Prince Harry v The Mirror in phone hacking case

I’m a bit confused here. It has been said on this thread that this case is not about phone hacking as such, as that has already been proven, but it is about who knew that phone hacking was taking place, in other words if the senior management at the newspaper knew and accepted phone hacking. Looking at the evidence given by Prince Harry, if it can be called evidence because to me it seems to be merely his opinions and not in any way actual evidence, but looking at that, it seems to me that the case is actually about whether or not Harry was hacked. I’m confused. Maybe GSM can help.

It seems to me from reading the witness statement (prepared by his solicitors after zoom calls - I was astounded that they refer to king as HRH) and the snippets about the trial I’ve heard on the news, that a lot of people had a lot of information about Harry. So much is about leaving voicemails with private information on them - I can’t speak for anyone else but I find that very surprising - who has their phone on their person, inaccessible to anyone else, 24/7? There seems to be much opportunity for someone else to be involved in the group of trusted people who knew things - for instance booking an airline flight is not a conversation between his private secretary and the chief of the airline; others would legitimately have access to that information and leak it for £££.

Obviously one can’t form a proper view on the basis of the information that we have, but the judge will look at each allegation separately and he only has to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that in one case information was obtained by hacking.

I do hope that where there is clear evidence of phone-hacking, this despicable practice attracts an appropriate, severe punishment which will act as a clear deterrent. In Harry's case, in many of his 33 alleged incidents there appears to be the possibility that "other sources" could have divulged the information, and some of it seems to have already been in the public domain. As for him only having to prove one case to achieve a finding in his favour, I'm not sure what the legal position is on that. Do all the other rejected cases bring his entire submission into "reasonable doubt", and if so, how does that effect the Judge's deliberations? Time will tell, but it's certainly not clear to me how this might develop.

Callistemon21

Iam64

Callistemon, I heard on the news that there are other claimants but the cost of proceedings is prohibitive. They will follow if PH succeeds. That’s why the Mirror has to win

Oh, thanks.

I'm semi-following and knew Harry's and 3 others were a test case.
If he and the others win there could be quite a deluge then.

I think Elton John, Doreen Lawrence and Liz Hurley are also part of this "test" case bit.

It continues today.

That seems pretty poor to me, 'on the balance of probability' when his evidence about phone hacking is so inaccurate. That phone hacking did happen has not been disputed; whether it happened to Harry is open to dispute when so many other sources published stories first .

eazybee

From what I have heard via the BBC and newspaper Harry has presented little evidence to show that his phone was hacked for information about his movements; most of the information was already known. He does not seem to have prepared his case well.

Harry only has to persuade the judge that, taking all the available evidence in to account, at least one case of hacking occurred (out of the 33 incidents cited) "on the balance of probability'" in order to win his case.

From what I have heard via the BBC and newspaper Harry has presented little evidence to show that his phone was hacked for information about his movements; most of the information was already known. He does not seem to have prepared his case well.

Iam64

Callistemon, I heard on the news that there are other claimants but the cost of proceedings is prohibitive. They will follow if PH succeeds. That’s why the Mirror has to win

Oh, thanks.

I'm semi-following and knew Harry's and 3 others were a test case.
If he and the others win there could be quite a deluge then.

Ok, so not equal with mind readers.

Callistemon, I heard on the news that there are other claimants but the cost of proceedings is prohibitive. They will follow if PH succeeds. That’s why the Mirror has to win

Mollygo

RW
Oh. No expertise in that area. That’s OK.

Nope i have no expertise in reading Harry's mind or anyone's mind in fact.

Iam64

I understand the legal complexities. The moral complexities are more straightforward. The tabloids hacked, cheated and caused huge distress. Wrong.

It certainly is wrong, distressing and immoral as well as illegal.

However, a claimant will not win their case if their testimony is proved to be unreliable.
There are other claimants - I did ask if this is a joint claim?
Does anyone know?

Germanshepherdsmum

How many here have read his witness statement?

Ok I admit I gave up somewhere around page 18😳

The thing that struck me was that in each of the incidents there were any number of people who legitimately knew the information he says could only have been hacked , like Christ’s arrival at the airport or his parties. Any one of them could have passed information on.

I’d be really interested in your take on it.

RW
Oh. No expertise in that area. That’s OK.

Mollygo

Mollygo
WR
How do you know he's thinking all of this?

How do you know he isn’t ?
That is such a stupid question? How old are you?

I haven't written a whole unhinged paragraph claiming that I know what's going on his mind.
No you just asked a stupid question? In fact, you asked two stupid questions.

And I notice you couldn’t answer my question.

Have I claimed that I know what he's thinking because I don't read minds.

How many here have read his witness statement?

Mollygo
WR
How do you know he's thinking all of this?

How do you know he isn’t ?
That is such a stupid question? How old are you?

I haven't written a whole unhinged paragraph claiming that I know what's going on his mind.
No you just asked a stupid question? In fact, you asked two stupid questions.

And I notice you couldn’t answer my question.

The journalist being questioned after Harry had to be ordered to attend court. Jane Kerr says she doesn't remember who she asked to get information for her, but she's sure it would have been legal. She missed a few people off her list. Harry's case begins to look much better.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

WR
How do you know he's thinking all of this?

How do you know he isn’t ?

I think the judge will rule in favour of Harry who again played the Diana card.

I do believe his phone was hacked, this doesn’t change my opinion of him, dislike him very much.

Iam64

I understand the legal complexities. The moral complexities are more straightforward. The tabloids hacked, cheated and caused huge distress. Wrong.

I agree.

nanna8

Harry clearly adores the press but only when it is feeding his ego and going his way. He doesn’t like it when they turn against him. Who is he waving to when he attends court cases, coronations etc? Just wondering, though I suppose it is his massive fan base. I really don’t think he ‘gets’ that he is not the most popular horse in the stable, he is clearly not tuned in to what people think of him after that ghastly book.

How do you know he's thinking all of this

I understand the legal complexities. The moral complexities are more straightforward. The tabloids hacked, cheated and caused huge distress. Wrong.

It’s the burden of proof that’s going to be the problem for Harry, with him claiming he was hacked two years before he owned a mobile and such like. I think I’ll wait for the judgement.