Harry is in town to fight against the Daily Mail - VIDEO

[vera99]

I'm sure we will all wish him well fighting the good fight against the Fail !
https://twitter.com/elliecostelloTV/status/1640274470395838465

There is a good case to be made against the press but he should not be the person leading the charge or else the case gets lost upon the basis that a less than noble individual is derailing it, for his own publicity, to the detriment of other claimants who deserve so much better out of it.
Before anybody claims that his presence is raising the profile of the case then they should know that it does not matter a jot within the court room.

Sure that was him in the M25 this morning with the SPG bikes and protection detail he says he doesn’t get 🤦🏻‍♂️

Claiming that your family is racist causing a huge loss of goodwill in the Commonwealth and letting that fester for a year before confirming it to be untrue all along.

The institution does have a racism problem, even Piers Morgan said so. He never said it was untrue. He just said he didn’t use the word racist. Which they didn’t. Unconscious bias sometimes leads to inappropriate questions like someone did, but racism is when you ignore someone telling you it’s offensive and continue to do it. I’m mixed race and the skin colour of me and my siblings, all different shades, has been much discussed and often in dehumanising ways. I know exactly what they meant and so did many biracial people of the commonwealth.

I can't believe I'm defending Harry...but...this is completely separate from whatever else he gets up to.

There appears to have been illegal activity by the press and this deserves to go through the right legal channels.

I'm sure they care. You can care. But until I hear something different, it's more of the same stuff. Christopher Jeffries is suing the Sun. That could be interesting - what he went through was dreadful. Or it could just be him ordering take out.
I've been very clear. Hacking is wrong. What the Dowlers went through was awful. No one should have their privacy compromised like that. If the case against the newspapers and journalists is proven, they should be punished, as have so many before them. But it's not news. Nothing that happened today is worth talking about. It might be at some stage but not yet.
So inevitably, if the old news doesn't interest, your eye moves to things that do. Like Harry's coiffure. My suggestion would be to redden the scalp so it didn't look quite so obvious. See, I'm not being negative, I'm being helpful.

Before anybody claims that his presence is raising the profile of the case then they should know that it does not matter a jot within the court room

But it needs to be reported on. Which it is because of the likes of not only Harry, but Elton John. And that is the point being made. What happens in the court room will be the course of Justice.

This was a directions hearing which means that his presence was unnecessary. Given his problems with the media are ongoing and the fact that he has several lawsuits on the go at once in which a lack of honesty has sometimes been flagged as concerning, was his attendance beneficial to the group as a whole?

In terms of trial-by-media, even though it will be disregarded inside the courtroom, on account of his situation, he has done the other claimants a disservice by using this particular case to raise his own profile by appearing in person.

You can care. But until I hear something different, it's more of the same stuff. Christopher Jeffries is suing the Sun. That could be interesting - what he went through was dreadful. Or it could just be him ordering take out.

What an awful thing to say. That poor man's life was ruined.

For clarity are you suggesting that the actions if proven correct of the Daily Mail are justified?

My position, and the position of many on this thread, is that engaging in illegal methods to obtain information is well… illegal (regardless of the popularity of the subject - in this case Harry is unpopular with you).

Many seem (not you exactly) to be arguing

• well it’s not really a big deal
• he wasn’t hacked that much he really shouldn’t complain
• other people were hacked more and they aren’t complaining
• he’s spoken about private things so why is he complaining about people breaking the law to get information
• this happened years ago why is he complaining about it now

I use the other claimants as examples to show how ridiculous these arguments are.

Oh, Mr Plitvice thinks so too and he would understand it better than anyone on this thread 😉

@Roussette
His own reasons being the press and their underhand illegalactivities. Not the money. He refused it.

What money was offered to him by ANL for phone hacking? I've seen settlement discussions over a libel complaint but not the hacking? Have they all been offered settlements? Because I thought ANL were saying they were out of time.

Agree with everything you have said @Bluespecsandshoes

I just can’t imagine being such an unhappy miserable person that I would go on a thread with a topic such as this, that includes a claimant who has lost her child and been subject to intrusive illegal activity from the media, and constantly post stupid silly comments completely unrelated to the thread and case because I had some deep seated irrational hate of Harry.

Pretty sure such behaviour is not posted in good faith and isn’t complying with the sites guidelines.

Perhaps your limited ability to deal with the actual facts makes you feel that way and project so frequently and emotively. That's why I rarely address your comments to me. In the absence of a block button that is the best I can do.

Actually, he did say it was untrue. He denied that Meghan had used the word racist and that it was the press who said they were racist. He went on to say that knowing the family as he did, they weren't racist.

I know the media employ awful tactics to get their stories. I have also known ordinary people experiencing tragedy to have unnecessary details to be put in the papers for public consumption so I am supportive of people trying to bring newspapers to account. We all have seen how H has invaded his own family’s privacy. Does he not see the irony in doing that while complaining about his own invasion of privacy?

Yes @Bluespecsandshoes it’s all so interesting when you start connecting the dots isn’t it? The tabloids used two people as their scapegoats and that was it! They pretty much got away with it to most peoples minds.

This is an actual thread about the court case not Harry's bald head.

I didn’t understand this - I thought he’d already sued them. What is the take out reference?

Perhaps your limited ability to deal with the actual facts makes you feel that way and project so frequently and emotively. That's why I rarely address your comments to me. In the absence of a block button that is the best I can do. I joined three days ago and have not @ you or addressed lots of comments to you. What are you talking about? You don’t deal in facts! Tabloid trash is your game

As I said, what he went through was awful. The newspapers branded him the murderer. If his phone was hacked, he deserves compensation.

My argument is that there are unspeakably tragic things which have been inflicted upon some of the claimants in the joint action and they clearly deserve justice. However, the Sussexes have jumped onto the bandwagon to justify their perpetual sense of victimhood. Regarding those five instances which justified his inclusion, there is really nothing of note in comparative terms.

You say it was awful. Then follow it up with 'perhaps he is just ordering takeout'

Says it all.

The difference is -

Someone telling an anecdote about their own life

vs

Someone breaking into a person’s house, stealing their diary and then publishing that very same story

He wasn’t just telling anecdotes though.