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

‘He's making the Prince Regent from Blackadder look like Bertrand Russell.’

😭😂

I may be wrong but I think he said he broke up with Chelsy ?

that doesn’t match him then begging for her back

and omg why does he think her friends would be so loyal to him they didn’t gossip and snitch

is he really just annoyed he didn’t get to control the narrative and have the final word that he dumped her

Doesn’t he think it’s unpleasant for his ex to have to relive this all by this being in the press again ? Isn’t that why celebs also settle out of court ? To protect people who don’t have the same platform

If he was bombarding her with calls, then it sounds as if they were hacking her voicemail not his.

I think Harry is very paranoid, but in all honesty it's justified. He has lived in this goldfish bowl all his life and reached a point where he couldn't even trust friends not to leak to the press. He could have grown up and learned to cope with this, as William has, but the death of his mother at such a crucial period in his life has stunted his emotional development and he just cannot process the lack of privacy.

The emotional stunting has also I think, left him spiteful, entitled, unreasonable and angry at not getting his own way. All low level narcissistic traits. It's sad but what's sadder is he thought the woman who would heal all this with a life of privacy and a family life, had totally different ideas to how their life should pan out. Neither are wrong, but they are not suited. Chelsey was clearly the love of his life but she could equally have been driven away by the royal life or Harry's own behaviour. We'll never know and I hope for both parties their private life remains that.

Public interest is important if damages are awarded I think. So they have to establish that stories were probably obtained unlawfully, and if they do the amount of damages awarded will depend on Harry convincing the judge that not only were they unlawfully obtained but also that it was not in the public interest and caused him distress, higher damages will be awarded if so

It is well known that Chelsy dumped him and he was desperately trying to win her back for years. Any spouse of any person - bringing this to public attention after a grand wedding and two kids- would not be happy about it at all.

From what I gather to hack phones in those days (voicemails) you had to have the persons number. Then you rang the phone and keyed in the passcode (often 1234) for voicemails hoping they had not bothered changing the code supplied with the phone. Then they would hang up and hope the person didn't realise the voicemail had already been read. I suppose if you did this every time the person would come to think it was normal for their phone to look like that. People were less phone savvy in those days.

is he really just annoyed he didn’t get to control the narrative

I think this is a lot of what it's about. Valentine Low in Courtiers said IIRC that H&M demanded staff monitor all the stories about them - I mean, how the hell do you even START with that on the internet?

Also alleged that they read everything written about them (hi H!)

Thank you tigger that makes sense.

Another thing I am confused about is this kind of thing below, which seems to have come up a lot - he is alleging hacking but the information was in a phone call, not a voicemail. Is phone tapping also part of the allegation?

Prince Harry suggests a Mirror article about his breakup was obtained through voicemail interception.
The article "Down in the dumped" reported on an "emotional phone call" in which Harry's then-girlfriend apparently asked for a trial separation.

I’m probably going to sound really stupid but I don’t think you can tap a mobile phone?? Unless H means he left someone a voicemail where he talked about an emotional call he’d had with Chelsy?

Andrew Green KC, for MGN, turns to an article with a photograph of Harry and Chelsy near Kensington High St.
“To know a photographer is there waiting is highly suspicious,” Harry says.
“This is a security issue,” Harry adds

but yesterday he said he was never in the street. Because of security.

so which is it?

he’s directly contradicted his own evidence.

plus - he lived near KHS. So not unusual for photog to be in area.

He seems determined to pull up every "issue" in his life and blame someone else for it. He is consolidating his position as Chief Complainer with no evidence except speculation. What worked with Oprah doesn't work in a court of law.

I wonder if Harry has ever had cause to ponder about the first photographs that were published of him and Meghan out in public as a couple? They were photographed in London walking into Soho House for dinner. The photographer who took the photos has publicly said he had been given a tip off from “someone in Soho House” that they’d be arriving.

Harry clearly pays no heed to the fact that there’s a thriving market for tip offs about him.

I gather that this was what triggered the issue with bullying. It was just unsustainable to counter all the media stories and comments.

I’m also exasperated by his position that an article which described him “cavorting” with a girlfriend while they watched a sports match together IN A STADIUM must have come from illegally gathered evidence 🙄

I’m probably going to sound really stupid but I don’t think you can tap a mobile phone?? Unless H means he left someone a voicemail where he talked about an emotional call he’d had with Chelsy?

Ah yes. But then he himself wouldn't have been hacked, is that important?

I also find it mind boggling how much of people's communication is/was apparently conducted via voicemail. If I had been dumped and wanted to talk to someone I might leave a voicemail saying, ring me back, but I wouldn't say, ring me back, I need to talk to you because I've just had an emotional call with Chelsy and she has asked for a trial separation.

I am not a fan of the phone in general though - do others use voicemail a lot?

Harry tells the court he filed his claims against MGN and News Group “at around the same time”.

He adds that he believes there was “industrial scale destruction of evidence” of unlawful information gathering in relation to him to which Mr Green asks where he gets this idea from.

“My legal team,” Harry replies.

Mr Green asks whether he thinks his phone was “consistently hacked” throughout the 15-year period between 1996 and 2011, the time period that makes up his claim against MGN.

“It could have been happening on a daily basis, I simply don’t know,” Harry responds.

Asked if he was aware of any evidence to show this, Harry says: “No, that’s part of the reason I’m here, my lord”.

You need evidence BEFORE you go to court you numpty!!!

But If the judge has allowed this to go to trial without solid evidence maybe Harry is correct in saying that? I’m genuinely finding the mechanics of this aspect v confusing

Harry clearly pays no heed to the fact that there’s a thriving market for tip offs about him.

There is certainly a big incentive for businesses like restaurants and nightclubs to encourage papping of celebrities arriving and leaving.

Asked if he was aware of any evidence to show this, Harry says: “No, that’s part of the reason I’m here, my lord”.

🤦‍♀️

I’ve found a Twitter account doing a bit of transcribing:

He’s saying the mirror were the ones who started phone hacking in the first place?

Harry clearly pays no heed to the fact that there’s a thriving market for tip offs about him

This has been going on for YEARS, nearly a century in fact. Pre current celeb culture the aristocracy and the royals were the ones who fascinated the ordinary paper and magazine reader, and cash strapped 'friends' used to feed stories to them and tip the papers off about what club the Prince of X and the Duchess of Y would be in. Not unknown for popular venues to do that for the publicity, either.

I thought this was a test case? So if these selected sample of people can prove hacking, then the rest of the claimants can proceed?

Might be wrong on that though?

Yeah I’m really confused! It’s like he’s saying: there was something in the papers about me which I probably didn’t disclose myself (I don’t remember) so it was probably a result of illegal activity, I probably said this in a voicemail (although I don’t remember and I haven’t got copies), these voicemails were probably intercepted, I haven’t got evidence but it probably existed and has probably been destroyed, I probably read about it at the time (though I can’t remember) and it probably caused me distress (which I also can’t remember). One too many probablies!