Share and Follow
Prince Harry today told the High Court what he believed was in the public interest – amid a series of testy exchanges with the defence barrister who told him, ‘Could I ask the questions?’Â
The Duke of Sussex, 38, arrived outside the Rolls Building in central London at 9.52am in a black Range Rover wearing a dark suit and silver tie, stepping back into the witness box shortly before 10.30am.
Harry is suing MGN for damages, claiming journalists at its titles were linked to methods including phone hacking, so-called ‘blagging’ or gaining information by deception, and use of private investigators for unlawful activities.
He alleges that about 140 articles published between 1996 and 2010 by MGN newspapers contained information gathered using unlawful methods, and 33 of these have been selected to be considered at the trial.
At the opening of today’s cross-examination, Andrew Green KC asked Harry about an article in The People from May 2005 headlined ‘Harry Carry!’ – which reported details of a knee injury that had delayed his entry to Sandhurst.Â
Prince Harry waved and smiled as he arrived at the High Court in London this morningÂ
Mr Green asked about a press release issued by Clarence House about the injury, which included a quote from Harry.
The barrister asked if the duke stood by the evidence in his witness statement, in which he said he wasn’t ‘going around discussing any medical issues or injuries’.
Harry replied: ‘Yes, it is entirely accurate. That is a reference to while I was at Sandhurst and the distrust that I ended up having … with the medical staff at Sandhurst.’
Mr Green then turned to an article published in the Independent on the same day as the People article, and asked the duke if he accepted there was a degree of public interest in the story.
Yesterday, Harry said there was ‘a difference between the public interest and what is in the interests of the public.’Â
Harry replied today: ‘No, I do not.’
Mr Green asked the duke what he thought a public interest story about him would be.
‘I’m not entirely sure, I’d be speculating,’ Harry replied.
‘Well could you speculate for a moment,’ Mr Green said.
Harry said it could be in the public interest to report ‘a life threatening injury’ he had suffered.
At one point in the cross-examination, the royal spoke directly to the judge.
Mr Green responded: ‘Could I ask the questions?’
In another testy exchange, Harry was asked if he would be happy or disappointed to find out that his phone had never been hacked by Mirror Group journalists.
‘That would be speculating,’ Harry replied.
He said there was ‘industrial scale hacking’ occurring at newspapers, so would feel it was an ‘injustice’ if this was not ‘proved’ in his case.
‘So you want your phone to have been hacked,’ Mr Green asked.
‘No one wants to have been phone hacked,’ Harry replied.
Read Related Also: Republicans rage at Trump indictment in documents probe
Harry could be seen carrying a bundle of documents in his hand as he entered the court Â
Harry smiles as he is greeted outside the steps of the Rolls Building – part of the High CourtÂ
The royal is suing Mirror Group Newspapers for damages over claims 140 articles published by its titles between 1996 and 2010 contained information gathered using unlawful methods
In a 49-page witness statement unveiled yesterday, the duke said that he found it ‘very hard to trust anyone, which led to bouts of depression and paranoia’.
‘Friendships were lost entirely unnecessarily,’ he continued, later adding that some of his friends ‘became instant targets’.
The duke later said that he can now see ‘how much of my life was wasted on this paranoia’, adding: ‘I’ve always heard people refer to my mother as paranoid, but she wasn’t.
‘She was fearful of what was actually happening to her and now I know that I was the same.’
Mr Green questioned Harry on about 20 of the 33 articles over the course of yesterday.
Harry was asked about why he has complained about articles in MGN titles when the same information had previously been put into the public domain by other media outlets.
The duke said his understanding was that MGN journalists used unlawful methods to get ‘exclusive’ angles on existing stories or to move the story on in some way.
David Sherborne, Prince Harry’s lead lawyer, smiles to the cameras at he arrived in court todayÂ
Cardboard boxes are seen being carried into the High Court this morning before the hearing got underwayÂ
Mr Green also asked Harry about his claim that articles ’caused him to be paranoid and to distrust those around him’, and whether he was referring to specific MGN articles or ‘the general effect of all of the articles’ about him.
Harry said: ‘Yes, because … it is 20 years ago and I simply can’t other than speculate whether I saw these articles at the time.
‘I certainly saw a lot of articles at the time and was made aware … unfortunately, by the behaviour and reaction of my inner circle.’
The duke added that when information he had told to only a few members of his inner circle was made public, ‘your circle of friends starts to shrink’.
The Duke of Sussex faced five gruelling hours of cross-examination yesterday
MGN is contesting his claim and has either denied or not admitted that articles about Harry being examined at the trial involved phone hacking or unlawful activity.
At the start of the duke’s individual case on Monday, Mr Green said there was ‘simply no evidence capable of supporting the finding that the Duke of Sussex was hacked, let alone on a habitual basis’ and that payment records used in the duke’s claim ‘simply do not demonstrate unlawful conduct or knowledge thereof’.
Harry’s claim is being heard alongside three other ‘representative’ claims during a trial which began last month and is due to last six to seven weeks.
The three other representative claimants are Coronation Street actor Michael Turner, known professionally as Michael Le Vell, who is best known for playing Kevin Webster in the long-running soap, former Coronation Street actress Nikki Sanderson, and comedian Paul Whitehouse’s ex-wife Fiona Wightman.
BELOW IS HARRY’S FULL WRITTEN WITNESS STATEMENT –Â Â
