The trials and tribulations of Harry - thread 2

[TrashyPanda]

Continuation of

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4812092-ph-lost-bid-to-challenge-for-right-to-pay-home-office-for-his-security?page=10&reply=126688485

That actually beggars belief.

there is a time and a place.
this was neither.

and actually, it’s very disrespectful.
court is a serious matter , not a joke

@Haywirecity - I’m loving the idea of Judge Judy in charge,

”don’t piss on my leg and tell me its raining”

Haha! Then it's probably you !!! Because I'm not sure of anything. I did think the Mirror agreed to all the cases being heard at the same time because it was cheaper and they thought most would be struck down for being out of time.
But that might well be against another newspaper.

@Haywirecity - we could take turns, on different days!

Wouldn't it be absolutely brilliant, Panda?
7 weeks? Pfft. It's lasagna for lunch, they'll all be done by 12!

Yeah, next time I'll be right, Panda. Hehe.

Lasagna? hope there's a side salad 😂

The issue is the constant need for new content for Netflix

He/they have to keep making "news", making the front pages...its how he/they "earn" their money

I suspect more and more "bombshells" from him/them...especially now the late queen is dead

...and he's a bear of very little brain, sadly

There's anything JJ wants! 😂
She's ace!

If I am no mistaken, it's not just the hacking they need to prove but also that the top managers (Piers Morgan et all) knew about it.

I immediately suspected that his wildly inappropriate and vulgar condemnation of Paul Burrell was all about making new content and using the attention of the case to springboard it. Paul Burrell is also an attention-craving livewire who will rapidly retaliate via the papers by the end of the week.

He has been ignored by all of the originally targeted conflict participants from his own family despite launching broadsides on several occasions. He has now lowered his sights to ex-staff because it still reminds viewers of his usp of being a royal.

I don't believe as a witness it's my job to construct the article or instruct which parts were unlawfully obtained or weren't, the journalist should be doing that,” Harry told the court.

I've just read this and it confuses me. Is Harry a witness or a claimant? Is he suing or just giving evidence on the part of someone else?

Because this reads like Harry does not have to provide evidence of anything.

I also find that confusing.

Who should be explaining what parts were unlawful etc.?

Daddy's the king dontcha know?

as his stance was allowed to stand, suggests he was correct in his statement?

He is suing, isn't he? So needs to prove laws were broken? Not just he didn't like the actions of various individuals, but that what they did was against the law?

Also had the person who started the thread suspended! No idea why, as there seems no lead up to anything, but accusations that the harry and meghan detractors had put in mass reports... but you can't report something that isn't there and there was nothing to report, so its proper weird.

I'll get deleted for commenting on this but I think its only fair to explain what happened. profuse and grovelling apologies if i do

The report didn't give Green's response so I guess so.

It's weird @mixedrecycling , I no idea now who is suing, what, or even if, they have to prove, if anything has been proved. I'm completely baffled by our justice system. 🤷‍♀️

Harry just needs to tell the truth both as the witness and the claimant. Its up to the barrister to prove the legal side of his case. Its what he's paying megabucks for.

Paul Burrell is pretty slimy. We're in agreement there.

Sky News have also got an actor to reenact today’s evidence

TBF I think that's quite a useful thing to do assuming they're staying faithful to the transcript.

Having been unable to follow live reports I'm having trouble building a coherent rather than a patchwork picture of what's been said and I'm sure I won't be alone but thanks for flagging it.

I'll be watching.

Is it a joint trial with multiple claimants each with there own legal team? Thats my understanding, but I've not looked into it. Its not a class action where one legal team represents multiple claimants, I'm pretty sure of that. So each legal team is really just on their clients side (aka representing the best interests of their client) but because its the same judge, presumably he will look at all the evidence provided and look for similar evidence of wrongdoing, but will walk the tightrope of judging each case on its merits, with one eye on the overall conduct of the defendants?

Does that sound even remotely right, cos its doing my head in now?

But the barrister can't give evidence. Only witnesses can do that. Which I accept Harry is. But the witnesses have to produce the evidence that proves the case. Don't they?

Yes, Paul Burrel is awful. He has lived off Diana's memory. There's nothing he hasn't sold. But then when we're talking about people selling Diana's memory...

PB is what a former boss used to call a “rent-a-gob”

im not at all surprised to hear Harry’s description of him either.