The ongoing Hacking Trial involving Prince Harry has taken a dramatic and unexpected turn after private investigator Gavin Burrows reversed his previous testimony. His new claims have thrown the entire Hacking Trial into chaos, raising questions about evidence, credibility, and the integrity of statements that have played a central role in the case.
Gavin Burrows, once considered a key figure in Prince Harry’s £38 million case against Associated Newspapers Limited, now says his original statement was fabricated. His words were initially a cornerstone of the Hacking Trial, allowing high-profile claimants—including Prince Harry, Sir Elton John, and Baroness Lawrence—to move forward with legal action.
Speaking via video link from an undisclosed overseas location due to concerns for his safety, Burrows told the court he never wrote the 21-page witness statement submitted in 2021. According to him, the statement was “a complete and utter untruth,” directly undermining one of the most crucial pieces of evidence in the Hacking Trial.
Burrows further alleged that former tabloid journalist and convicted phone hacker Graham Johnson—whom he described as “a conman” and “a serial criminal”—was the real author of the false document. His accusations have intensified scrutiny around the Hacking Trial, suggesting that the foundation of the case may have been built on fraudulent testimony.
“I didn't write a statement, I don't recognise anything in the statement. The signature is not my signature. The whole thing is a falsehood,” Burrows insisted, calling the document a “stitch-up” filled with “lies” and fiction.
In a striking move, Burrows called for a forensic examination of the signature found in the disputed document. He claimed it had been “cloned,” adding yet another layer of uncertainty to the Hacking Trial. His remarks cast serious doubt on the authenticity of evidence that had been used to implicate major UK publications.
He also criticised how his name had been used in relation to the celebrities involved in the case: “Apart from calling me Jack the Ripper, you've put every possible name in there you could think of. The man went too far.”
During cross-examination, barrister David Sherborne questioned Burrows about his sudden reversal and previous role as a “trusted representative.” Burrows responded sharply, saying, “I don't think you've got a trusted representative.” He accused Johnson of having multiple violent convictions, adding another explosive claim to the evolving Hacking Trial.
With accusations of faked signatures, fabricated testimony, and involvement from a so-called serial criminal, the Hacking Trial now stands at a critical juncture. Legal experts suggest the fallout could reshape the future of phone hacking cases in the UK.
