Experts have emerged to shed light on his history of selective interviews and caution that the ongoing High Court case might put an end to this trend once and for all.
Camilla Tominey, the associate editor of The Telegraph, delved into the allegations against Prince Harry. In her assessment, she pointed out that his appearance in the witness box marked a significant moment, reminiscent of Edward VII's involvement in a baccarat scandal back in 1891. Tominey emphasized that Prince Harry's situation was quite different from his Oprah Winfrey interview.
Until now, the Duke of Sussex, along with his wife Meghan, had relied on emotions rather than concrete evidence when presenting their version of the truth through various platforms such as Oprah's talk show, Netflix, Prince Harry's autobiography, and numerous interviews and podcasts.
Tominey also noted that the couple's allegations against the press and the palace, even when later proven to be misleading at best, had largely gone unchallenged by interviewers.
Moreover, Tominey speculated on the motives behind this cherry-picking approach, suggesting that it served to ensure a smooth transition to a post-Megxit narrative of righteousness.
