Prince Harry says court battle against UK tabloids is

Prince Harry struck a combative tone as he testified Wednesday in his lawsuit against the publisher of the Daily Mail and insisted that his last legal battle with Associated Newspaper Ltd. was “in the public interest.”

Harry and six other prominent figures, including Elton John and actress Elizabeth Hurley, allege that the publisher invaded their privacy by engaging in “clear, systematic and sustained use of illegal information gathering” over two decades, lawyer David Sherborne said. The celebrities allege that the company illegally spied on them by hiring private investigators to hack into their phones, bug their cars and access private records. The trial will use testimony from several private investigators, who have said they worked on behalf of Associated Newspapers.

Associated Newspapers Ltd. denied the allegations, calling them absurd and saying the roughly 50 articles in question were reported from legitimate sources that included close associates willing to report on their famous friends.

Harry said in his 23-page witness statement that he was distressed and disturbed by the intrusion into his early life by the Mail and its sister publication, the Mail on Sunday, and that it made him “paranoid beyond belief”. Harry also alleged that the lives of “thousands of people” were “invaded” by Associated “because of greed.”

“There is obviously a personal element to bringing this lawsuit, motivated by truth, justice and responsibility, but it is not just about me,” Harry said in a written statement released as he took the witness stand. Under the English civil court system, witnesses present written testimony and, after stating it to be the truth, are immediately cross-examined. “I am determined to hold Associated accountable, for the good of all… I believe it is in the public interest.”

A heated interrogation

Harry, dressed in a dark suit, held a small Bible in his right hand at London’s High Court and swore to “God Almighty that the evidence I will present will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” After the Duke of Sussex said he preferred to be called Prince Harry, he acknowledged that his 23-page statement was authentic and accurate.

Defense lawyer Antony White, in a calm and gentle tone, began asking Harry questions to determine whether the source of the articles, in fact, came from royal correspondents working with their sources at official events or from friends or associates of the prince. Harry said his “social circles were leaky” and disputed suggestions he had been cozy with journalists who covered the royal family.

Harry suggested the information came from eavesdropping on his phone calls or from private investigators spying on him. He said journalist Katie Nicholl had the luxury of misleadingly using the term “unidentified source” to conceal illegal investigative measures.

“If you complain, in my experience, they attack you,” he said, explaining why he had not opposed the articles at the time.

As a soft-spoken Harry became increasingly defensive, White said, “I intend for you not to have a bad experience with me, but it’s my job to ask you these questions.”

Finally, Judge Matthew Nicklin intervened in the tense exchange and told Harry not to argue with the defense attorney as he tried to explain what it’s like to live under what he called “24-hour surveillance.” Nicklin also reminded Harry that he “doesn’t have to bear the burden of arguing the case today.”

At another point during his questioning, Harry seemed close to tears when he said the tabloids had made his wife Meghan’s life “an absolute misery.” Harry has previously said persistent attacks from the press led the couple to decide to leave royal life and moving to the US in 2020.

Harry’s media crusade

For decades, Harry has had what he called an “uneasy” relationship with the media, but he kept silent and followed the family protocol of “never complain, never explain,” he said.

The litigation is part of Harry’s self-proclaimed mission to reform the media he blames for his mother’s death. princess dianawho died in a car accident in 1997 while being chased by paparazzi in Paris.

He said that “fierce and persistent attacks”, harassment and racist articles about Meghan, who is biracial, had inspired him to break with family tradition and eventually sue the press.

It is the second time Harry has testified after breaking with House of Windsor tradition and becoming the first. senior royal to testify in court in more than a century when he took the stand in a similar successful lawsuit against the publisher of the Daily Mirror in 2023.

Last year, on the eve of another planned trial, Rupert Murdoch’s British tabloid publisher, NGN agreed to pay Harry “substantial damages” for privacy violations, including phone hacking.

This trial is expected to last nine weeks and a written verdict could come months later.

“If Harry wins this case, it will give him the feeling… that he wasn’t being paranoid all along,” said Royah Nikkhah, royal editor of The Sunday Times and a contributor to News themezone. told News themezone on Monday. “If Harry loses this case, it represents a huge danger for him, not only in terms of costs, but also in terms of going to trial and not trying to settle. So we have to wait and see, but the stakes are high for Harry.”