Harry's legal team tactics of "cash for witnesses" exposed ahead of ANL trial

[Lunde]

Some interesting stuff

Just the costs for the legal action estimated at £40 million (I can see why Hugh Grant chose to settle)

Dodgy actions around the timeline as each claimed to have a revelation of "hacking" in 2016 - which just squeaked their cases in before the 6 year limit - even the judge has commented about the lack of documentation around 2016

The use of obscure website articles to create the "watershed" moment in 2016 - where the websites are own/controlled by those working as researchers for Harry's legal team on the case - possibly creating their own evidence

Paying "whistle-blowers" to give evidence

Strong reliance on evidence from private investigator Gavin Burrows who says his witness statement has been fabricated by Harry's legal team and that his signature was forged

https://pressgazette.co.uk/media_law/cash-for-witnesses-prince-harry-legal-teams-tactics-revealed-ahead-of-mail-privacy-trial/#:%7E:text=Huge%20cash%20payments%20to%20witnesses,against%20the%20Daily%20Mail%20group

It’s a very murky, toxic insalubrius place where PH ‘finds’ …. ‘Hhis truth’
hopefully the courts will kick him out if anything is proven

… and fine him … or worse … for lying in court if he has and is caught out

Now the unusual activity on MN makes some sense. It is all a red herring to distract from potential witness tampering.

I am surprised at the leeway H gets in UK courts. In the US witness tampering is a felony offence with up to 20 years in prison. I can't imagine any court in the US giving H the same grace for his wayward behaviors as the UK courts are doing so far.

Perhaps the UK legal eagles can shed light on this.

We've been keeping up with the case on this thread @Lunde - you're very welcome, or we can continue here

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5443044-duke-of-sussex-court-case-key-witness-statement-false?page=3

I have come to the conclusion that Harry will do and say anything for attention in his desperate birthday to remain relevant.

19th of January is the day apparently!

Are the claimants not getting twitchy about the £40 million legal fees?

Even if they win they will all owe a lot of money - I thought the judge had issued warnings about not accepting excessive fees?

Now the unusual activity on MN makes some sense. It is all a red herring to distract from potential witness tampering.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

He probably thinks the British taxpayer will (should) foot the bill

Hugh Grant would have bitten The Sun’s hand off - despite his interview making it sound like a part 36 offer was something he had never heard of. He knew one of his employees was leaking personal information (told him myself back in 2023).

The Daily Mail has this information filed and David Sherborne is aware of it.