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?

So, a follow up question, where is the evidence that they obtained the information illegally? I've read the stream on the BBC and i didn't see any.

Yes, I’m no legal brain but even as a curious bystander, it seems he has no real evidence but feelings, is again doing exactly the same as his previous case ( not security) and using this as a vehicle to avenge his mother and white knight Meghan , the judge should really make him stop now , he’s wasting thousands of pounds of taxpayer money on a personal grudge.

Is this case treated as a class action, as in the claimants are treated as group.
or can one claimant fail and the others succeed ?

A clearly emotional Harry hits out at media for commercialising his private life
published at 14:51
14:51

Sean Coughlan
Royal correspondent
Prince Harry was clearly very emotional as he railed at the way his private life has been “commercialised” by the media.
He says it’s “disgusting” the idea that he shouldn’t be entitled to a private life.
And he says this court battle has been another “horrible experience” for himself and his family.

So

Yes being in the press from a young age must be awful, thank goodness her isn't doing the same to his young children ...

If you don't want people writing about your private life maybe don't write an autobiography or give interviews where you breach your own privacy and give the press fodder for years

If you find court cases traumatic, stop going to court.

This isn't what the case is about. Why did they put him on the stand? He didn't give any evidence of wrong doing.

I'm following the BBC stream and haven't read any so far. Of course, this is only the first witness for the claimants.

I assume as well as the other celebrity witnesses there will be the paper evidence of payments, etc, but I'm not sure how robust that will be. We do know their key witness withdrew his statement (or said the statement alleged to be his was fraudulent).

We now move to Barbara Jones. Earlier, Prince Harry agreed she knew how to "work people well".
Sherborne asks him to expand on how he thinks she would get information.
"Blagging, and pretending to be someone else to get access to places she probably shouldn't," he tells court.

That’s quite a telling answer. What Harry describes there is just a journalist doing their job. It’s not illegal - it doesn't breach any data or privacy rights.

It seems to be all Harry's "vibes" and "feels" that any information he didn't want out there must have been obtained illegally - but I am not seeing the chain of events

The fact that most of these stories come from his "Party Prince" years makes me think that there were likely a lot of hangers on on the army/party/club circuit who made a good living phoning in tips - but Harry doesn't want to see it.

Contrast to William who was more cautious, had a smaller, loyal circle and fewer leaks and stories - except for the times he was proved hacked by the NOTW

It's also an odd contradiction - given Harry's claims of trauma - that they use their own kids as a marketing tool on social media.

When I asked that early on I was told that while it's a group action the cases stand or fall individually.

It also has implications for costs - if some win and some lose, those who lose may have huge costs to pay.

I am surprised the Judge allowed Harry to ramble on the way he did.

@Serenster is there a pile of evidence that isn't being mentioned in court? I can't see how they have a case with what Harry said. I'm now baffled as to what is going on.

They all seem to be treating Harry as a "vulnerable" witness

Each claim will stand or fall on its own merit. It’s a number of separate claims being heard together as that’s the most efficient way of running it.

On the evidence of this morning's testimony he does seem pretty vulnerable.

If you have a look at today’s civil listings in the High Court you will see them all listed to be heard at the same time in Court 76!

www.court-tribunal-hearings.service.gov.uk/kings-bench-division-daily-cause-list?artefactId=73f42a61-426f-4d20-a6ae-5721cd0af94b

The fact that most of these stories come from his "Party Prince" years makes me think that there were likely a lot of hangers on on the army/party/club circuit who made a good living phoning in tips - but Harry doesn't want to see it.

That's what I'm thinking @Lunde - remembering the photos of 'Party Harry' I suspect he wouldn't remember what conversations he had himself, let alone know what others said or be careful around strangers.

I presume they will all have witnesses presenting more technical evidence…

Ok that makes sense. Not sure I would have started with Harry but I'm not Sherborne.

He did tell him off twice! But this is why the royals don’t appear in the witness stand, 1 they are not used to being questioned by mere people and 2 they are treated in a wholly different manner!
for the purposes of a court case his titles should have been inadmissible and he should be treated like any other witness.

The worst part of sitting up there in the witness box, he says, is that ANL have "made my wife's life an absolute misery".
He gets visibly emotional delivering the final sentence, his voice breaking.
That marks the end of Prince Harry's evidence. He bows and leaves the court.

Can't help but wonder if Meghan has tried giving him some acting lessons- he was rude and abrasive throughout giving evidence, but suddenly tearful and fragile for the final moments.

Harry betrayed many in his book and interviews, stuff that was private and personal, he had no 2nd thoughts about embarrassing others. His doufus friend Alex has often put his foot in it when thinking he was defending harry. So I feel no sympathy at all for Harry, I suspect he is a shit friend who does not inspire loyalty in friends, all whom he dropped like hot turds once married.

Yes, each claimant has to prove their own case. There will be some common evidence between all, eg, about the general practice of hacking and UIG within ANL. But they each need to show evidence that they were the victim of the specific incidences of hacking/UIG thy have plead, as well as showing they are not caught out by limitation of actions. In the previous hacking cases, there were various different outcomes for each claimant. Some persuaded the judge they had been hacked, some didn’t, some did prove hacking but were caught out under limitation so lost, some settled before trial, others persuaded the judge they had been hacked, but did not beat the pre trial settlement offer so effectively “lost”.

No more updates! , is that it for today?

Too late to edit, @IAmATorturedPoet (my electricity went off ) but if that pic really was taken in Ibiza then I'm wrong agian

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”

I believe drugs also push takers into paranoia (?) and why does need need the judge to know what Harry's world is like? He's not a counsellor ...

"To sit here and go through this all over again and have them give their own defence and claim that I don't have any right ot any privacy is disgusting."

And where has anyone for the defence claimed he has no right to privacy?
Seems he's just making things up now, but nothing new there

Of course, in his claims, he is alleging very personal and private information has been stolen from him. And it's the second time he's had to take the stand, very publicly, and discuss personal matters including past relationships.

No, he didn't have to. He chose to bring a case. He could have decided not to do that.