Prince Harry v The Mirror in phone hacking case

Anniebach

The press have been hostile to him since he was born ! ! ! !

Why do you think that might be?

Sorry, but hacking private phone calls is wrong.

My private phone calls aren't worth hacking, but I would be mortified if some, covering years, were made public.

We all say things, thinking them private, and don't want them exposed.

I felt the same about Charles and Tampon-gate, and Diana and Squidygate.

I had no time for either of them, but those intercepted phone calls were toe-curling.

People, whoever they are, need some privacy.

However, apparently he was asked what he wanted to be called in court, and Just Harry chose to be called Prince Harry. Funny how titles are important in some situations isn’t it?

Louella12

I trust the legal bods concerned remembered to call him His Royal Highness at the start of play

He isn't an HRH any more.

The Queen said they’re not allowed to use their HRH styles when they left the royal family to become commercial.

I trust the legal bods concerned remembered to call him His Royal Highness at the start of play

And clearly people’s pronouncements on the Daily Mail, or other newspapers, is purely opinion.

The evidence from the past suggests that Prince Harry has little understanding of the truth. Some of what he has said in the past is lies, other things he has said are his truth. Which basically means his opinions. Opinions don’t carry much weight in court, facts carry weight.

Obviously you can believe what you read in the papers then.

Prince Harry accuses tabloids of casting him as 'Thicko.

And?

(I'll stop now.)

Ladyleftfieldlover

Sorry eazybee. The right wing press in this country is appalling. If you don’t believe me read the front page of the Daily Mail online. Unbelievable.

I don't think the Daily Mirror is rightwing!

Who would you trust more - Prince Harry or Piers Morgan? 🤔
Between a rock and a hard place.

Callistemon21

Glorianny

Can we correct some of the misinformation on this thread please. The Mirror has not admitted to hacking Harry's phone.
Their KC
Andrew Green KC said there was no evidence that hacking of Harry’s phone took place. “Zilch, zero, nil, de nada, niente, nothing,” he said.

To coin a phrase:

"Well, he would say that, wouldn't he"

I love that phrase!! It conveys so much.

Glorianny

Can we correct some of the misinformation on this thread please. The Mirror has not admitted to hacking Harry's phone.
Their KC
Andrew Green KC said there was no evidence that hacking of Harry’s phone took place. “Zilch, zero, nil, de nada, niente, nothing,” he said.

To coin a phrase:

"Well, he would say that, wouldn't he"

Before, probably.

The press have been hostile to him since he was born ! ! ! !

I don't read the Daily Mail but I see it quoted here and I don't agree it that it is appalling. It may produce views you don't agree with but that is not the same thing as appalling.

I thought there were three other complainants but I may be wrong; it is still about one man pursuing a vendetta against the press; the other 99, possibly, won't get much attention.

And the royal family never comment on the Government.
I can't imagine who advised him.

The point is that it’s all opinion. Courts deal in facts.

Sorry eazybee. The right wing press in this country is appalling. If you don’t believe me read the front page of the Daily Mail online. Unbelievable.

easybee you mean one man and the other 99 people involved in the complaint.

The press in some other countries is much worse than it is here.

It’s being reported that Harry has said the press and British government are at ‘rock bottom.’ He may or may not be correct, but isn’t this opinion? I don’t understand the link between him pursuing a case alleging phone hacking and who knew, and the condition of the British government, which may well be at rock bottom, but what’s it got to do with his phone hacking allegations?

I don't think our press does behave in a terrible way; those who transgress are held to account.
But I suppose it depends on what sort of press you read.

And this case isn't about the press in general; it is about a very privileged and very stupid man waging a personal vendetta against the press and blaming every perceived misfortune in his life on them.

Apparently the burden of proof required for Harry to be successful is only (sic) "on the balance of probability" (51%+), rather than "beyond reasonable doubt" (difficult to ascribe a precise number to it, but have seen it described as at least 90%).

Clearly that must make his case far more potentially winnable for Harry.

Maybe he though he'd be swearing to tell his truth, his whole truth and nothing but his truth Lathyrus.

eazybee

William who underwent the same treatment, and Catherine appear to have survived the intrusion into their private lives, as has King Charles.

I am not condoning the press intrusion, but feel that they have preserved their dignity, whereas Harry appears, according to today's testimony, all 55 pages worth, to be throwing himself to the wolves.

Is preserving dignity more important than fighting against the terrible way our press behaves? My father worked with the families of murder victims and the press were so cruel and intrusive. I don't care about Charles dignity to be honest.

Given that he has sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, I think he has put himself in a position where he could be accused of perjury.

I’m surprised that a statement that consists mostly of speculation, opinion and invective has been allowed but perhaps that is a defence tactic to thereby discredit any aspect of his statement.
On the premise that if some can be shown to be fiction, all is in doubt.