denials, destruction of records, and "masses upon masses of missing documents" had prevented the claimants from learning what the newspapers had done. "They swore that they were a clean ship," Sherborne said. "Associated knew that these emphatic denials were not true. … They knew they had skeletons in their closet." Sherborne said that his clients had not been aware they were phone hacking victims until private eye Gavin Burrows came forward in 2021 to help those he targeted. Burrows said he "must have done hundreds of jobs" for the Mail between 2000 and 2005, Sherborne said in a previous hearing. However, Burrows has since disavowed that sworn statement and said he never worked for the Mail.
The Significance of the Case
The case is part of Harry’s self-proclaimed mission to reform the media, which he blames for the death of his mother, Princess Diana, who was killed in a car crash in 1997 while being pursued by paparazzi in Paris. He also said that persistent press attacks on his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, led them to leave royal life and move to the United States in 2020. The litigation is also significant because it involves tens of millions of dollars in damages and could have implications for the way the media operates in the UK. The case is expected to be closely watched, not just because of the high-profile claimants involved, but also because of the potential consequences for the media industry as a whole.
