In response to the Duke's attorney, the judge instructed David Sherburne, representing the Duke and three other prominent plaintiffs, to present concrete evidence instead of mere assertions of specific instances of voicemail eavesdropping.
The judge demanded the lawyer to provide two compelling examples of explicit proof that Prince Harry had sent out a specific message.
In reply, Mr. Sherburne referred to the Duke's testimony, informing the court that in dealing with the articles, the Duke repeatedly emphasized the private nature of the discussed material. He stated that there were instances where the Duke clearly referred to private matters.
This exchange took place after mgn's attorneys accused the Duke on Tuesday of suing tabloid publications as part of a campaign to reform the British media without substantiating his claims.
The Duke is suing MGN for unlawful information collection, including phone hacking, and has listed 148 items that he alleges were obtained illegally, such as voicemail interceptions.
During the barrister's final argument on Wednesday morning, the judge emphasized that this was the opportunity to provide specific examples of voicemail interceptions that led to articles about the Duke in Mirror titles. Mr. Sherburne, in response, referred to the Duke's testimony, mentioning a discussion between the Duke and his brother concerning Mr. Burrell, indicating it as one example. He further referred to the line "hooray Harry's been dumped" as another instance.
However, he acknowledged the challenge of recalling specific voicemails from 20 years ago and explained that all claimants had provided witness statements detailing how the information related to private voicemail conversations.
The discussion between Prince Harry and his brother regarding Paul Burrell, their mother's former butler, is cited by Mr. Sherburne as an illustration of possible voicemail eavesdropping, particularly referring to the 2003 People article. During cross-examination, the Duke admitted that a voicemail he left for his brother, referring to Mr. Burrell as "two-faced," could have been extracted from a voicemail he had left. Harry believed it was unwise for Prince William to have any association with Mr. Burrell, and this story marked the beginning of the rift between the brothers.
The source of the 2007 Sunday Mirror article titled "hooray Harry's dumped" was also questioned by the Duke. The events mentioned provide some context for the discussions in the courtroom and the challenges faced in presenting specific evidence related to voicemail interceptions.
During the ongoing phone hacking case involving Prince Harry and Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), the Duke of Sussex testified that he questioned how the tabloid was able to locate him at a nightclub following his breakup with Chelsea Davey.
He stated that they did not discuss their breakup often, so he was unsure how anyone would have known about it. MGN's Andrew Green KC responded by saying that the News of the World had already published the story, and the Sunday Mirror followed it up the same evening.
The Tabloid group argued that given the Duke's lifetime of media intrusion, it was hard not to feel sympathy for him. However, according to the charges, he brought the lawsuit as a vehicle to seek to reform the British media as part of his ongoing case.
Mr. Justice Fan Court instructed the Duke's attorney to provide particular examples in response to MGN's argument that the Duke's allegation had failed to withstand scrutiny. The Duke's attorney stated that there was hard evidence that MGN engaged in widespread illegal information collecting. He referred to the Duke's mobile phone number as a significant feature of the case, as it was found on a device belonging to a former head of news at the Sunday Mirror.
The accusations of voicemail interception that are a component of the claim of improper information collecting were disputed by Andrew Green Casey, who stated that they were generally nothing more than a speculative hope without evidentiary foundation.
The attorney for the Mirror Group emphasized that Prince Harry's claim had a different objective from the claims of the other three parties. He said that the genesis of his claim was his meeting with Mr. Sherburne at Elton John's party in the south of France. The Duke was not asking how he could get paid for voicemail interception or illegal information gathering suffered before 2011, but what he could do to end the harassment he and his wife were experiencing from the tabloid press. However, Mr. Green denied that any of the articles complained of were the product of phone hacking.
The trial is scheduled to end on Friday, and Mr. Justice Fan Court will announce his decision later that day. Meanwhile, in today's news, school buildings in England are deemed structurally unsound and dangerous for children and staff due to a lack of funding.
The leading water board is bankrupt because they've been diverting maintenance money to their CEOs and shareholders, leading to polluted rivers and seas. One commenter expressed anger at the entitled attitudes of the rich and the carbon footprint that Prince Harry is leaving with each court appearance. The commenter also highlighted the differences between Prince Harry and Prince William's efforts to eradicate homelessness in the UK, noting the stark contrast between the two brothers.
