Duke of Sussex & Others v ANL: thread 2

[bluegreygreen]

This is a continuation of the discussion on the previous thread:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5443044-duke-of-sussex-court-case-key-witness-statement-false?page=1

We are following the court case on the

It is but that has already been dealt with.

It’s def illegal to pay the police - or any public servant - for information! Has been since 1998 and reinforced by the Bribery Act.

The police were bloody useless investigating the Lawrence murder, they lacked evidence and witnesses, no one wanted to put their neck on the block naming the thugs. Without briefing the press the story would have faded fast. The sustained campaign produced a result eventually 2 of the 6 convicted. I think DL is forgetting that. I'm not saying she should be grateful to the mail but without it she was just another anguished campaigning mother. Sorry to be mean.

For the legal eagles:
Sherborn isn't working no win no fee, so the claimants must be paying substantial amounts up front, it's been going on for 5 years, Sherborn doesn't come cheap. Did someone say the case was being bankrolled by someone else? I struggle to on top of it, the brain isn't retaining anything.
Every time I go 😮 I forget everything else.

No matter what she received in payout, DL has every right to stay bitter and angry at the Met for the rest of her life. I wonder if stories involving the police were cherry picked by the lawyers to woo her.

Back in 2022 during the Wagatha Christie trial - I remember reading that Sherborne bills at approx £1,000 per hour (probably more now)

So win or lose he will be laughing.

I feel desperately sad and sorry for DL but a part of me thinks that the only reason the DM were able to identify and publish the names of Stephen’s killers is because they paid for information. And some of the people they paid were no doubt, not nice. It’s either OK to pay for information or it isn’t. It doesn’t work both ways or when a particular moral code is in place.

The judge has said the costs are exorbitant and still seven weeks to go with probably 8k a day for Sherborn, it's obscene.

It’s rumoured to be partly through insurance up to £14m, partly via Elton John, and possibly through the estate of the late Max Mosley. But who knows? Maybe Harry’s put his hand in our his pocket too?

That insurance won't have been cheap and if they weren't 100% honest about their evidence, it won't pay out, it will have many clauses.

DM article on DL's evidence

In written submissions, Antony White KC, representing ANL, said the allegations in relation to Lady Lawrence “are denied in their entirety” and “are unsupported by the available evidence”.
He added: “They are the product of an attempt by members of the claimants’ research team, adopted by Baroness Lawrence and her legal representatives, to present a case of unlawful information-gathering against Associated based entirely on spurious and/or discredited information, none of which is before the court in the form of proper admissible evidence.
“In fact, the reality is that the information in each of the articles was obtained by entirely legitimate reporting and based on the sources identified by Associated in its defence and evidence.”
He also said that the publisher is able to call a witness or witnesses to explain how the article was source “in relation to almost every article alleged to be the product of phone hacking or phone tapping”.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-15520359/Baroness-Lawrence-claims-Daily-Mail-pretended-support-credibility.html

Would there be tax implications for the individuals if someone else is paying all or part of their fees, a gift tax or BIK ?

The notoriously tight Harry ??

@TheAutumnCrow any idea who the insurance provider is because that could be very helpful

Wouldn't surprise me. Disgusting the way she's been treated.

And like a pp, I also suspect there was probably some money changing hands for the information about Stephen's killers. Not fun to think of the sort of person who'd have had access to that sort of info getting enriched from it... but on balance I'm still grateful to the DM for doing it if so.

I saw the insurance mentioned in this article from the December hearing - but I don't think it names the insurance provider

https://archive.is/BJTol

Archive link to DM article https://archive.is/gAjW6

@SunandWine most of the Lawrence case is out there.

They may have paid people but would they need to ? All the suspects were out there.
They took a punt and having followed the whole grisly wicked episode I'm glad they did. It was one of the finest moments of newspaper history.
These evil bastards protected by our own police were called out and loud .

@CommonlyKnownAs why would they need to it was an open secret !
I punched the air in joy.

The first of the private investigators is giving evidence this morning - Danno Hanks, according to the PA schedule.
He won't be on for long as it looks like legal arguments are pencilled in for this afternoon.

Thanks @PrayForMyBum

It will have very specific clauses preventing it from being cancelled.

I don’t think posters understand what after the event legal insurance is, what sort of companies provide it and the fact that those companies will have lawyers reviewing the case on an ongoing basis.

Today's agency report from court (no paywall):
https://www.elystandard.co.uk/news/national/25822124.private-investigator-did-unlawful-stuff-related-duke-sussex-court-told/

An American private investigator has told the High Court that he “did unlawful stuff” in relation to the Duke of Sussex for the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, but “cannot recall what exactly”.

😂

Well that's not very helpful.

Wonder how much he got paid for this "evidence"