Prince Harry’s bid to sue The Sun over phone hacking thrown out by High Court judge

[MamoruHisaishi]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/prince-harry-the-sub-phone-hacking-high-court-judge-b1097090.html

I don’t think it’s fair to go after Jason Knauf. He still lives in the UK and so has certain responsibilities under UK law. Meghan vs The Mail was a VERY high profile case in which every intricacy was widely reported. If it had transpired at a later date that he had knowledge at the time that Meghan had misled court and had said nothing, it would be difficult for him to argue that he did not know about it and was not following the case of his former boss in which he may be mentioned. He was in an awkward position. He was also asked by both teams to provide evidence.

It is also much better for Meghan, even if she doesn’t see it that way, even if it was embarrassing and would get used against her, to have to apologise for misleading the court DURING the proceedings, rather than it being found out after the fact and potentially call into question the overall win (seeing as she would have won with that forming part of her case) and becoming the basis of an appeal by the Mail (in which case The Mail probably would have won the appeal) OR worst she could have been charged with contempt of court. Thanks to Jason Knauf, she won with that detail struck out, meaning she won on the basis of a truthful statement.

... the judge has found that there was no agreement

He also found that Harry’s suggestion it existed was completely inconsistent with everything else Harry had already said about his claim

We know, Serenster, and while inconsistencies are hardly anything new with Harry I do wonder why he didn't just refer to William's settlement (which was demonstrably true) and leave it at that

Unfortunately it seems he just can't help himself; finding facts insufficiently dramatic he lards them with silly accusations he doesn't have a hope of proving, and so diminishes what little's left of his credibility

Because on its own William’s settlement doesn’t really mean anything, in fact the Judge interpreted it in favour of MGN (as it shows they were willing to settle with both him & William at the time). So if anyone was of the opinion it was spiteful to bring up William’s settlement at all… well it backfired!

It does make me laugh when amateur commentators think a judge has got it wrong.

So if anyone was of the opinion it was spiteful to bring up William’s settlement at all… well it backfired!

It was not to spite William though, if that was the case, they would have gone out of their way to demand papers and subpoena those who were involved. It was to point out an admission of guilt from the paper and they left it at that.

Not to sure if your comment was to me, as I clearly stated that the judge only followed the law, as he has to go on the evidence in front of him. This was not presented, however, it was one of those things lawyers will throw in there to show the character (in this case implying a bad character of the papers part, if you will).

As I'm sure Harry's team would have been aware. This on it's own would not have likely gone any further due to lack of concrete evidence. However, they would have had to put it in, incase the judge concludes that together with every information presented to him, this could have been true. The judge did not assume so.

It is well known that the Sun has been settling claims - not just from Prince William, but large numbers of other claimants - for the last decade at least.

Harry’s issue wasn’t that people don’t believe the Sun hacked phones, it’s that he waited too long to do anything about it. So he can’t now bring a claim, and has no leverage to get a settlement. The implausible, unevidenced “secret agreement” was something he dreamed up to get around this problem. It was always a very unconvincing story, and one that the Judge agreed was not remotely plausible.

Harry wanted to have his day in court on phone hacking against the Sun. If you are seriously suggesting that his legal team decided they needed to rely on a secret agreement to be in time, but despite this would not bother to take any reasonable steps to prove it actually existed, despite having many options at their disposal to do so, I think you have completely misunderstood what’s gone on here.

How many anti Harry threads do you do a week ?

He’s in the news

This. I'd wish he'd just go away, stay in America and shut his mouth.

The judge has effectively called Harry a liar.

So he should not have brought this case along with all the others who have been subjected to illegal information gathering like bugging, hacking, planting trackers on cars, and other activities. He should just 'go away and shut his mouth'.

Not at all, Roussette. He should have brought it in time. He had six years from when he learned he’d been hacked. That’s plenty of time. For most people. You don’t get extra time just because you’re a Prince.

But might not settling with the media have been a good thing, PrincessTigger - as long as it wasn't covered up of course?

Admittedly it wouldn't have produced a nice cry of "Guilty!!", but that's the impression it would almost certainly have created to the wider public, and Harry would have avoided yet more revelations of his lack of credibility

In theory it could also have risked the media dodging another inquiry if Harry had been the only claimant - but he's not, and some of us are hoping it'll still come to that on the back of testimony from more reliable witnesses

Part of his case is going forward though, and that can only be a good thing.

Absolutely, Roussette - providing he doesn't louse up that too of course

It's honestly not that I feel he shouldn't speak up if wrong's been done to him, and in a free world he can sue whoever he likes. I just feel he'd have done better, in a case with this kind of potential, to take the money, enjoy the "See, it shows they're guilty" and leave the rest to those able to give a better account of themselves

He has very deep pockets. Not bad considering his working life so far

He’s using the legal system to hit back, fine.

Quite possibly but I know, I just know, he would be widely criticised for doing that.

'Why isn't he standing with the others and highlighting this case?'
'Trust him to take the money and run'
'Grifters, just after a quick buck'

I can see it now!

Yes, I think so, because he's got absolutely no evidence to support his claims.

You do know, don't you, that it's only part of his case that is not going forward. The rest is.

Yes, the part that is more than 6 years out of date I believe is not going forward. Also, the Judge effectively called him a liar. See the captain up thread.

Completely agree.

This.