Extensive Phone Hacking by MGN

[Roussette]

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'.

Excellent report from Prospect Magazine, link below if you haven't read it:

We know that newspaper managements at two of our biggest media companies have consistently concealed and denied the truth about what went on. They have issued dishonest statements and have lied to parliament, the stock exchange, to other journalists, to regulators and even the Leveson Inquiry, set up to establish the truth. And now some have been caught telling porkies in court.
Two companies—Murdoch Inc and the Mirror Group—have shelled out more than £1bn in costs and damages, while continuing to deny or admit the truth of what went on. Sadly, millions of emails and documents that might have cast light on the truth have gone missing.
In some cases the same people are in charge today as were running the company at the height of the scandal, which somehow they failed to notice. Take a bow, Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News UK and a former editor of the Sun and News of the World.
And take a further bow, Piers Morgan, now a star TV presenter for Murdoch Inc and editor of the Daily Mirror for nine years while phone hacking was raging. His newspaper was shelling out hundreds of thousands a year on private investigators using unlawful means to target people in public life, but he somehow failed to notice.
Two judges have now found that unlawful information gathering at the Mirror was “extensive and habitual.” Morgan says—albeit in guardedly narrow terms—he’s innocent. Mr Justice Fancourt begs to differ.
That this grim picture of intrusion, lies and cover-up is finally emerging is down to a handful of decent journalists, among them the Guardian’s Nick Davies—but also a few poachers-turned-gamekeepers who decided enough was enough.
It’s down to some determined lawyers and some forensically rigorous judges. It’s down to an ever-growing roll of brave victims of intrusion who have been queuing to receive out of court settlements.
And it’s down to Prince Harry, who has shown quite remarkable courage in pursuing this case to court, and submitting to cross examination—unlike the media executives who hacked and tormented him for so much of his life.
Since launching his legal action Harry—together with Meghan—has been subjected to an ugly and unremitting barrage of denigration by three newspaper groups he’s suing. I’ve not once seen a single declaration of the evident conflict of interest involved in trying to discredit him. Criticise him, by all means, but be honest about the context.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/media/64291/prince-harry-hacking-scandal-piers-morgan-mirror

The thing that puzzles me is the role of the Metropolitan Police in the phone hacking scandal. Prince Harry has now called upon them to launch a criminal investigation - to which they've responded in a manner which doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they will - why collude with the cover up?

This Guardian article from 2012:

Police attempts to undermine the Guardian's reporting when it first disclosed the scandal in 2009 are shown to have been wrong. There had been a "conspiracy of silence", Prescott said.
According to the evidence presented on Monday:
Police knew from the outset that Prescott was a hacking victim, but told him the opposite.
Police immediately identified hundreds of hacking targets in the seized files of the private detective Glenn Mulcaire, but later claimed they were unaware of them.
Police never received key financial evidence or computers from News International (NI).
Police "tipped off" Rebekah Brooks, the then editor of the Sun, about the scope of their investigation.
Police discovered in Mulcaire's files highly sensitive leaks from within their own ranks that could have endangered those with new identities.
An unknown police officer reversed a recorded decision to inform key victims, ensuring a cover-up.

Of course, that was then and this is now.

What could be motivating them to kick a criminal investigation of the lies of Morgan, Sly Bailey and others into the long grass?

Fantastic to see the pressure ratcheting up on the Met Police and the CPS:

Phone hacking victims, including Prince Harry, could launch a legal challenge if police do not reopen a criminal investigation into Mirror newspapers.
Their legal team have told the BBC they could attempt a private prosecution themselves, if necessary.

An encouraging read - clearly, this isn't going to be swatted away anytime soon.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67727174

Again you are quoting facts incorrectly.

Steve Coogan is part of the campaign group "Hacked Off" set up by those who were phone hacked by the various different news outlets. He is part of the campaign group because he was phone hacked himself.

He did a interview with the Today Programme on Radio 2 which involved talking about this case. His interview was reported on in The Guardian, BBC News and some other news outlets. This is why myself and another poster highlighted his views.

The thing that puzzles me is the role of the Metropolitan Police in the phone hacking scandal. Prince Harry has now called upon them to launch a criminal investigation - to which they've responded in a manner which doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they will - why collude with the cover up?

The Met police have been shown to be institutionally corrupt.

I have always known since a teenager due to the personal experiences of a couple of people I know/knew that they give journalists information. They and other police forces are now not allowed to do things in the same way which is why those stories came out about Nicola Bulley.

As Max Mosley said of his sex life 'I didn't ask you to join me'. Neither he nor his son were the vile Oswald, an example of one of the worst human beings the aristocracy has foisted on us proles. Neither had the influence of Oswald, thankfully, nor his craving for public acknowledgement. Their lives would not concern us if it were not for the prurience of the tabloid press.

And as for the Met . . . Read more. You'll understand how they operate.

Thanks Reugny

I can see the self-interested logic in the Police wanting good coverage from journalists and hence leaking stories to them, just like the Royal family do.

However I don't get why they would risk engaging in potentially criminal cover-ups to do so. It's not like they need the media for their survival, as to the royal family - we will always need a Police, however bad they get.

Is it about internal politics within the po-po, so individuals trying to look good to further their careers? What was in it for them, at the time of phone hacking and then Leveson? What's in it for them now, since as you say the Nicola Bulley case shows they're still at it?

I'm really curious.

The extent of corruption in the Met, possibly other forces, is extensive and is everyday practice. The top of the Met can't admit to investigating it, if they do, everything will fall apart. Many cases in which it is clear that corruption has muddied the waters. It was general practice for newspapers to pay police for information, generally via private investigators who crop up all over the hacking scandal. It's not a secret.

People will go to extreme lengths to defend clearly unacceptable behaviour.

One of the most problematic families in history-
”THE SINS OF THE FATHER ARE NOT THE SINS OF THE SON”
Ok well what are the sins of the son then?
”[redacted]”
Does the son at least disapprove of the sins of his father?
”He hasn’t mentioned that he doesn’t agree with all that in fact he was incredibly racist when he was younger and eventually learned to stop talking about it.”

It’s one of the worst cases of a wealthy, well-connected man censoring those trying to hold him accountable. He was not a random accountant on 28k a year, he held positions of power and responsibility.

The husband of the sex worker who sold her story lost his job, meaning he was held more accountable than MM ever was…

The extent of corruption in the Met, possibly other forces, is extensive and is everyday practice. The top of the Met can't admit to investigating it, if they do, everything will fall apart.

There was also a general understanding about what the news media should and shouldn't report to the public about cases.

The excuse for this is that by using the press/media they could catch guilty parties.

However due to them using the press/news media to manipulate the public e.g. Jean Charles de Menezes this stopped. This resulted in briefings like in the Nicola Bulley case.

I'm not here to defend the Mosleys, a revolting family, nothing that I know of can redeem them. However, press intrusion to solely satisfy the public taste for salacious scandal is either wrong or right. I consider it wrong and I'm delighted to see the news barons forced to put their hands in their pockets whether to compensate PH or Steve Coogan or anyone else who has been smeared by their trashy publications.

I don't know about now but I think at least in the past some police officers have accepted money from the press for information and stories otherwise not in the public domain. Leverson 2 would have been able to uncover such practices. Still very much need fir that as others have said.

So, police officers being bribed by PIs and journalists to leak info about ongoing investigations....

Police officers being bribed to look the other way, conceal or destroy evidence, not conduct criminal investigations, let suspects off the hook, etc. Just like in the movies.

I can see why the victims of phone hacking, including Harry, are not going to let up. Most people on the receiving end of the impacts of police corruption would feel desperate and powerless. Given reluctance of 'the establishment' to clean up its act, maybe all we've got are our deep-pocketed celebrities...

What?

What has racism got to with any of the articles Harry has brought against the Mirror Group?

None of them were about racism.

It was about hacking into his private information, to sell gossip stories.
Whether you like it ir not, nobody, absolutely nobody deserves to have their private information hacked and it all spread across gutter rags.

If it happened to you, i would defend you to the hilt.

And what the fuck has some husband who lost his job because his wife sold her sex work stories got to do with any of this?

You tell me. It wasn’t me that brought him up, people falsely claimed that the press trying to hold him accountable drove his son to suicide (not true).

I remember being shocked at the time (although subsequent revelations about the Met make me unsurprised) that the police engaged in this behaviour. Raking backhanders from PI's and reporters in exchange for gossip and information? As far as I could tell, absolutely nothing was done about this. Its a complete breach of trust by people who are meant to uphold the law.

@Angrycat2768
I remember being shocked at the time (although subsequent revelations about the Met make me unsurprised) that the police engaged in this behaviour. Raking backhanders from PI's and reporters in exchange for gossip and information? As far as I could tell, absolutely nothing was done about this. Its a complete breach of trust by people who are meant to uphold the law.

It is utterly shocking. I don't think the public at large have any idea of the presumed scale of this type of corrupt behaviour by police officers. I suspect most people think this sort of stuff only happens to a teeny extent, the work of a few 'bad apples', as past police commissioners themselves have tried to mislead the public into believing.

I recall being mystified by the stance taken by former Police Commissioner Cressida Dick in relation to police misogyny and race. Don't want to do an oversimplifying amalgam, and clearly police forces the world over are hugely prone to corruption, but this is the glorified UK here, supposed role model to the rest of the... well...

The more I learn about the corrupt collusion within the UK 'establishment', including the tabloid media, venal journalists, police officers, government officials and civil servants, and of course the royal palaces busily leaking and briefing against each other (particularly their Common Enemy Number 1, H&M), the more absolutely disgusted I am...

More people need to stop wasting their days on stuff like bashing H&M from morning to night, and instead pay attention to the real problems facing UK society, which are HUGE.

Feels like there's an urgency for folks to educate themselves, read investigative journalism reports instead of the dumb tabloids, and press for the right reviews and enquiries and other actions to start fixing the problems.

I'm going to support Harry and the other phone hacking claimants every way I can, as their fight continues!

The more I learn about the corrupt collusion within the UK 'establishment', including the tabloid media, venal journalists, police officers, government officials and civil servants, and of course the royal palaces busily leaking and briefing against each other (particularly their Common Enemy Number 1, H&M), the more absolutely disgusted I am

While I agree there are undoubtedly certain elements among public servants who collude with the press, particularly and sadly, the police, what evidence do you have that staff in royal palaces leak and brief against each other? In particular (presumably contemporaneously with their time in the royal family) planting stories against H&M? This of course excludes Harry's biography Spare, as Harry has to be regarded as a biased biographer.

I'm not wishing to derail, but simply to respond to your assertions.

Thanks!

Thanks! Was just about to cross post the same article

According to the BBC article, claimants have several avenues to try and bring this forward through criminal courts if the Met, for some reason, decide not to.

This is great to hear

Who are the palace sources? And why do they only leak negative stories if they aren't briefing against each other?

@kirinm I also have no idea. It simply doesn't make sense to brief against another member of the family. The RF exist on the goodwill of the British people. To be successful at that they need to portray the members of the family as decent upright citizens, who do good things via their various causes and charities. They also need to represent us as a country, to the world. How would (eg) making Edward look like a man who enjoys bondage (he presumably doesn't!) make Anne or Camilla look better? The RF needed Harry and Meghan to inject some modernity and diversity into the family. Why would they want to destroy that narrative. Evidence of this is how they kept so much of Harry's bad behaviour in his younger days hidden and portrayed him as a fun loving guy, when his true self is anything but that, as we have seen in recent years.

Of course the Monarchy's workforce is huge and not well paid, so the temptation there is to leak stories to the press. In fact there was even an instance of a newspaper plant getting a job as a footman to gather dirt on the RF from inside.

The newspapers themselves have said that many of the negative stories come from the Royal Households themselves. I presume, yes legions of poorly paid staff, boredom, one upmanship amongst different households, and also trying to get favourable coverage for one thing ( which isn't as lucrative for the papers) by leaking gossip ( which is).