Duke of Sussex court case: key witness statement false

[bluegreygreen]

I looked for another thread on this but didn't see one.

The story is about the case Prince Harry (and 6 others) are bringing against the Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers) for phone hacking. Back in July the claimants were told to reveal any payments that were made to witnesses in exchange for evidence; this seems more serious.

From what I can gather the main witness (Gavin Burrows) in the case was employed by the claimants' team over a couple of years to help research into the phone hacking by different organisations and to track down relevant people. He says he was asked on several occasions if he had worked for the Daily Mail and always denied it, and the first he knew of the current case was when he heard in 2023 that Baroness Lawrence had brought it based on his evidence.

Apparently Burrows wrote a statement at that time (2023) denying the claims and has now written a more detailed statement also denying the claims.

The claimants now don't want to call him as a witness (unsurprisingly) but do want to rely on (some of) his evidence as 'hearsay evidence'.
They also don't want Associated Newspapers to be allowed to call him as a witness.

Telegraph archive link
https://archive.is/YAjNq

I haven't heard before of 'hearsay evidence' being used like this - does anyone know the rules? How can it be tested?

Only now 😉

Yes, @drivinmecrazy , in a nutshell.
His status and privilege is writ large.

Harry now talking about Barbara Jones, foreign correspondent for MAil on Sunday
Says she would always turn up when he was in Africa, and it was 'very suspicious' how she knew where he was.
AW KC says she likely turned up and made enquiries of local staff. Harry says no, it must have been blagging (illegally obtaining information by deception).

I travel a lot, so in an offhand conversation I might forget the odd holiday destination.

On the other hand, at work I'm the sort of person who'll answer an HR query with numbered evidence for the simplest of questions.

Court is supposed to be treated like the latter, I understand. And this isn't his first go.

😂😂😂
If I could I would - it’s the drama Mick!! 😂

I’ve caught up now! Wow 😮, are they really going to let him sit there and behave like that?
he has either lied outright or is using “his truth “ , I’m shocked and angry that this is allowed any other person would be not allowed to behave this way!

I'm assuming AW will go back over things with evidence, and the questions will get trickier.

You don't get to be KC by being easy on questionable witnesses.

I really hope so @bluegreygreen!

Who decides which witness goes first?

If it's the Claimants, do they regard Harry as their "star" witness who will be utterly believed and trail-blaze for the other witnesses; or do they regard Harry as their "weakest" witness and hope by the end of the trial everyone will have forgotten his wibblings?

From the Guardian updates

In his written evidence, the Duke of Sussex said that the “bubble burst” after he stepped down as a working senior royal in 2020 and moved to North America.
Describing claims against News Group Newspapers (NGN), the publisher of The Sun and the now defunct News Of The World, Harry said:

It was only really within the past few years that I found out that other individuals within or associated with the Institution, such as my friend Marko, had brought phone hacking claims against NGN.
It is not an exaggeration to say that the bubble burst in terms of what I knew in 2020 when I moved out of the United Kingdom.
To this day, there are members of the royal family and friends of mine who may have been targeted by NGN and I have no idea whether they have or have not brought claims.
..............................................................................................

Or was it that Sherborne put the idea into his head during Summer 2019?

He really is an objectionable toad! 😡

Sean Couglan on the BBC live feed

"You get an impression from Prince Harry’s sometimes terse responses how personal this court case is to him. He paints a picture of always being wary of leaks and intrusions into this social life. It’s something he makes clear has hounded him since his childhood.

He tells the judge that he wants the court to know what it’s like living in that world.

While he says is case is motivated by “truth, justice and accountability”, it’s clearly also been an emotional burden, pushing him to what he calls “paranoia”.

In turn, the Mail’s barrister painstakingly and unemotively goes through each disputed article, making the detailed case for how they were based on information that was legitimately obtained.

Prince Harry seems to want to look at the big picture, the Mail are going for the careful close-up."

But the case isn't about whether the papers hounded him, followed him and printed lots of article about him. It's about whether they used illegal means to do so. Harry really just wants his day in court, I hope he feels the costs are worth it.

I don't entirely understand why Harry is being allowed to grandstand and pontificate on everything under the sun including Diana, Meghan and the kitchen sink

Are there going to be harder questions or will it be used as evidence that Harry is an unstable/paranoid person?

Elizabeth Hurley - I have got to see that. I know a lot about Liz.

Didn't H on one of his and M's very few foreign tours , go to the back of the plane and tell the various journalists , "not that you were invited" ( sic.) Of course they were invited it was a foreign tour at the request of HMG . No idea if the Barbara Jones visit was the same , but H does seem to have had some very tenuous grasp on the relationship between the WRF and the press in the past.

I'm not sure I would go as far as Ito say I feel sorry for H but it does seem like he should let go of this idea of persecution for his own peace of mind. Maybe if he concentrated more on something more constructive.

I’ve just checked and unless I’m missing it , it appears that the daily mail are not reporting on the case ( probably not surprising) but are reporting lots of articles about w and c visits in Scotland.

All of which (NGN claims) are totally irrelevant to claims against ANL, @Lunde.

I'm surprised - it sounds like Sherborne didn't make him rewrite his statement for this case.

@GwendolineFairfax8 - I'd put folding money on EH being a more credible witness than H

I just hope he feels the costs

More from Harry's witness statement: Prince 'extremely upset' by Diana death photo
published at 14:04
14:04
While we wait for court to resume, we've been continuing to look through the Duke of Sussex's witness statement, which was published as he started giving evidence at the High Court
One example Prince Harry gives of information which he claims could only have come from unlawful information gathering is an article from 2006, about his and Prince William's reactions to the publication of a photo of Princess Diana after her fatal car crash by the Italian media.
Harry says he does not recall reading the Daily Mail article at the time, but found the piece "disgusting" and made him consider: "If Associated was willing to publish this type of material, then it really makes me wonder how far they are prepared to go."
He adds that the information in the article suggested they "were plainly listening in to our calls".
Associated Newspapers Limited has denied allegations of unlawful information gathering. The publisher argues that the case has been brought too late, and strongly defends its journalists in the face of the accusations.

But the case isn't about whether the papers hounded him, followed him and printed lots of article about him. It's about whether they used illegal means to do so. Harry really just wants his day in court, I hope he feels the costs are worth it.

Agree @MrsLeonFarrell - I think the trouble is he's convinced himself there was illegal activity, evidence or not. He now seems to associate any information gathering at all with illegality.

Daily Mail can argue he just had a vendetta about his mother’s death. I was a fan but she might have survived had she been wearing a seatbelt.

Harry’s autobiography title ‘Spare’ is so derogatory to his mother. If you view the photos of her reuniting with Harry and William on the Royal Yacht Britannia - the joy and love shines out of her.

Sherborne should have warned Harry it would be a difficult case to prove.

Interesting - I sent him a lot of evidence earlier today

Harry being forced to work with Rebecca English.

@jeffgoldblum Isn't that photo reaction story the one where ANL says Rebecca English phoned Kensington Palace to check it was OK to publish?