Page 18 | Harry v. NGN

Atlasvue · 2025-01-19T10:02:32+00:00

Starting a thread for Tuesday. This BBC article covers the basics. This is the last line …. ’*Tuesday really is the beginning of the end. And someone is going to lose - and lose big.*’ I have a feeling, that Harry won’t win but he just wants to use the public setting to air his grievances. A therapy session would have worked out much cheaper. [[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2l00xkgwnyo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2l00xkgwnyo]]

Original poster

Atlasvue · 22/01/2025 13:13

prh47bridge · 22/01/2025 12:58

Proving nothing of the kind.

If NGN offered a settlement that was as much as, or more than, would have been awarded in court and Harry failed to accept it, he would have been liable for NGN's costs even if he won. If NGN offered enough, Harry's choice would have been to continue and possibly end up bankrupt, or accept what was on the table. Given that the offer included a full apology to both him and his mother with an admission of wrongdoing, he got what he wanted and was in a position where he had little choice but to accept. The same happened with Hugh Grant, who said he did not want to accept NGN's offer but had no choice as going to trial would be too expensive.

Despite what the Harry-haters on this thread think, this is a huge victory for him. NGN has folded. They have avoided a judgement that there was a corporate cover-up going all the way to the top of the business, but they have, for the first time, admitted wrongdoing and apologised to Harry and Diana.

The settlement will cover Harry's costs which will have been substantial. We don't know how much it goes beyond that, if at all.

Show quote history

It isn’t a win if he didn’t get an apology for the reason why he went to court, to prove those high up in NGN knew about illegal information gathering.

It’s just getting his fees covered and an apology that omits blame at the editors and Murdochs door. How’s that a win? Harry is the one that folded because he couldn’t afford the fees, so had to lay down his dragon slaying sword.

We won’t hear about any donations, because there won’t be any cash outside of the legal fees.

OP posts:

samarrange · 22/01/2025 13:14

NewFriendlyLadybird · 22/01/2025 13:09

I read the apology. That’s a ‘win’ for Harry. It’s what winning the court case would have achieved, but at less personal and time cost.

This. Perhaps some of the people who don't think this is a win for Harry could tell us what they imagine a win would actually look like?

I suppose "Rupert Murdoch eviscerating Rebekah Brooks and then himself on the steps of the High Court" would be a step further, but I must say that always seemed a bit unlikely.

pelargoniums · 22/01/2025 13:15

Adamante · 22/01/2025 13:06

Well fair is fair, I guess, but my goodness he will be even more insufferable now!

For those of us without a foot in either camp – neither vile Sussex Squad nor simpering monarchist – I’m declaring it an absolute WIN for Team “pissing about on the internet”. I don’t want Harry bankrupted; there’d be far less to gossip and rumour-monger about. I might have to be alone with my thoughts.

GreylingsSkin · 22/01/2025 13:15

TallerSally · 22/01/2025 13:08

I agree.

I read with some amusement the speculation that Harry's settlement is in the £10M range.

Let's put ourselves in Murdoch's shoes for a bit, shall we?
Fox News will pay more than $787 million to Dominion Voting Systems...
Fox News now facing Smartmatic's $2.7 billion lawsuit over the network's 2020 post-election coverage....

Different country, very different legal system and different set of issues, but if £10M (plus costs) was all it'd take to get Harry to settle, don't you think Murdoch would have offered that ages ago? The way to think about how NGN approached their settlement offer is to consider the downside risks to them of exposure to further proceedings and government regulation as well as the risks to their individual executives including Rebekah Brooks, who is still exposed despite this settlement. The downside risks to them are HUGE. The amount they'd need to offer to mitigate these risks would need to be commensurate.

My guess re Harry's settlement is that it's in excess of £30M + costs + apology and admission of wrongdoing. It needed to be an eye-watering amount that would bankrupt Harry if he didn't take it, and I suspect Harry had already budgeted a £10M hit if he were to go to trial and win, as he was clearly highly likely to do.

£10M may be eyewatering to some, but it's chump change to the likes of NGN ....and incidentally to the senior members of the RF, who (Harry excluded) are billionaires. And it's not far-fetched to speculate that Jeff "$240bn net-worth" Bezos could have chipped in a few dozens of millions to protect Will Lewis at the Washington Post. And who knows, could the Royal Households have secretly chipped something in too, to conceal the role they played?

Of course it's in the interests of the British Media to attempt to downplay the amount NGN has had to fork out to settle with Harry, and to weave the silly narrative that Harry settled for a measly £10M. I wouldn't be surprised if the true amount is in the £50M ballpark.

So it's blindingly obvious that Harry had no choice but to settle, and he got most of what he wanted, first and foremost NGN's unprecedented public admission of wrong-doing at the Sun, as well as the groveling apology including to Princess Diana, neither of which was obtained by Prince William. And after all, it's not up to Harry to single-handedly hold most of the British Media to account, there is law enforcement and a government in the UK - and a Leveson II which never happened. I'm glad Sherborne and Tom Watson reminded people of that.

Anyway, what a huge victory for Harry. No-one ever walks away from legal proceedings with all their boxes ticked, but Harry and Tom Watson can be proud of themselves for pushing NGN this far, all the way to admitting criminality.

Show quote history

This 👏👏👏

Serenster · 22/01/2025 13:19

Perhaps some of the people who don't think this is a win for Harry could tell us what they imagine a win would actually look like?

Proving his claims in court and having the court determine them in his favour would be the obvious. All those allegations David Sherborne was so happy to throw around in his statement after the settlement? Having the judge determine that claimant had met the civil standard of proof on those would be a win.

Although I expect Harry would have settled foran admission of liability that journalists at the The Sun, not just the News of the World, had hacked his phone. He didn’t get that.

He has got a settlement payment and a public apology. Given many, many others have got settlement payments, and that statement doesn’t admit anything new, the public apology is the real win here.

(Tom Watson actually did win! He got an admission that he was right and the News of The World was wrong).

Dolma · 22/01/2025 13:20

They have avoided a judgement that there was a corporate cover-up going all the way to the top of the business

From the Leveson Report : "This suggests a cover up by somebody and at more than one level." NGN rode out 4 volumes of scathing judgment from Leveson, I hardly think they are running scared from a lowly high court judge.

they have, for the first time, admitted wrongdoing and apologised to Harry and Diana.

They have admitted to using private investigators. Is there anyone who is surprised that newspapers use private investigators? Or that, in the days before the courts created the requirements of modern privacy law (which is a really modern invention), they stepped outside the boundaries of what courts now consider to be unacceptable behaviour?

smilesy · 22/01/2025 13:20

This. Perhaps some of the people who don't think this is a win for Harry could tell us what they imagine a win would actually look like?

According to Harry pre trial, he wanted an admission of guilt from the people’ “at the top” of the Newspaper. That would be his win. Not another statement admitting that private investigators acted legally. We all got that from previous litigations. He didn’t want to settle for anything less. But he has. After wasting everyone’s time and money. But this has been said a lot of times. It’s just that now the Harry fans have rocked up to tell us otherwise with their fingers in their ears going “La La La”

typos

Sandwichgen · 22/01/2025 13:21

In summary, Harry didn't get as far as he wanted to get, but he got further than anyone else?

(It somewhat feels to me as if he used all the other claimants as a human ladder to rack the settlement up to the stratosphere as the last man standing, but I suspect that's because I don't understand the law).

Partybagprick · 22/01/2025 13:21

samarrange · 22/01/2025 13:14

This. Perhaps some of the people who don't think this is a win for Harry could tell us what they imagine a win would actually look like?

I suppose "Rupert Murdoch eviscerating Rebekah Brooks and then himself on the steps of the High Court" would be a step further, but I must say that always seemed a bit unlikely.

Show quote history

A "win" for Harry, as he enunciated time and time again, was not money. If it had been money, he would have settled yonks ago along with Hugh Grant et al and not run up the massive amount of legal costs he will have preparing for trial. HE WANTED HIS DAY IN COURT. He wanted the editors and owners of NGN publicly held up to scrutiny and found complicit in phone hacking. HE DID NOT GET THIS. He got an apology from them about using non employee contractors (private investigators).Everyone and their aunt knew NGN did this, they have known since Leveson and the criminal trials. He has had no admission or finding of wrongdoing on the part of NGN, which, in his own words, was the reason for bringing the case in the first place.

Americano75 · 22/01/2025 13:25

He got his apology. No doubt the Daily Mail and the brainless fannies who fall for its vile agenda will find some way of twisting events.

samarrange · 22/01/2025 13:25

Dolma · 22/01/2025 13:20

They have avoided a judgement that there was a corporate cover-up going all the way to the top of the business

From the Leveson Report : "This suggests a cover up by somebody and at more than one level." NGN rode out 4 volumes of scathing judgment from Leveson, I hardly think they are running scared from a lowly high court judge.

they have, for the first time, admitted wrongdoing and apologised to Harry and Diana.

They have admitted to using private investigators. Is there anyone who is surprised that newspapers use private investigators? Or that, in the days before the courts created the requirements of modern privacy law (which is a really modern invention), they stepped outside the boundaries of what courts now consider to be unacceptable behaviour?

I suspect that the attached paragraph from NGN's statement may be relevant to explaining why they folded. For all its carefully-worded bluster about what might have been presented in court, it does not actually say "News International did not destroy evidence". I suspect they know that the other side had pretty strong indications that they did in fact destroy evidence. And although this was a civil trail, putting that into the legal domain could have resulted in criminal prosecutions as a result, including possibly for perjury.

Vespanest · 22/01/2025 13:29

From NGN
Today, our apology to the Duke of Sussex includes an apology for incidents of unlawful activities carried out by private investigators working for The Sun, not by journalists, during the period 1996-2011.
There are strong controls and processes in place at all our titles today to ensure this cannot happen now. There was no voicemail interception on The Sun.
It must also be stressed that allegations that were being made publicly pre trial (and indeed post settlement) that News International destroyed evidence in 2010/11 would have been the subject of significant challenge at trial. These allegations were and continue to be strongly denied. Extensive evidence would have been called in trial to rebut these allegations from senior staff from technology and legal.
After we served our skeleton arguments and evidence for trial including witness statements, the Duke has not sought to pursue these allegations further despite his stated intent and no admission or apology has been made in relation to this. This is significant. This matter was also investigated fully by the police and CPS between 2012-2015, at the conclusion of which it was found that there was no case to answer.

Janiie · 22/01/2025 13:29

smilesy · 22/01/2025 13:20

This. Perhaps some of the people who don't think this is a win for Harry could tell us what they imagine a win would actually look like?

According to Harry pre trial, he wanted an admission of guilt from the people’ “at the top” of the Newspaper. That would be his win. Not another statement admitting that private investigators acted legally. We all got that from previous litigations. He didn’t want to settle for anything less. But he has. After wasting everyone’s time and money. But this has been said a lot of times. It’s just that now the Harry fans have rocked up to tell us otherwise with their fingers in their ears going “La La La”

typos

Edited

This,

What aren't people getting here?? He wanted people at the top help accountable, he wanted the truth, this wasn't about the money. Instead he has settled and got an apology for intrusive private investigators acting unlawfully decades ago which was not new information.

He settled. There is no win here by any stretch of the imagination.

smilesy · 22/01/2025 13:30

Americano75 · 22/01/2025 13:25

He got his apology. No doubt the Daily Mail and the brainless fannies who fall for its vile agenda will find some way of twisting events.

Edited

He got the same apology everyone else got years ago. what needs to be”twisting”? He didn’t get the admission he claimed he wanted. You don’t need to be a “brainless fanny” or any other charming insult you care to throw around to work that one out

Serenster · 22/01/2025 13:30

People seem to have decided that Harry had a slam dunk case. Inevitable I guess. However NGN also had a good defence based on him being out of time to sue them. That will have factored into the relative assessments of strength and weakness, despite what some poster on this thread would have you believe.

Vespanest · 22/01/2025 13:30

Sorry I cross posted with others

Original poster

Atlasvue · 22/01/2025 13:32

Well then if Harry is getting 30m like some deluded posts have said….then he will be donating the money then in the name of good causes? Like the LA fire relief efforts……

We won’t hear anything. Harry folded and took 10m to cover his fees. There ain’t more money

OP posts:

pelargoniums · 22/01/2025 13:32

Vespanest · 22/01/2025 13:29

From NGN
Today, our apology to the Duke of Sussex includes an apology for incidents of unlawful activities carried out by private investigators working for The Sun, not by journalists, during the period 1996-2011.
There are strong controls and processes in place at all our titles today to ensure this cannot happen now. There was no voicemail interception on The Sun.
It must also be stressed that allegations that were being made publicly pre trial (and indeed post settlement) that News International destroyed evidence in 2010/11 would have been the subject of significant challenge at trial. These allegations were and continue to be strongly denied. Extensive evidence would have been called in trial to rebut these allegations from senior staff from technology and legal.
After we served our skeleton arguments and evidence for trial including witness statements, the Duke has not sought to pursue these allegations further despite his stated intent and no admission or apology has been made in relation to this. This is significant. This matter was also investigated fully by the police and CPS between 2012-2015, at the conclusion of which it was found that there was no case to answer.

Disappointingly verbose when they could have had “It Was the Sun Wot Won Settled It”

Serenster · 22/01/2025 13:33

Also, just a reminder of what Harry said at Dealbook in December

The duke said he sought “truth and accountability” through legal action.
He said that 1,300 people had settled their claims, adding: “They’ve settled because they’ve had to settle. So therefore, one of the main reasons for seeing this through is accountability, because I’m the last person that can actually achieve that.”

So what changed?

NewFriendlyLadybird · 22/01/2025 13:33

NGN’s apology is an implicit admission of guilt. It’s not an apology for using non-employee contractors, but for serious intrusion, phone hacking and unlawful activities by journalists and by the contractors — instructed by NGN at the NOTW. There’s a little bit of sleight of hand, but the apology by NGN is an admission of responsibility by the group, which means it comes from the top. Why else would they have been so keen to settle? It must have been a large amount to keep individuals from being named individually court. But we know who they are, and this has confirmed it.

IcedPurple · 22/01/2025 13:35

NewFriendlyLadybird · 22/01/2025 13:33

NGN’s apology is an implicit admission of guilt. It’s not an apology for using non-employee contractors, but for serious intrusion, phone hacking and unlawful activities by journalists and by the contractors — instructed by NGN at the NOTW. There’s a little bit of sleight of hand, but the apology by NGN is an admission of responsibility by the group, which means it comes from the top. Why else would they have been so keen to settle? It must have been a large amount to keep individuals from being named individually court. But we know who they are, and this has confirmed it.

NGN almost always settle, so this is nothing new.

It's Harry who publicly took a stance against settling. See the quote from @Serenster above.

Alarmclockstop · 22/01/2025 13:35

I’m declaring it an absolute WIN for Team “pissing about on the internet”.

I agree 😂

Dolma · 22/01/2025 13:35

pelargoniums · 22/01/2025 13:32

Disappointingly verbose when they could have had “It Was the Sun Wot Won Settled It”

Show quote history

Beautiful. Somewhere out there a content team is giving you a chef's kiss.

Original poster

Atlasvue · 22/01/2025 13:36

Exactly! The sun aren’t apologising for anything.

Blaming the private investigators. Harry accepts that it was the PIs and not journalists and those high up at the Sun and it’s owners

So why are these posters acting like it was what Harry was setting out to accomplish?

All he got was his fees and a non apology

OP posts:

MrsLeonFarrell · 22/01/2025 13:37

Haven't read the full thread

The BBC are calling it a significant settlement because it's the first time that NGN have admitted that The Sun also gained information in ways that News of the World did. It is significant but I'm not sure it is monumental as Harry's lawyer claimed.

He hasn't got NGN to admit that their executives did anything illegal. He has got the same apology, albeit to nore famous people, that everyone has received since 2011. He hasn't, as far as I can tell, got accountability from individuals inside NGN beyond 'sorry the private detectives acted illegally and that it hurt you and caused you problems'.

So I tend to agree with the BBC significant but not monumental.

I hope it brings him closure.