Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Extensive Phone Hacking by MGN

892 replies

Roussette · 15/12/2023 11:04

So... Harry has won his case.

As lawyers are saying now... this is massive. 15 out of 33 accusations of hacking by Harry were upheld as a result of phone hacking and other illegal practices.
Hacking and blagging were even taking place during the Leveson enquiry.

He has won damages of £140,000 plus. And before this thread descends into Harry hate, please think of all the other claimants who have also had their claims upheld and damages awarded to them. They went through hell, medical records hacked and reported on, trackers on cars, phones hacked...

It's not about the money, it's about 'accountability of power'.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
31
EmmaEmerald · 15/12/2023 20:20

Cakester · 15/12/2023 20:14

Oh and I like this from the jdugement:

As a matter of law, the fact that a person has chosen to put some aspects of their private life into the public domain does not mean that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of other aspects of their private life, and indeed speaking about one’s feelings about a certain matter on one occasion does not forfeit the right to privacy in relation to one’s feelings on another occasion...

Yes

This is what I can never get the tabloid defenders to agree with

My boss is not entitled to turn up at my home and demand something just because I work for her.

In the same way, you do an interview on the red carpet, it doesn't mean it's okay for photographers to follow you home

I think Sienna Miller said something like - if you saw someone being chased down the street by a group of people, you'd think the individual was under attack. But put cameras in the hands of the group, and suddenly no one cares.

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 20:23

PM will walk away pretty much unscathed from this. He has a lot of supporters and a lot of detractors. He has bounced back from scandal before and I've no doubt someone will employ him. Failing that he'll write a book. It's not fair but it's the way of the world.

Cakester · 15/12/2023 20:25

From the judgement, this is quite serious.. how old was he at the time, 20? They got his flight details!
It is evident that the Mirror journalists had obtained details of the Duke’s flights. In my judgment, the story in this article– particularly the all-important confirmation of the identity of Chelsy Davy – was probably stood up by the Mirror by commissioning PIs to blag flight information, credit card details or phone billing data, to confirm that it was Ms Davy who had been in Argentina. That unlawful activity was, I find, specifically instructed from London, not undertaken at the whim of Mr Behr. Mr Harwood’s attempt to explain how else Ms Davy’s identity was confirmed was wholly unconvincing. It follows that, since MGN directed the unlawful activity, the tort is established.

Myfabby · 15/12/2023 20:27

MaturingCheeseball · 15/12/2023 19:44

“To a modest extent” - The Judge

Imo Harry cheapens the phone-hacking issue. I just hope his award is passed to Invictus.

pp talking about nothing in Daily Mail - take a look at Daily Mirror. The phone hacking concerns The Daily Mirror , not the DM.

Don't be obtuse. does it concern the BBC, CNN etc?

You think 140k makes a difference to H? The audacity of you to direct him what to do with those funds?

when they made it a headline that Archewell lost 500k, did it concern the Fail.

Please, take several seats

minou123 · 15/12/2023 20:34

Cakester · 15/12/2023 20:14

Oh and I like this from the jdugement:

As a matter of law, the fact that a person has chosen to put some aspects of their private life into the public domain does not mean that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of other aspects of their private life, and indeed speaking about one’s feelings about a certain matter on one occasion does not forfeit the right to privacy in relation to one’s feelings on another occasion...

This is a perfect summery of what I have always thought.

It's called consent. Something the gutter press know knotting about.

Original poster
Roussette · 15/12/2023 20:38

EmmaEmerald · 15/12/2023 20:20

Yes

This is what I can never get the tabloid defenders to agree with

My boss is not entitled to turn up at my home and demand something just because I work for her.

In the same way, you do an interview on the red carpet, it doesn't mean it's okay for photographers to follow you home

I think Sienna Miller said something like - if you saw someone being chased down the street by a group of people, you'd think the individual was under attack. But put cameras in the hands of the group, and suddenly no one cares.

Show quote history

^^ This

I have quoted this before....

Privacy.

If i burst into your home by kicking the door down. That's invading your privacy.

If you decide you want me to come round, invite me, open the door and welcome me. That isn't.

OP posts:
Cakester · 15/12/2023 20:41

Is anyone else alarmed they got his flight details?

cometdancer · 15/12/2023 20:44

When I look at the Daily Mail as mentioned on another thread I can’t see any mention of the court case featuring on the homepage, only about H&M’s Christmas card.

cometdancer · 15/12/2023 20:46

I always thought H&M were driven out of this country. I believe the vendetta is real. I’m most alarmed the RF could have sat back and let this play out.

queentim · 15/12/2023 20:55

I'm very happy for the claimants!

And to think they only needed to prove 1.

What a nasty set of people.

Anyone who supports them are just as nasty in my book.

TallerSally · 15/12/2023 20:55

cometdancer · 15/12/2023 20:44

When I look at the Daily Mail as mentioned on another thread I can’t see any mention of the court case featuring on the homepage, only about H&M’s Christmas card.

The Daily Mail have form in attempting to smother good news about Harry & Meghan, while blasting every bit of nonsense trivia they can get their paws on, that (in their minds and those of their enlightened readers) make H&M look bad.

Hence the deafening silence on today’s absolutely MONUMENTAL win, which other media outlets have been running headlines on all day.

DM also know that they are NEXT UP in the pipeline of cases, and today’s ruling makes it more likely that they and their own set of lying executives are not going to enjoy their upcoming judgement day…

Serves the lying slanderers right. Soon time to face the music!

LumiB · 15/12/2023 20:58

Absolutely disgusting what happened to everyone involved. I cannot even imagine the paranoid feelong you'd always have especially around phones. Always wondering has it been hacked. Glad he won as did the others.

Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:04

It seems his friends were subjected to a lot of this illegal activity, as they were more careful with Harry's phone.

Less care was taken with Ms Davy’s phone. She and her family and friends were clearly not considered off limits and I am satisfied that she was subjected to UIG and VMI regularly, as a means of obtaining information about their relationship and the Duke’s life.
The same applies to the Duke’s other girlfriends and his close friends, in particular Guy Pelly, Natalie Pinkham and Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who were regularly targeted with a view to obtaining information about the Duke. I am satisfied that they would have been subjected to VMI and other UIG.

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:09

Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:04

It seems his friends were subjected to a lot of this illegal activity, as they were more careful with Harry's phone.

Less care was taken with Ms Davy’s phone. She and her family and friends were clearly not considered off limits and I am satisfied that she was subjected to UIG and VMI regularly, as a means of obtaining information about their relationship and the Duke’s life.
The same applies to the Duke’s other girlfriends and his close friends, in particular Guy Pelly, Natalie Pinkham and Tiggy Legge-Bourke, who were regularly targeted with a view to obtaining information about the Duke. I am satisfied that they would have been subjected to VMI and other UIG.

This issue is well known and formed part of the case as presented to the court. Not so much that Harry's phone was hacked, but that members of his close circles were, such as Chelsea Davys, as a way of gaining information on him. Nothing new in this.

Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:12

I am copying extracts of todays Judgement, as I said above

Original poster
Roussette · 15/12/2023 21:13

What are you saying? I don't understand rosy. It's a legal case and he has won it. You say nothing new. Well.... there's a lot I didn't know about it. Till now.

Well done Harry for taking this so far.

OP posts:
Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:21

Roussette · 15/12/2023 21:13

What are you saying? I don't understand rosy. It's a legal case and he has won it. You say nothing new. Well.... there's a lot I didn't know about it. Till now.

Well done Harry for taking this so far.

Someone should tell the judge this isn't new, those are his words from today! ha ha

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:25

Harry's case was put forward as I outlined, with the majority of the hacking of people in his circle but which affected him. He's won that case today on that basis.

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:26

Did you not read the case as outlined by his barrister at the beginning of the case? The judge is just repeating this and confirming that he won the case on this basis.

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:26

It's pretty easy to understand.

Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:30

We are discussing today's judgement, which is new, today.

Original poster
Roussette · 15/12/2023 21:30

Not sure what your point is rosy

Are you pleased he won the case? Curious.

For him, for the other claimants (and I feel sad about Ms Wightman and NickiS), and for the benefit of anyone who has been through illegal practices?

OP posts:
Original poster
Roussette · 15/12/2023 21:31

Cakester · 15/12/2023 21:30

We are discussing today's judgement, which is new, today.

Thank you

I thought so.

OP posts:
rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:32

Harry brought the case months ago and included in it instances of phone hacking which included that of his girlfriend and other friends. That's what the judge has quoted today. That he's won that case on this grounds.

rosyglowcondition · 15/12/2023 21:33

Of course I'm pleased he won his case, along with anyone who wins a legal case involving a gross invasion of privacy. No one in their right mind would think otherwise,