Harry v NGN 2

[mainecooncatonahottinroof]

I don't think we're done talking - and I never start threads!

As you were!

@FromTheOfficeOfJammyTodger you understand the law is different in the US? There are not the same financial risks as in in the UK where you can be liable for both sides costs if you win, but have turned down a massive settlement.

Start a thread on it then? Or are you too busy slaying dragons on this thread?

So it's all about the money for Harry then?

The point the poster was making was that the individual followed through on his principles, that making people accountable was more important than the financial gain

Yes I am. And I am also aware of just how difficult it is to bring a libel claim in the US, where the First Amendment makes this much harder than in the UK; where legal fees are exorbitant; and fighting when you are nowhere near as rich as the likes of Hugh Grant and Harry to take the hit of losing, let alone any kind of match for the financial might of a company like CNN. This was a brave and principled plaintiff.

And not having the Part 36 mechanism doesn't meant there are not costs consequences for the losing party. He took a big risk.

Just to clarify in my own mind , how far back can we go ? Some posters ( usually Sussex supporters) like to remind us about interviews by Charles, Diana and Sarah in the 1990s but object to references to the OW interview 5 years ago .
It may be bloody obvious to you but , despite having 2 degrees , it’s not obvious to me 🤷‍♀️

Honestly I do not give a shit in attacking or defending Harry. I am not interested in discussing this important issue with people who are just fans of each side and defend them no matter what.
What Harry has said though is he wanted the public apology for him and his mother, and the settlement.
And Harry and Tom Watson have said they will continue to campaign on this issue

@Mylovelygreendress You think Charles might have given Harry up to £10 million in 2025 to meet legal costs?
I think most people would disagree with you.

No I don’t think that but there are plenty of rumours suggesting that Harry thought he might !

Would Charles have £10m liquid to spend on Harry’s costs or is his wealth all tied up in the complex mysteries of royal finances?

@JoyousGreyOrca You don't give a shit about defending Harry?? 🥴

So you obviously think he is incredibly thick.

What Harry has said though is he wanted the public apology for him and his mother, and the settlement.

This is totally the contrary to what Harry said 4 weeks ago.

They are children. Nobody is assuming any of that.

My position is that the tabloid newspapers are already framing the children. Look a moment at the coverage from the coronation and various walks to the church. A "narrative" is being created.

"gleaned for NGN which is our major source of information about him"???
I am not out of my mind as far as I know. Most of what we know about him was from the newspapers interpretation of him and some interviews they did here and there.

Since he left the UKL, he has indeed written a book, made appearances, done interviews etc.

But again, I would say that most of what we think we know comes through the papers.

Yes.

We know what he said and it certainly was not this!

Maybe we need to get one of those factcheckers The Office of the Duke and Duchess were so fond of to moderate this discussion?

Didn't he say that he would never settle?

Anyway, I'm off to watch Vera, nothing like a good murder on a Saturday night

Actually, nobody dismissed it,

Prince William was not part of the conversation.

You brought him in.

As soon as you did, in the context of academic achievement, you were agreed with and his achievement was acknowledged.

What Harry has said though is he wanted the public apology for him and his mother, and the settlement.

That’s what he got.
When did he say that was what he wanted?

Can you show me what he said? Because I have not read anything to the contrary. Someone a few pages back claimed he had said something different, and I posted the actual quote of what he said with a link.
So if you are right, show me.

I wonder what would happen if all the momentum re Harry won/did not win etc was instead targeted at NGN?

I feel like we are looking for accountability in the wrong place.

True.

But I am only two years younger than my brother.

His resilience when our dad died at 16 trumped mine at 14.

Most would agree, on a parenting site that the difference between 14 and 16 is considerable.

20, 22 - not so much.

I do not think it is fair to judge resilience. There are so many factors affecting it.
I agree there are massive differences between a 12 year old who is nearly 13 years old, and a fifteen year old.

The tabloid newspapers can create whatever narrative they want. It doesn't mean the children will fall in line with it!

In the last 5 years, I think there's been enough of his own direct words and deeds to have an opinion of his behaviour.

There are other newspapers than NGN also!

Louis is 6 years old and was already being labelled as mischievous from 4 years old. He just seems like a young child to me.
Charlotte is labelled as a caretaker of the other two boys. A nauseatingly sexist stereotype.

At the New York Times Dealbook Summit last month, he said:

I know why people have settled. 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. And also closure for these 1300 people and their families.

Nonsense, that's been part of the narrative over the course of many threads here!

Harry seems to behave too as if his mother was exclusive to him, with his oft repeated references to her.