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'.

Watching that youtube of Piers Morgan. Oh my god. What a supercilious, patronising twat he is.

When asked if he listened to hacked voicemails he kept saying "I don't believe so". The person questioning him said... it's either yes or no, which is it. Morgan repeated "I don't believe so".
That obviously means "yes"

PM obviously thinks he is above the law. And he seemed seriously unhinged when he was ranting about Meghan on the ITV morning programme. That’s a very unpleasant combination.

A BBC news report said just now that it came up in court that PM advised someone he was sitting next to at function to change their PIN number for fear that journalists could hack it.

How much of that is connected to the timing of the ruling and how much to the release of Endgame? I don't think the ramping up is connected with the case so much as it is with the book.

Having said that it is clear that Harry and Meghan stories are great clickbait as far as news sites that need to attract adverts to survive are concerned. Sadly I can't see that changing for anyone who is targeted by the media. They might not hack anymore but they all use ordinary, as well as, famous people as a commodity. Not sure how we change that.

They might not hack anymore but they all use ordinary, as well as, famous people as a commodity. Not sure how we change that.

Maybe, by not participating? Not clicking on their stories or buying their papers? I do think we, the public, have a lot more power than we realise.

How come it's only ever Prince Harry's name mentioned though?

Because that's the scum media for you, ScremeEggs
Other names are mentioned if you search for them, but Harry's provides better clickbait for this kind of outlet

I am pleased for PH and for the others I should add.

While I don’t like some of how PH has come across in the last few years, perhaps this will give some an understanding of what he has been through in his teens. No wonder the guy struggles with his mental health. I also looked at the Daily Mail who have posted nothing. Gutter press really and should be shut down. Piers Morgan also needs dealt with.

That’s the reason they chose Harry as one of the first 4 litigants though, because of his profile

I don't click on tabloids, or buy any of the books but it's like pushing water uphill in terms of effect!

Do you mean a date with Piers Morgan? Wasnt he married at the time? I dont doubt he has/had a crush on her and would probably have liked to have a relationship with her. He behaves like a 10 year old who pulls the pigtails of someone he fancies.

I think I posted part of this earlier:

In his statement read out by David Sherborne, Harry said:

“My commitment to seeing this case through is based on my belief, in our need and collective right, to a free and honest press, and one which is properly accountable when necessary. That is what we need in Britain and across the globe. Anything else is poisoning the well for a profession we all depend on.
“The acts listed in this judgment are prime examples of what happens when the power of the press is abused. I respectfully call upon the authorities, the financial regulator, the stock market who were deliberately deceived by Mirror Group, and indeed the Metropolitan Police and prosecuting authorities, to do their duty for the British public and to investigate bringing charges against the company and those who have broken the law.

“Today’s ruling is vindicating and affirming. I’ve been told that slaying dragons will get you burned, but in light of today’s victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press, it is a worthwhile price to pay. The mission continues.”

I have seen tabloid destroy someone I am close to.

Once the public face of the story faded the carnage in their private life would take your breath away.

Almost all personal relationships had broken down.

It wiped out an entire life and every relationship that makes a life meaningful. As a result, the trust needed to rebuild a life simply wasn't there.

In the end they went for a completely new name, a new identity, and moved far away.

It was devastating to watch.

Yes I really hope so Fabby.

Mr Justice Fancourt said the unlawful activity was “concealed” from Parliament, shareholders and the public, as well as the board overseeing MGN.
In his summary of the ruling, the judge said: “The board as a whole was not told about it.
“That was because the editors of the three newspapers, the editorial managers of the company and [chief executive officer Sly] Bailey and [group legal director Paul] Vickers did not report what they knew, or suspected, to the board.
“The likelihood of extensive illegal activity should have been investigated properly by Ms Bailey and Mr Vickers, at the latest in early 2007, but it never was.
“Instead, it was concealed from the board, from Parliament in 2007 and 2011, from the Leveson Inquiry, from shareholders, and from the public for years, and the extent of it was concealed from claimants in the Mirror Newspapers hacking litigation and even from the court at and before the trial in 2015.
“The company’s in-house lawyers knew about the use of phone hacking and extensive unlawful information-gathering because of their involvement in ‘legalling’ articles for publication.”
Mr Justice Fancourt found the chairmen up to 2012, Sir Victor Blank and Sir Ian Gibson, finance director Vijay Vaghela and former board member Stephen Parker “did not know about phone hacking or the extent of the use of private investigators to conduct unlawful information gathering, and that the non-executive directors did not know either”.

Surely the police have to investigate?

What a fantastic result! I'm really pleased for him and Michel Turner but gutted for Nikki Sanderson and Fiona Wightman.

The relative silence from the tabloids is in how they're going to try and change the narrative - you see it already in this thread. Anyway - good news to end a good year for him.

@andIsaid

That is truly awful. Sadly, I can imagine that sort of thing happening. I hope your friend is doing OK

“Today’s ruling is vindicating and affirming. I’ve been told that slaying dragons will get you burned, but in light of today’s victory and the importance of doing what is needed for a free and honest press, it is a worthwhile price to pay. The mission continues.”

Bring on police enquiry and Leveson 2!

What struck me was how his positioned changed so dramatically from how smart, intelligent and beautiful she was to how she apparently became entitled and arrogant when she didn’t want to play ball with him. She played a high price for that and it may not have been the wisest PR move but I bet she is jumping about in her kitchen with glee right now, I hope she is anyway, and glad she distanced herself from him.

and yet someone on this thread tried to sully the mood by saying this was an odious statement.

average disgruntled middle aged man, can't deal with rejection, but amplified by how powerful this delusional man thought he was.

used to feel sorry for his wife, then i found out who she has. perfectly suited if you ask me!

There is a lot of history to this, and I followed it.

He has now deleted all of this and I kick myself at deleting the montage from my saved files but... at one point, he was literally tweeting her every other day. Before he met her, when she was on Suits. He was like a schoolboy with a crush. Telling her how wonderful she was, she was the best actress ever, she deserved to be nominated for awards, how he was her biggest fan... it was literally hundreds of tweets.

Then they met in a bar by arrangement before she went off to meet Harry. He then was angling for a wedding invite continually in tweets. It didn't happen. She pulled away (on advice from Harry no doubt) and he turned.

And from then on he never stopped attacking her at every single opportunity.

That is the only way to change it - it’s easier than ever to see exactly which story is driving website visitors - papers used to have to guess if they had an uptick in sales because of what they put on their front page.

It’s also possible to see which exact words are driving clicks which is why Meghan and Kate are always described by their maiden names at some point in the article and why headlines have someone ‘snubbing’ someone else when they simply don’t go to an event.

The only way to change what’s reported on is for the public to change what they are interested in.

It’s a bit like election polls - people claim they find the intrusive gutter stories appalling and not proper news when asked to their face but the stats show that’s exactly what the majority are reading, clicking on and searching for on the internet and while that’s what makes money that’s what the tabloids and others will print.

They really just care about the money.

Yes and remember when they got engaged he was so happy and he also said the royal family had a problem with racism... why does anyone give this man and his ever-changing opinions the time of day? I don't get it.

Bravo Harry, and the others, for bringing this claim. Not an easy thing to do.

Daily Mail next. You’re going down, you fuckers!

No comment or statement from BP then.

How much of that is connected to the timing of the ruling and how much to the release of Endgame? I don't think the ramping up is connected with the case so much as it is with the book.

You have two factors here.

The first is that a few weeks ago they knew they were going to lose and offered to settle. That is the connection to the case (wall to wall extreme negative coverage ensued before the public announcement).

The second is that the judge stated he found O.Scobie measured and reliable. That is the connection to the case and the book - (wall to wall extreme negative coverage ensued before the public announcement. Not at all reliable. A liar in fact)!

We need to pay attention to this - PH and OS are people who largely have no impact on our lives.

BUT - the papers operate in the same way when it does impact us. That is the utility argument.

The ethical and moral arguments are clear.