Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Thread gallery
26
00100001 · 07/06/2023 23:36

I do actually believe his phone was hacked you know. Stands to reason really, especially as we know Catherine's was... But I don't think he's doing a good job on the stand

Kiwano · 07/06/2023 23:52

I think his phone certainly was hacked. There is simply no chance that the Mirror hacked him only on the one occasion they've admitted and then virtuously decided not stop. However, there seem to be far too many occasions when he's complaining about something that had already been reported by other papers.

Kiwano · 07/06/2023 23:58

MoirasSaggyBundles · 07/06/2023 21:51

I was listening to an interview with a barrister earlier, and as I understand it, "Harry's lawyers" are in fact Hugh Grant's lawyers - the Hacked Off group going after MGN, spear-headed by Grant, has pushed forward Harry's case as the test case (possibly as a fishing expedition to see what evidence comes out evidentially from the defence) and Harry has not had his own independent legal advice as to the strength of his case. This could account for why there is a bit of disconnect between Harry's "case" on paper evidence, and Harry's live testimony and actual knowledge about what was said in the press, by whom, and when, and whether he actually read it at the time(in order to qualify for damages pertaining to being hurt by revelations contemporaneously).

I'm sure the lawyers have advised him on an independent basis, not least because it is their professional duty. There are plenty of other people who have settled their claims on advice from the same lawyers, even though their cases might have helped to strengthen others. They will have put the case together on the basis of his instructions and he will certainly have had to sign off on the pleadings and his witness statement, and they are likely to have tried to coach him through his evidence. However, all lawyers have lived through the experience of seeing a client in the witness box who does not come up to proof, and they just have to recognise that it happens and there is only so much they can do by way of preparation.

Howsimplywonderful · 07/06/2023 23:58

Catherine’s phone was hacked but evidence was provided by the phone companies showing it.

Harry has provided no such evidence, saying they used ‘burner phones’ for his hacking even though this doesn’t seem likely when they used regular phones for everyone else

Nofixedabodewell · 08/06/2023 04:58

I presume H has finished giving evidence now? Is he on his way home?

it’s like he’s watched a lot of thrillers and cop dramas and from that he’s extrapolated a lot of theories about things. He has no evidence, just a burning sense of injustice. That’s understandable really. He’s angry and wants his pain recognised and some sort of compensation. Not financial necessarily but he wants acknowledgment. However his vagueness and lack of understanding about court procedure really doesn’t help his case. Everything is personal with him , yet he completely lacks empathy or self awareness.

cobicat · 08/06/2023 06:14

Didn't Harry mention using burner phones? How could they hack those?

ThePoshUns · 08/06/2023 06:38

EsmaCannonball · 07/06/2023 17:50

Is it me or is he looking more and more like Rory McGrath?

Yes. He looks a right scruff.

Original poster
TrashyPanda · 08/06/2023 07:25

@ThePoshUns - I think it’s his hair - the artful arrangement at the front never looks tidy

OP posts:
Nofixedabodewell · 08/06/2023 07:29

He look’s dishevelled, tired and scruffy. It can’t help that he’s jet lagged. I guess he’s used to having servants deal with his clothes in his former life. I can’t see Meghan washing and ironing his clothes!

cobicat · 08/06/2023 07:34

Regarding the emphasis on Chelsy stories, a cynic could be forgiven for wondering whether all isn't well in his current relationship. This might be the explanation if it fails - the media is responsible.

mixedrecycling · 08/06/2023 07:34

I suspect he thought - I've done it myself! - that going somewhere new would allow him to leave his troubles behind. But then found his troubles were not so much about the environment, as the past and the the way he copes with his environment.

Recognising that is the first step towards facing up to it and working through whatever you need to work through.

Harry still seems to be focussed on changing his environment - which is only useful up to a point, especially when the environment he is trying to change is the past, not the present.

Boulshired · 08/06/2023 07:35

For a moral victory all he needs is a small sway on one of his claims and it doesn’t have to be hacking,

mixedrecycling · 08/06/2023 07:39

I wonder if he would see it that way? His absolute certainty that he was hacked, and how all-encompassing the press intrusion has been on his life...

Well, we will never know. Unless he writes another book to tell us.

OTOH, the judge might find a lot of his claims proved.

Gilmorehill · 08/06/2023 07:46

I think it’s highly likely H was hacked just because it’s proven his brother was. However I’m astonished at the lack of concrete evidence which has been presented to prove it in court.

upinaballoon · 08/06/2023 07:51

I know he might lose and he didn't necessarily perform brilliantly in court, but I wonder if getting some of it off his chest in public, with his voice, with more listeners than one counsellor, might give him a feeling of getting rid of a bit of the anger.
I so think that it would suit Harry to do a physical job which kept him busy. Not needing to work isn't always the best blessing.

SoTedious · 08/06/2023 08:05

Don't forget you have to read his very long statement to consider the evidence, it's not just what comes up in cross examination. In the statement he talks about 'unusual mobile activity' like voicemails and notifications disappearing, missed calls etc, which known hackers had his number, as well as the individual stories.

Ohpleeeease · 08/06/2023 08:10

I think PH is confusing phone hacking with phone tapping throughout. I find it astonishing - in fact unlikely - that highly personal and private messages would be left on voicemail. I can believe that factual information like location, dates and times might be, but not relationship stuff.

Vermin · 08/06/2023 08:19

Given the parties in this case I’m hoping that there’s a judgement which finds that MGN did in all likelihood hack his messages but his conduct in publishing other people’s phone messages without consent / writing a book giving way more detail means there’s no damage / each party covers their own costs / symbolic £1 like the Hamiltons.

MrsFinkelstein · 08/06/2023 08:20

Gilmorehill · 08/06/2023 07:46

I think it’s highly likely H was hacked just because it’s proven his brother was. However I’m astonished at the lack of concrete evidence which has been presented to prove it in court.

Same. I have no doubt he was hacked. But from the examples discussed on the stand, while hacking could have been the source, it seems just as probable the source could have been friends/spectators/staff.

There didn't seem to be any examples that were so private there was no other possible chance.

Even the Paul Burrell comment - when I heard it I immediately said: if that's what he calls him to William, he'll have said the same to anyone else who'd listen. Pretty much everyone said the same about PB.

I'm sure he was hacked, but I would have expected more concrete proof - the use of the data/call logs etc that previous cases used. Unless that's to come?

RoseAndRose · 08/06/2023 08:38

cobicat · 08/06/2023 06:14

Didn't Harry mention using burner phones? How could they hack those?

I think he meant that the press were using burner phones to hack by dialling in to his voice messages, so any unknown numbers dialling in to it cannot be linked to individuals.

But I saw a post earlier on one of these threads saying that before a certain year (when it became known that phone company data could be used to show what numbers were used to do the hacking) no-one used burner phones because no-one realised that they could be identified that wat. So it's not clear how far this assertion stands up

Howsimplywonderful · 08/06/2023 08:38

The court case reminds me of a cartoon I read once

Man says to God ‘I’ve been praying to you to win the lottery and you’ve never answered my prayers

God ‘can you not meet me half way and buy a ticket’

Harry has been given an opportunity to show he was hacked but has failed to do so, to give the judge anything to work on besides his ‘suspicions’

PicturesOfDogs · 08/06/2023 08:39

Howsimplywonderful · 07/06/2023 23:58

Catherine’s phone was hacked but evidence was provided by the phone companies showing it.

Harry has provided no such evidence, saying they used ‘burner phones’ for his hacking even though this doesn’t seem likely when they used regular phones for everyone else

I don’t understand the burner phone thing.

Wouldn't the data be from his provider, regarding accessing his voicemail, rather than the callers?

LadyMuckingabout · 08/06/2023 08:48

If he concentrated on actually being hacked, it would be far more productive. As it is, he just goes on about lack of privacy, which may be horrible for him, but is an entirely different issue.

Also his current life flies in the face of everything it seems he wanted - to live in pampered luxury in Africa away from prying eyes. “White Mischief” springs to mind…

mumda · 08/06/2023 08:53

@SoTedious I don't get it either. Every voice mail I've left has consisted of 'its me. Can you ring me back.'
I'm sure one of the things I've read said he slammed the phone down... Do you do that on voicemail.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.