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

Possibly Jonathan Coad who is a 'PR professional and media lawyer' (according to Google).

Presumably all witnesses have to be available until the end of the trial?

"Green suggests the source was Chelsy Davy’s uncle, Paul Davy.
That’s based on the understanding that the journalist (Jane Kerr) was being truthful about the source of the story, Harry says.
Attributing it as a “pal” is a classic hallmark of phone hacking, the duke adds."

Harrys paranoia is shining through, Claiming "pal" is a code word for hacking is ridiculous.

“References to spending ‘hour’ on the phone with Chelsy, I don’t know how anyone would know that, our relationship was private,” Harry says.
“Our trust in our friends reduced rapidly in a very short space of time,” Harry adds."

Then he accuses his own friends of leaking.

"Harry has questioned how the Mirror knew about his trip, but Green once again points to an earlier article – this time in the Daily Mail – revealing the detail.
Quotes attributed to an “insider” are suspicious, Harry says.
Harry acknowledges the similarities but again argues that a story in the Mail would push a Mirror journalist to try to take it further."

So this time is not the infamous "Pal" (hacking) or friends leaking information its yet another code word for hacking "insider". He really cannot make his mind up.

@mixedrecycling yeah but that doesn't mean sitting in the court room. He can go home.

I can’t fathom what’s happening. I am starting to think he has a very low iq and incredibly limited grasp of reality. To the extent he isn’t fit to be on the stand, and needs an appropriate adult with him.

I mean he’s basically sitting there saying yeah you’re right might not be hacking, I’ve no clue mate.

I feel a bit sad that people disapprove of PH so much that they are looking for him to lose this case.

I don’t care much about him but I do care about the behaviour of the press because it affects us all. There’s countless examples of ordinary people finding themselves the target of unwarranted press attention - it could happen to any of us. Milly Dowler. Doreen Lawrence. Christopher Jeffries. Nicola Bulley.

Plus they are powerful and they tell lies and get away with it and that’s not good or healthy in a free society.

I want him to win not because he’s Prince Harry but because I think someone should stand up to them. It seems like everyone else has settled. I almost wish someone else was bringing the case so that we could all get behind it.

He DOES have an appropriate adult in the witness box with him! Apparently he was struggling with all the evidence files so they asked if he wanted help so some poor minion is sitting there leafing through them for him.

I want him to win if it’s true and any of those articles are proven to be gained due to hacking. I do not wish him to win if they are not, because that makes a mockery of justice.

a court case is not to make an example of the media and punish them for wider sins, it is like any other case, they need to be proven on the balance of probabilities to be guilty of what they are accused of.

to find them guilty in thr absence of that makes a mockery of justice and that is even worse for all of us.

I feel a bit sad that people disapprove of PH so much that they are looking for him to lose this case

He shouldn't win because he's PH. He should win because he's proved his case, and as far as I can see he's nowhere near doing that.

I want him to win not because he’s Prince Harry but because I think someone should stand up to them. It seems like everyone else has settled. I almost wish someone else was bringing the case so that we could all get behind it.

What's wrong with settling? That is the norm in civil cases, and always preferred by the courts. If he wins, it will be a financial settlement too, so why is it somehow more honourable to clog up the court system?

As I said above, this is all old news, not really relevant to the current media landscape, where the tabloids have way less influence and are much more restrained than they were pre Leveson. Whatever happens or does not happen with this case isn't going to change anything.

Do you support this case regardless of the merits? Just because it's 'standing up' to the press? It does sound like it.

Fair point iced purple

Aye he has. I should have maybe put ‘friends and the like are the only ones to have sold me out’.

He does have a route to winning that is based on purely circumstantial evidence.

The judge in the 2015 phone hacking case against the Mirror didn't require any "gotcha" moments in order to find that an individual had been hacked. The generic case (ie, the fact that MGN have admitted to a bucketload of phone hacking), combined with no obvious other method of getting the information, was enough for the case to be proved.

But Harry has a chunky obstacle that is specific to him, as he's a massive public figure in the way that the other claimants are not. There are loads of lawful, and plausible, routes to have gotten the information about him, because it was worth the effort of getting. The pictures would sell, so worth hanging around at Heathrow waiting for every flight from Cape Town that week - no need to know which specific one Chelsy was on. Brute force was economically viable. The whole point of phone hacking was that it was so ridiculously easy and cheap. Whereas if phone hacking wasn't available to get stories about actresses from Corrie, the journalists probably wouldn't have bothered to go any further.

So then the question becomes whether the other routes were, in fact, lawful ones, or if they fell into the "unlawful information gathering" realm. Privacy law is entirely judge-made, and has only recently been developed, so whereas "phone hacking" has a nice clean definition, wider "UIG" is much harder to separate from normal investigative practices. At what point does a journalist asking questions become a journalist unlawfully blagging? I think that's the tricky issue that the judge is ultimately going to have to deal with here. What boundaries apply to journalists in respect of non-phone hacking information gathering?

I feel a bit sad that people disapprove of PH so much that they are looking for him to lose this case.

I wanted him to win the case because phone hacking is awful. But his evidence is flimsy, speculative and seeped in petulance and he should never have brought it to court.

I don’t know what the judge may or may not have said today.
we all know what he said when Harry flouted his instructions and didn’t turn up.

It was you who said said not turning up at all - you'd probably be able to assume something from that. but different if he was late.

He didn’t turn up at all yesterday.
he wasnt late - he just wasn’t there at all.

‘I want him to win if it’s true and any of those articles are proven to be gained due to hacking. I do not wish him to win if they are not, because that makes a mockery of justice.

a court case is not to make an example of the media and punish them for wider sins, it is like any other case, they need to be proven on the balance of probabilities to be guilty of what they are accused of.

to find them guilty in thr absence of that makes a mockery of justice and that is even worse for all of us.’

this 💯

I don’t want him to win as a proxy for a more deserving case

But i do want him to win if it’s the just verdict for his case and he can really show us what he’s claiming is true - he prob was hacked, so I’m struggling with the lack of tangible proof, so far, but I’m thinking he’s going to have an ace up his sleeve, otherwise why is he doing this

And even if he does win, he’s still a hypocrite with questionable motives, he’s not a saviour or hero. It’s ok to have nuanced opinions, it’s not all or nothing. Even if I think he’s treated some people badly, he still didn’t to be hacked.

The long and short of this is multiple stories have appeared over the years about Harry;s misdemeanours, and he lost his relationship with Chelsey Davey, all of which has hurt him greatly and he wants someone to pay for it.

He doesn’t want to take responsibility for any of the stuff he did that caused those stories, or that the relationship broke down when he went in the army and was negligent.

He wants someone to pay for all the wrongs he perceived and he blames his family, thr palace and the media. That’s where we are. He wants everyone to pay.

if I was Meghan though I’d think it very clear that Chelsey was his first love and the one that got away,

‘I want him to win if it’s true and any of those articles are proven to be gained due to hacking. I do not wish him to win if they are not, because that makes a mockery of justice.

a court case is not to make an example of the media and punish them for wider sins, it is like any other case, they need to be proven on the balance of probabilities to be guilty of what they are accused of.

to find them guilty in thr absence of that makes a mockery of justice and that is even worse for all of us.

Aye. This.

You are right!!

It’s ok to have nuanced opinions

This

It is a challenge for some posters to get to grips with. But he isn't 100% right or 100% wrong

He's not really doing any of the other litigants any favours. They would have been better off without him joining in. I hope they publicly acknowledge how the stupid friend has proven more damaging than a clever enemy.

I think that is a very fair and measured post

Is this case with Coronation Street actor Michael Turner actress Nikki Sanderson; and comedian Paul Whitehouse's ex-wife?

If yes what would it mean if they had proof of phone hacking or gave better evidence - would they all win/lose together or would some instances be taken into account and not others ?

I don't quite understand how it all works if it's wider than just Harry.

He DOES have an appropriate adult in the witness box with him! Apparently he was struggling with all the evidence files so they asked if he wanted help so some poor minion is sitting there leafing through them for him.

To be fair, that is often one of the jobs of a paralegal in the witnesses’ legal team (when they are not acting as a Gopher!).

I think it's clear he does have a low IQ. He's becoming a laughingstock.

Just read Elior post so Harry is potentially damaging the whole case and the rest of the litigants.