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

Agree with both of you - it makes no sense as presented.

I feel validated! ✌️

Have just looked at the ChatGPT summary, @CraftyGin - thanks.

Interesting to see how it collates things - I haven't used ChatGPT before.

One thing it does write that I would disagree with is in its summary of 'unlawful information gathering' it puts 'hiring private investigators' alongside phone hacking, bugging homes/cars and blagging records.

I don't think it's unlawful to hire private investigators - the issue is whether the investigators have carried out illegal acts. Anyone can pay for information.

I suppose it's an example of where you need to know the subject, because AI will just collate what's out there.

Agree - it was just collating what was in the papers. It may have said the PIs were illegal because they admitted to being dodgy.
.
I think it works well when you comment on what it produces - no doubt, it will say, "good question", and then come back with something a bit different.

It's really interesting when you ask it to comment on this thread.

That would be interesting!

So if you comment on what it produces it refines things?

Sounds like it could be a very useful tool but you really would need to have the basic knowledge to start off with, or you could very easily get knocked off track.

(Edited as posted while still thinking)

I don’t rate ChatGPT / AI chat software at all, because I’ve tried it out a few times on a few topics that I do know quite a lot about and it’s hopeless - it absorbs other people’s well-worn mistakes and incorporates them as part of its ‘database’.

The ‘hallucinations’ (including made up quotes from legal sources) that we’ve heard about on other threads (non RF related) are very worrying.

Cross-posted with you while editing, @TheAutumnCrow. That does sound worrying.

I haven't really come across it much - except at the top of a Google search, when I usually ignore it and look for a website I trust anyway.

https://www.thenational.scot/news/25834517.full-secret-notice-peter-mandelson-just-sent-uk-media/?ref=yahoo

LOL. I think he will find it is well and truly in the public interest to press this.

I’m disgusted that he thought he could get away with pulling this stunt!

I’m sorry I should probably explain the relevance and why I posted that here ( I’ve posted it on a few threads as I’m really quite angry) , it’s another example of what we are seeing here , the rich and powerful thinking they can gag the press and do whatever they wish without the general public finding out! 😡

I think it's relevant here from the 'gagging the press' perspective @jeffgoldblum (perhaps less so on the PR disasters thread?).

I think journalists could easily defend themselves from accusations of breaching clause 3 by saying they were justified because it was in the public interest. National security issues are quite important, after all.

Yes , I was so annoyed I plopped it in the first couple of threads ! 😳 , still I could argue it’s bad pr? 🤔

You’re a passionate soul, Jeff, I’ll give you that

No chance that RAVEC could provide Burrows with security so that he can testify in person? To protect him from Harry's stalker? 😀

While thinking they are better than everyone else. They don't want to be judged by the great unwashed, they don't want to be shown as less than the image they want to portray. They want constant attention and press but only the gushing type.
I don't particularly like Tom Cruise but he gets the game, he puts himself out there, he is/acts enthusiastic with fans, constant selfies, to be that successful he understands that he needs people to like him. He lived in London until recently without any difficulty, walking around Knightsbridge, jogging in Hyde park, he wasn't mobbed or in the papers everyday. Certainly wealthier and more famous than the disgruntled 7.

One thing it does write that I would disagree with is in its summary of 'unlawful information gathering' it puts 'hiring private investigators' alongside phone hacking, bugging homes/cars and blagging records.

I haven’t looked into it in depth, but I don’t think “blagging” as frequently talked about by some of the witnesses is illegal, at least not in all contexts. Otherwise mystery shopping exercises, or consumer reporters pretending to be a genuine customer to covertly film or record a scammer would be illegal, and they are not. Investigative journalists also create cover stories to build relationships and gather information and there’s never been any suggestion it is illegal.

it’s a heavily regulated area for the public authorities like the police, who need to go through a documented process to have someone be able to pretend they are someone else in order to gather information, but for the general public there are no such rules.

Also, Mandelson - words fail me. As you say, thinking he can curtail justified press coverage of him given what’s just been discovered about his illegal activities while in high public office.

I’m with you 👏

Rather hoping some journalists follow him everywhere now.

How fucking dare he? It very much is in the public interest, I hope the press camo in his bloody door step. Prick.

I’m really confused about this.
How can they have illegally obtained his medical records if they didn’t know what he had, and he had something ‘more serious’?

Sounds like they were just guessing? Because if they had illegally obtained the records, they would surely know exactly why the medical issue was? So it sounds to me proof they didn’t illegally obtain anything, unless I’m missing something?

Typed my response as soon as I read that post, but can see everyone else picked up on the same thing immediately.
Because of course everyone did.
Because it makes absolutely zero sense.

So grandiose and delusional.

These characters are so arrogant and entitled.

That’s how they have sharp-elbowed their way to the top in life - using a mix of smarmy charm - kissing up and kicking down, ruthless plotting, manipulation and standing on anyone’s necks to get on. They really are another species but quite predictable in their characteristics. I hope everyone laughs and ridicules PM as this will destabilise him more than expressions of disgust and anger - because he cares deeply about his image and his fragile ego would implode if people thought him transparent fool. Ruthless and Machiavellian he would take as a compliment.

Thanks @Serenster - that makes sense.

One of the newspaper reports I saw gave the definition of blagging as 'obtaining personal information, such as medical or financial information, by deception'.

I don't know what the actual law states, but that definition would cover such things as contacting a hospital and pretending to be the person to ask for information, but would clearly not include the activities that the claimants are discussing.

They seem to feel that any payment for information (and indeed any publication of information that they haven't approved) is illegal.

Tbh it’s a relief that others did pick up on it, because I thought I was going a bit doolally there.