Prince Harry says UK court battle ‘not just about me’

Prince Harry struck a chord as he gave evidence on Wednesday in his trial against the publisher of the Daily Mail and insisted that the latest legal battle and Associated Newspapers Ltd. “it was in the public interest.”

Harry and six other celebrities, including Elton John and actress Elizabeth Hurley, say the publisher invaded their privacy by engaging in “a clear, systematic and ongoing practice of illegal data collection” for two decades, said lawyer David Sherborne. Those celebrities allege that the company illegally spied on them by hiring private investigators to hack into their phones, bug their cars and access confidential records. Testimony from several private investigators, who say they work for Associated Newspapers, will be used in the trial.

Associated Newspapers Ltd. denied these allegations, called them nonsense and said that the 50 or so articles in question were reported by official sources including those close to them who are willing to inform their famous friends.

Harry said in his 23-page witness statement that he was saddened and disturbed by the intrusion into his childhood life by the Mail and its sister publication the Mail on Sunday, and that it had left him “bewildered beyond belief.” Harry also alleged that the lives of “thousands of people” were “attacked” by the Associated “because of greed.”

“Obviously there is a personal element to bringing this claim, it’s motivated by truth, justice and accountability, but it’s not just about me,” Harry said in a written statement released as he entered the witness box. Under the English civil court system, witnesses give written evidence, and after asserting the truth they are quickly cross-examined. “I am determined to hold the Associated accountable, for everyone’s sake … I believe that will help the community.”

Hot cross examination

Harry, dressed in a black suit, held a small Bible in his right hand at London’s High Court and swore “to God Almighty that the evidence I will give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” After the Duke of Sussex said he preferred to be called Prince Harry, he admitted his 23-page statement was true and accurate.

Defense lawyer Antony White, in a calm and gentle manner, began to ask Harry questions to determine if the availability of these articles, in fact, came from royal writers working their sources at official events or from friends or associates of the prince. Harry said his “social media circles weren’t leaking” and denied suggestions he had been comfortable with reporters who sheltered the royal family.

Harry suggested that the information came from wiretapping her or that private investigators had set her up. He said journalist Katie Nicholl had the luxury of using the term “anonymous source” to cover up illegal investigative measures.

“If you complain, they criticize you with the repetition of my experience,” he said, explaining why he did not object to the articles at the time.

As the soft-spoken Harry began to defend himself, White said: “I mean for you to take no ill of me, but it’s my job to ask you these questions.”

In the end, Justice Matthew Nicklin intervened in the tense back-and-forth and told Harry not to argue with the defense attorney as he tried to explain what it’s like to live under what he called “24-hour surveillance.” Nicklin also reminded Harry that he “doesn’t have to bear the burden of arguing the case today.”

At one point during the interview, Harry was seen in tears as he said the tabloids had made his wife Meghan’s life “a complete misery.” Harry said before ongoing media attacks it led to the couple’s decision to leave royal life again to the US in 2020.

Harry’s media crusade

Harry has had what he called an “uncomfortable relationship” with the media for decades, but he kept mum and followed the family rule of “never complain, never explain,” he said.

The trial is part of Harry’s self-proclaimed mission to change media coverage of his mother’s death, Princess Dianawho died in a car accident in 1997 while being followed by paparazzi in Paris.

He said the “relentless vicious attacks,” harassment and racist articles about Meghan, who is mixed-race, pushed her to break away from family culture to the end. sue the media.

This is Harry’s second time testifying after he broke House of Windsor tradition and became the first royal officer to testify in court in over a century when he represented the publisher of the Daily Mirror in 2023.

Last year, on the eve of another planned trial, Rupert Murdoch’s UK tabloid publisher NGN. he agreed to pay Harry “substantial damages” for privacy violations, including phone hacking.

The trial is expected to last nine weeks and a written decision could be issued a few months later.

“If Harry wins this case, it will give him a sense … that he wasn’t always confused,” Royah Nikkhah, royal editor of the Sunday Times and a CBS News contributor, said. he told CBS News on Monday. “If Harry loses this case, it’s a big risk for him, not just in terms of costs, but in terms of pushing all the way to court and not wanting to settle. So we have to wait and see, but it’s a big risk for Harry.”