PH lost bid to challenge for right to pay Home Office for his security

[Mumsnut]

I've probably garbled that, but that's the gist of it.

Why aren’t the journalists giving evidence?

Presumably they could just refuse to reveal their sources?

On page 6 of his witness statement he says that his mobile phone was his main way of staying in touch with his family, and especially his mother who he was very close to

Except it’s already been established and confirmed that he didn’t have a mobile until 1998, after his mother’s death

In other words, another "recollections may vary"

As Green said, it does indeed appear to be in the realms of total speculation

“We are, Prince Harry, in the realms of total speculation,” Green says.

oh dear

‘The pub in which Harry celebrated his birthday was owned by the celebrity chef Ed Baines, Green says.
Baines had a relationship with the media and regularly spoke to them, Green says.
Harry says he was not aware of the chef but suspects he would be too busy to call the media to let them know he was in the pub.’

from the ‘neutral’ ‘balanced’ guardian (that has its own biases and issues around bullying staff and controlling narratives and is only kicking the boot in to act superior over the other media houses - even they can’t help highlighting the nonsense logic 😂😭

“I don’t walk on streets,” Harry says, explaining he has to travel by car for security reasons as he is spotted wherever he goes

and yet there are photos of H&M, before they were married (may even have been before they were engaged) walking London streets going on a theatre date.

I think they’re now onto the drug story

The MGN barrister Andrew Green KC has pointed Harry to a 3am column in the Mirror and a “callout” at the end of the column asking members of the public to ring in if they see famous people.
The column reveals details of Harry’s birthday celebration – at a gastropub in Fulham.
Green suggests Harry would have walked along the street to the pub which is off the Fulham Road.
“I don’t walk on streets,” Harry says, explaining he has to travel by car for security reasons as he is spotted wherever he goes.

Goodness. Harry is reminding me of The Female Quixote. He’s been so protected he doesn’t understand how the world works.

I'm assuming Harry just means that he's so special that he doesn't WALK on streets , he just regally glides along! 🤣

He used to walk in streets when he regularly went to TK Maxx in Ken high street

Harry’s own words on a podcast in 2021 about dating Meghan:

"It was nice with a baseball cap on looking down at the floor, walking along the street and trying to stay incognito," he said, before adding, "Not sure how many times I've done that, trying to walk down the street and stay incognito is like 'Whoa signpost! Someone’s dog!'... it's amazing how much chewing gum you see and how many shoes."

walking along streets is not unusual, by his own admission. So he has lied to court.

He’ll be walking on water next

jeffgoldblum · Today 12:46
I'm assuming Harry just means that he's so special that he doesn't WALK on streets , he just regally glides along! 🤣

LOL

when he was younger, he’d go for pub crawls etc near where I used to live. Very frequently. He was regularly seen out on the lash - it’s true he wasn’t walking but stumbling drunkenly on the streets

It sounds like he’s saying he does it infrequently, actually. I can believe that.

Then he should have said that.

What he ACTUALLY said was “I never walk on streets”.

Words matter, especially in a court of law

Yup and interesting how the guardian has positioned that snippet - tehy aren’t casting him in a good light

the Guardian impression of court artist picture

A sketch by court artist Elizabeth Cook has been released
It shows her depiction of the Duke of Sussex with his counsel David Sherborne and the judge, Mr Justice Fancourt looking on
Accredited journalists have access to a live feed of proceedings as well as access to the court room, and I can say Harry looks less hungover in real life

he didn’t say not hungover , just less hungover!

For what it’s worth @AliceOlive I agree with you, he probably walks on streets occasionally, not everyday.

But that’s why if you are giving evidence you have to be precise and specific.

But in his own words

Not sure how many times I've done that, trying to walk down the street and stay incognito

that definitely implies it was commonplace and not unusual.

I’m getting the impression that Harry thought that for each article, the journalist responsible would be pulled in for questioning?

I’m not sure what his case actually is?

I wonder if he's ever really been aware that his privilege is why a well known person was able to be served alcohol in a pub when he was underage and it's against the law!

He seems to be on a mission to undermine his own evidence article by article.

“Andrew Green KC is now being asked about apparent cooperation between the palace and the News of the World.

In particular, he talks about an article headlined "Charles shocked by how often Harry uses cannabis".

The article writes: "Charles was very calm, he didn't confront Harry aggressively, but asked him to tell the truth... although Charles didn't scream and shout at Harry."

Mr Green says there is a reference to a senior aide to Charles, and asks whether the palace cooperated with the News of the World on the story.

Harry says he has "talked extensively" about how the story came about, including what he was aware of at the time and what he later became aware of.

Asked again whether the palace collaborated with the newspaper, Harry says there was "one individual".

So - palace collaboration then - shitty yes, illegal no, phone hacking, nope again.

Wasn’t one of his witnesses a former phone hacker, or did I imagine that?

Well Omid Scobie says ‘Duke to give bombshell evidence in court’ and he’s never wrong 🤣