Illicit information collection “acted like a web” around the Duke of Sussex during his Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) trial.
Prince Harry’s attorney told London’s High Court that no aspect of his youth was secure from press intrusion, citing the Mirror’s coverage of his relationship with Chelsy Davy.
The nobleman asserts that MGN journalists gathered information through illegal means, such as phone hacking.
MGN denies phone snooping in this particular instance.
In his opening statement on behalf of the duke, barrister David Sherborne, who also represents three other defendants, stated, “These methods acted as a web around the prince in the hope that it would capture the valuable information that they sought through these unlawful means, some of which ended up in stories.”
Prince Harry does not have a “personal vendetta against the media,” but he wanted to hold them accountable.
Among the articles about which the judge is considering complaints are stories about the prince and his ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy.
“The ups and downs and ins and outs of their relationship; the beginning, the break-ups, and finally the split were all revealed and dissected by the three Mirror Group titles,” Mr. Sherborne continued, stating that this was “clearly motivated by illegal activity.”
He told the court that an April 2005 People article described the prince’s phone calls to her.
“It was as if they were never alone,” he continued.
Mr. Sherborne believes the reports diminished the couple’s acquaintances because they suspected associates of leaking material to periodicals. But he acknowledged that there was little direct evidence of illegal methods being used to obtain these stories.
The couple’s relationship eventually concluded. The prince earlier stated that Ms. Davy decided “a royal life was not for her” after constant abuse.
A 2003 article detailing an alleged dispute between the duke and his brother Prince William, now the Prince of Wales, over their mother’s former butler Paul Burrell was also presented to the court.
“Brothers can sometimes disagree,” said Mr. Sherborne.
“However, once it is made public in this manner and their inner feelings are revealed as they are, trust begins to erode.”
The prince claims that approximately 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 contained information obtained through illegal means. 33 of these articles have been selected for consideration at the trial.
The publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and Sunday People acknowledged at the beginning of the High Court hearing last month that a private investigator had been instructed to illegally gather information about Harry’s behavior in a nightclub in February 2004.
This event is not included in the duke’s claim for invasion of privacy.
David Sherborne told the court on Monday that it was “clearly implausible” that there was only one instance of illegal information gathering, contending that it occurred “on multiple occasions.”
He stated that “every aspect” of the prince’s life had been covered by the media and that it was “obvious” that stories about his private life were fueling MGN’s sales.
However, Andrew Green KC, who represents MGN, stated that there was no evidence to substantiate the prince’s claims.
Mr. Green, summing up MGN’s defense, stated that there was no evidence that Harry had been compromised, “much less routinely.”
Mr. Green said none of the phone hacking whistleblower journalists claimed to have hacked the prince’s phone.
“There is no evidence to substantiate the conclusion that the Duke of Sussex’s mobile phone was hacked. Zilch, Zero, Nil, De Nada, Niente, Nothing,” he said.
Prince Harry’s absence on Monday surprised Mr. Justice Fancourt, the case’s judge.
If there was time, he ordered witnesses to testify on the first day.
Mr. Green, representing MGN, accused the prince’s side of “wasting time,” stating that it was “absolutely extraordinary that we were just informed last week that he would not be present on the first day of his trial.”
Prince Harry flew in from Los Angeles after his daughter’s birthday, according to Mr. Sherborne. He added, “He is in a different category than the three other claimants due to his travel and security arrangements.”
His counsel said the duke will be the first senior royal to speak in court in 130 years on Tuesday.
After it was confirmed he would not appear on Monday, nearly half of the public section of the courtroom left.
In addition to Prince Harry, Coronation Street actors Michael Turner (also known as Michael Le Vell) and Nikki Sanderson. Also Fiona Wightman, the ex-wife of comedian Paul Whitehouse, have filed claims against the publisher.
MGN denies that senior executives knew about illicit information collecting behind these stories and did nothing to stop it.
Prince Harry’s legal team contends MGN concealed and destroyed potential evidence of illicit information gathering about Prince Harry. But the court can still follow the trail.
They want the judge to consider MGN’s existing admissions of hacking, examine the purported holes in the defense case, and then infer that certain stories about Prince Harry must have been illegally obtained.
The judge need only rule for or against the duke based on the preponderance of the evidence.
No one who has confessed to phone hacking has mentioned Prince Harry as a victim.
