Prince Harry tells phone-hacking trial an article about him and William was sort that ‘seeds distrust between brothers’ – as it happened
Prince Harry #PrinceHarry
‘This sort of article seeds distrust between brothers’
The next article raised by Green is about a disagreement between William and Harry over meeting Paul Burrell, the former butler to Princess Diana.
“This sort of article seeds distrust between brothers,” Harry says, a nod towards the reported breakdown in relationship between Harry and his brother, the Prince of Wales.
The article says Harry referred to Burrell as a “two-faced shit”.
In his witness statement, Harry says this is the sort of phrase he would use to describe Burrell and may have done so in a voicemail message left on William’s phone.
Updated at 10.22 EDT
Key events
Show key events only
Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature
Closing summary
Today’s proceedings in the high court are coming to a close. Today Prince Harry became the first senior royal to be cross-examined in court since the 19th century.
Here’s a summary of what happened today:
Harry was sworn in at court and taken through a number of articles he has submitted as part of his claim against Mirror Group Newspapers.
Harry told the court as a child he was subjected to “incredibly invasive” news articles that would have an impact him and those around him, including his late mother.
The prince said some editors and journalists had “blood on their hands” and through their work they had caused pain, upset and “inadvertently” death.
Harry said every article published about his private life contributed towards the destruction of his childhood.
The Mirror Group Newspapers barrister, Andrew Green, repeatedly argued that the articles submitted for the complaint were based on information often already in the public domain in articles published in other newspapers.
Green argued that many of the articles could be traced to legitimate sources including spokespersons for St James’s Palace.
In addition to Prince Harry’s cross-examination in court, he provided a 49-page written witness statement, setting out many of his arguments. He argues that the press portrayed him as a “thicko” and a “drug taker”.
In court, Harry argued that reports about his health – in one case an injured thumb – led him at the time to feel paranoid around his own doctors.
Harry’s witness statement says that at one point at the age of 20 he had to hide in the boot of a car to avoid the paparazzi.
In his witness statement, Harry alleges Piers Morgan, the former editor of the Daily Mirror, listened to messages left by his mother, Princess Diana.
In court, Harry alluded to the difficulties between him and his brother, Prince William. He said an article about a disagreement between the two was the sort of story that “seeds distrust between brothers”.
The prince said he would have called former royal butler Paul Burrell a “two-faced shit”.
Harry’s witness statement makes reference to the long-standing speculation that his real father was army officer James Hewitt, which culminated in a series of stories about attempts to steal Harry’s DNA for testing.
The prince suggested in his witness statement that the UK government and UK press had a poor reputation around the world and was at “rock bottom”, adding that the UK press was “in bed” with the government rather than scrutinising it.
Thanks for reading, we’ll be back tomorrow.
Updated at 12.37 EDT
Britain’s government and press at rock bottom, Prince Harry tells court
Prince Harry has said Rishi Sunak’s government is at “rock bottom” and avoids scrutiny by getting “in bed” with friendly newspapers.
The prince once again broke with royal protocol by using his appearance in the phone-hacking trial to criticise a serving government. He said democracy in the UK was threatened because British media outlets were working with the government to maintain the “status quo”.
Harry told the high court that “our country is judged globally by the state of our press and our government, both of which I believe are at rock bottom”.
He used his witness statement in the phone-hacking court case against Mirror Group Newspapers to suggest British newspapers work closely with ministers to defend vested interests: “Democracy fails when your press fails to scrutinise and hold the government accountable, and instead choose to get into bed with them so they can ensure the status quo.”
Sunak’s spokesperson declined to comment on the intervention, saying: “You’ve heard repeatedly from the prime minister on the state of the country and his priorities, but I’m not going to get drawn into commenting specifically on that.”
In the witness statement, Harry has said he was furious at royal butler Paul Burrell, who used to work for his mother, and discussed the issue with his brother, Prince William.
The People later published a story in which Harry was quoted as calling Burrell a “two-faced shit”. The prince now believes this came from hacking his voicemails:
Both my brother and I had very strong feelings about how indiscrete Paul had proven to be with the way he had sold our mother’s possessions and how he had given numerous interviews about her. We firmly believed that she would have expected some privacy in death, especially from someone she had trusted, and we were so upset at the way he was behaving – I didn’t want to hear his reasons for it. Therefore, our disagreement over to how to handle the situation going forward was not something I wanted splashed across the defendant’s newspapers, and I have no idea how the defendant’s journalists obtained the information within the article. A ‘senior Royal source’ is quoted within the article, reflecting my exact private feelings including that I was “dead against any meeting” and that a meeting would be “pandering to Burrell’s attention-seeking and self-interest”. I also would have used the phrase “two-face s***”, as is reported and believe this could have been lifted directly from a voicemail I had left.
Updated at 12.10 EDT
Harry’s witness statement makes reference to the long-standing speculation that his real father was army officer James Hewitt, which culminated in a series of stories about attempts to steal Harry’s DNA for testing:
Numerous newspapers had reported a rumour that my biological father was James Hewitt, a man my mother had a relationship with after I was born. At the time of this article and others similar to it, I wasn’t actually aware that my mother hadn’t met Major Hewitt until after I was born. This timeline is something I only learnt of in around 2014, although I now understand this was common knowledge amongst the defendant’s journalists. At the time, when I was 18 years old and had lost my mother just six years earlier, stories such as this felt very damaging and very real to me. They were hurtful, mean and cruel. I was always left questioning the motives behind the stories. Were the newspapers keen to put doubt into the minds of the public so I might be ousted from the royal family?
Updated at 12.09 EDT
Harry’s witness statement describes his concerns about how the media now contains “incredibly powerful” companies “who masquerade as journalists and who have, quite literally, hijacked journalistic privileges for their own personal gain and agenda”.
He writes:
It’s an unbelievably dangerous place. I believe it doesn’t matter whether you’re a public figure at this point. Whoever you are, if you are of interest to the press at that time, wherever you are, whatever you’re doing – if you’re in private or if you’re in public – you are a target. You become a victim of their system. They claim to hold public figures to account, but refuse to hold themselves accountable. If they’re supposedly policing society, who on earth is policing them, when even the government is scared of alienating them because position is power. It is incredibly worrying for the entire UK.
In my view, in order to save journalism as a profession, journalists need to expose those people in the media that have stolen or hijacked the privileges and powers of the press, and have used illegal or unlawful means for their own gain and agendas. In the same vein, I am bringing this claim, not because I hate the tabloid press or even necessarily a section of it, but in order to properly hold the people who have hijacked those privileges, which come with being a member of the press, to account for their actions.
Updated at 12.08 EDT
The court session has concluded for the day. Prince Harry was told not to discuss his evidence with anyone. He will return to the witness box tomorrow.
Green turns to an article about a trip taken by Harry to South Africa in 2005.
Harry has questioned how the Mirror knew about his trip, but Green once again points to an earlier article – this time in the Daily Mail – revealing the detail.
Quotes attributed to an “insider” are suspicious, Harry says.
Harry acknowledges the similarities but again argues that a story in the Mail would push a Mirror journalist to try to take it further.
Harry says in his witness statement the level of detail in articles about his trips with Chelsy Davy is “disturbing”.
“References to spending ‘hour’ on the phone with Chelsy, I don’t know how anyone would know that, our relationship was private,” Harry says.
“Our trust in our friends reduced rapidly in a very short space of time,” Harry adds.
Updated at 11.33 EDT
The next article to which Green refers is about an alleged argument between the duke and his then girlfriend, Chelsy Davy.
The article came shortly after the Sun had published a story with an image of Prince Harry dressed in a Nazi uniform, Green tells the court.
The photos in the Sun of Harry in the Nazi uniform were sold to the Sun by an attender of the fancy dress party, Green says.
It was also said that at that party Harry flirted with a girl who was not his then girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, Green says.
This then formed an article in the Mirror about how Davy responded to the claims Harry was flirting with another girl.
Green suggests the source was Chelsy Davy’s uncle, Paul Davy.
That’s based on the understanding that the journalist (Jane Kerr) was being truthful about the source of the story, Harry says.
Attributing it as a “pal” is a classic hallmark of phone hacking, the duke adds.
Updated at 11.18 EDT
Prince Harry tells the court he can’t fathom how the journalist would have known when he was flying back from Africa.
“Details about how I was flying would not have been released by the palace due to security reasons,” Harry says.
Harry says he thinks that detail would have been obtained unlawfully – through flight blagging, phone hacking, or other means.
Green suggests it could have been Chelsy Davy’s uncle, Paul, who gave the media the information.
Harry rejects this.
“It’s [as] distressing reading it now as it was the first time I looked at it,” Harry says of the article.
Updated at 11.18 EDT
The court session has resumed.
Andrew Green KC for the Mirror has now moved on to the 15th article he wishes to scrutinise.
The headline is “When Harry met Daddy: the biggest danger to wildlife in Africa”.
Harry complains that the article reveals private information about his life, namely about his meeting with his then girlfriend Chelsy Davy’s father.
The prime focus of the article related to the business of Davy’s father, a game-hunting enterprise.
Once again, Green points Harry to an article published the day before the Mirror article in question – namely in the Mail and that the Mail article has many of the details featured subsequently in the Mirror’s follow-up.
Green suggests the Mail on Sunday article was based on an interview with Chelsy Davy’s uncle, Paul Davy.
“That’s what the article says,” Green says.
“Doesn’t mean it’s true Mr Green,” Harry replies.
Updated at 11.16 EDT
The court has risen for a short break.
Did you leave a voicemail on Prince William’s phone calling former royal butler Paul Burrell a “two-faced shit”? Green asks.
“I left voicemails on my brother’s phone and that is terminology I use to refer to Mr Burrell,” Harry replies.
But he adds he cannot recall if he specifically left the voicemail.
Updated at 10.26 EDT
‘This sort of article seeds distrust between brothers’
The next article raised by Green is about a disagreement between William and Harry over meeting Paul Burrell, the former butler to Princess Diana.
“This sort of article seeds distrust between brothers,” Harry says, a nod towards the reported breakdown in relationship between Harry and his brother, the Prince of Wales.
The article says Harry referred to Burrell as a “two-faced shit”.
In his witness statement, Harry says this is the sort of phrase he would use to describe Burrell and may have done so in a voicemail message left on William’s phone.
Updated at 10.22 EDT