Harold Goes 'Fishing' In The High Court With No Evidence But A 'Suspicion'
TOS gives evidence in the High Court, but what he appeared to seek was an audience with the Court of Public Opinion
The Times cartoon (by Peter Brookes, their political cartoonist) says it all as Harold, the overseas son found the courage to get on a plane from the US to visit his home country to give evidence in a court of law in a case of alleged phone hacking—his truth via his witness statement, which does not necessarily equate to the actual factual truth.
In a public display of contempt, Harold didn’t show up for the first day of the hearing on 5 June 2023, when the judge made a point that the first witness should be available to give evidence if time permitted once the opening statements had been completed. As it happens, there was time for the first witness, and David Sherborne (TOS’s lawyer) made a feeble excuse for TOS as a no show, but admitted he was in the country. Justice Fancourt was not amused by a clear lack of respect being shown to the court and had given explicit directions that the first witness should be available on the first day of the hearing.
It was anticipated that they might (completion of opening statements), which is why I directed the first witness should be available. (Justice Fancourt)
The first witness was called, but Harold did not appear, thus wasting the time of the court. Harold had stated he would not attend on Monday despite the directions of the judge being made clear. Harold’s lawyers should have explained this to him, but it appears that Harold believes he is above the law. Andrew Green KC, for MGN stated that he wished to cross-examine Harold for more than a day, and the judge replied that he had no objections, and that the court would sit for longer on Tuesday and Wednesday if necessary given that Harold did not show up when he had been directed to do so.
The media had chosen to cover this story, even though I think it’s a non-story compared to what is actually going on in the world. We had the Holly, Phil, and ITV scandal, where the former gave a pathetic monologue to the audience of ‘This Morning’ asking if they were okay, and proceeded to try and save her career by throwing Phil (her friend) under the bus. What we learned is that you don’t want her as a friend, and that neither Holly and Phil can be trusted— not that I ever liked either of them.
This is one of the issues of MSM where they pick and choose stories that also benefit them. The ITV scandal of a media platform covering up potential grooming and scandals is of interest to the newspapers and magazines because they are in the same industry and they need to protect themselves. The same goes for the Mirror Newspapers Group (MGN which includes the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and The People) case that Harold is pursuing, as the case involves the fate of journalists and the media groups. MGN has previously admitted to hacking and has paid damages to those involved already, but denies having hacked Harold’s phone.
The actual news should have been (and was shared on some front pages) was the destruction of the Kakhovka Dam in Ukraine that has destroyed homes, killed people and animals, and is a horrific humanitarian disaster that was carried out with the intent of destruction and harm to the masses. People have lost their lives, their homes, and to rebuild a new dam and hydroelectric power station, and around 30 settlements (villages and towns) will take years and billions in whatever currency be it euros or dollars. This affects the world and humanity, for as as society we must help others and prevent bad actors from carrying out such atrocious acts. Collectively funds from our governments will be used to assist Ukraine, and donations will be collected to help the humanitarian disaster . Whatever happens in the MGN and Harold case, it will not affect the masses, humanity, or society.
The HRH style
First of all, we should address the HRH style and it re-emerging in public. David Sherborne made a song and dance about how Harold should be addressed—as His Royal Highness in the first instance and then Prince Harry. One would think we were on stage at The Globe in a Shakespearian play with all the showboating.
Has C3 given him permission to use the HRH in public, or is TOS testing the waters to see whether BP or his Pa will do or say anything? Perhaps it would be wise for BP to clarify the matter, or is TOS forcing his Pa’s hand to permit them to use the HRH style again as in to do it first then face the consequences knowing that C3 would probably concede for an easy life?
Perhaps he believed (or TW did) that once the Queen had passed, whatever rules or instructions she had implemented (in this case the conditions of the Sussex exit) no longer applied and the condition to refrain from using the HRH in public no longer applied?
People get confused with HRH (a style) and a title. The HRH is a style that the monarch confers to immediate members of the family to denote that they are close, and typically it has been used to indicate that they are (or will be) working members of the RF. That is to say, the style of HRH is an indication that they represent the nation, or will as an adult. Hence, this is why Diana and Sarah Ferguson had their styles removed upon their divorces (as they are given at the pleasure of the monarch), but retained their duchess and Princess of Wales titles without the prefix of ‘the’.
Why is this an issue after all it is only a style some might say? It is because the People find the use of HRH offensive, and it was the wish of the late Queen for the Sussexes not to use it because she was aware that the use could create confusion and it some might have been mislead into believing that they represented the Crown.
Both TOS and TW need the style and titles to have any status or relevance in their commercial dealings.
What is this case really about?
With so many opinion pieces and articles here and there, one can easily be confused about the point of this case.
The issue is whether from the 33 articles in question that MGN published, did the information originate from hacked phones or other illegal methods? That is the only question being asked here, despite TOS listing 50 articles in his witness statement. In his 55-page witness statement, he demotes his Pa to HRH King Charles III (he is now His Majesty), which is a shocking faux pas which renders the document substandard and inaccurate already.
In the witness statement, he also criticises and dismisses the UK government, the government that serves the Crown (his Pa). This alone goes against the neutrality expected of members of the royal family whether they are working members or not. Harold once pledged an oath to his country and that means to support and be loyal to the country. How can anyone ever expect him to represent the nation when he dismisses the government as ‘rock bottom’ and suggests there is criminal activity? Shouts of ‘treason’ again can be heard in households around the nation, for while the government is far from perfect and there might be corruption within the parties themselves, can it considered to be criminal?
Such a person is not fit to hold a role as Counsellor State or to be in the line of succession if that is they think and believe the government is ‘criminal’. One requires absolute loyalty to the Crown and State and from the above as penned by Harold himself, he is not fit for purpose by his own hand. He is of course entitled to his opinions behind closed doors as we all are, but to publicly declare the above and to use a ducal title and the HRH style (which infers he represents the monarch) is sacrilege. Perhaps there are mental health issues that account for the above, but if so then these should be addressed before more harm is done to the reputation of the nation and the monarchy.
Is there a case to answer here? Have journalists come forward and admitted to the hacking? Where are the alleged hacked texts and voice messages? Is there any actual evidence of hacking?
Where is the evidence? TOS says that some has been ‘destroyed’ or rather messages get deleted after a while, and 20-30 years is a long time ago which is the timeframe of the alleged hacking (1996-2011). In response, Harold has said, ‘I don’t know,’ to many questions when cross-examined, or that he suspected hacking (with no evidence) because no one else would have known that information, although he has no evidence of that either. People talk to others, let off steam and people can overhear conversations too.
TOS also claims there were suspicious invoices, but again, a suspicion is not evidence and it seems that TOS was on a fishing expedition trying to find information. This was his case and he should have had sufficient evidence to pursue the case prior to the hearing.
I don't believe as a witness, it's my job to construct the article or instruct, which parts were unlawfully obtained weren’t. The journalist should be doing that. (Harry)
Justice Fancourt replied that Harold had the opportunity to agree or disagree with the questions presented to him as he is the witness and should know what he is accusing others of.
As this is a civil case, when you accuse a party of an allegation then you must state what that allegation is and to prove it has substance with evidence. You must state the point of the case and what parts to the articles are alleged to be illegally obtained. Did TOS articulate the allegations? From the court reporting it seems that he didn’t and answered with questions only to be reminded by Andrew Green KC, that he was asking the questions and TOS was there to answer them and not to question the lawyer.
Could I just repeat what I said yesterday – this is about me asking you questions not you asking me questions.(Green)
Many answers that TOS gave were vague and suggestive, and at one point Green asked if TOS needed the assistance of an aide as he struggled to with the bundles. After a break, an aide was assigned to TOS, because he always needs a minder or babysitter to cope it seems.
From what I have read from the responses and court reporting, TOS treated this as an interview with jokes here and there because that’s all he can do. This was not a public engagement or interview, but this is what he seemed to believe it was. IMHO, TOS doesn’t care about the case, but used the courts as a platform to air his grievances via his witness statement where he could ‘attack’ Piers Morgan, aides who had not carried out his wishes, the RF, the media and make other allegations without being rebuked.
In fact, he let slip that he pursued this case as he had been persuaded to by David Sherborne whom he met whilst on holiday during a trip to see Uncle EJ in France in 2019. Money for old rope it seems—resurrecting old cases and the winner is Sherborne who gets a hefty fee for a case that he knows he probably can’t win due to lack of evidence, but that wasn’t the point of the case.
The point of the case is for TOS to publicly attack those he can’t control (aides, and the media) under the guise of protecting the country from the media, and he then goes on to admit the case was initiated as a PR control tactic:
(it was) ‘ …how to find a way to stop the abuse, intrusion and hate that was coming towards me and my wife without relying on the institution’s lawyers. (Harry)
TOS further admits that he has no evidence of any hacking, only supposition based on his paranoia that appears to have been fed to him by his wife, lawyers (who get paid regardless) and perhaps Uncle EJ who has had his own share of issues with the media. The remedy for the press to stop writing critical articles is for the duo to stop behaving in such an appalling and disgraceful manner. Criticising the uncomfortable truth is necessary to hold people accountable for their behaviours, such as the West who are calling out those in the Kremlin for their actions against Ukraine.
To sum up, Harold admits that there is no evidence of hacking in the cases presented, that he did not pursue the case to uncover any hacking but used it as a PR tactic to try and control the press in order to prevent them from writing critical articles on the Sussexes. He also confirms that at the time of the alleged hacked articles he was not harmed by the articles (as BP took care of matters) and it is only 20 years later (after meeting TW) that he has an issue with the articles in question. TOS also admitted that during the period where some articles were published, he didn’t actually possess a mobile phone and therefore could not have been hacked. The claim was that others involved must have been hacked then, but again the argument is weak especially when some of the named aides had not yet been hired by the Royal Household.
The case rests on Harold’s belief that MGN carried out phone hacking activities and that it began there.
Courts do not take kindly to people using precious court resources to score points against others and to be used as a platform for PR narratives. IMHO, that is what the aim of this case actually was as there seemed to be little attempt to offer evidence of hacking as there is none.
It was pointed out that the information in the articles could have come from other sources rather than hacking, and were alleged without concrete evidence. Instances where he claims that a phone was hacked because the photographers knew he was in a pub are ridiculous—London is small, and anyone could have seen him and tipped off the press, plus they knew his usual haunts.
However, TOS is convinced that even without evidence, he believes that his phone was hacked and that simply because there is no evidence it doesn’t mean he wasn’t hacked. In a court of law, someone should tell him that it is what you can prove that matters and not what you think or believe.
Harold did not have a mobile phone until 1998, so the claims he was hacked prior to that fail in this case.
No article could definitively be proven to have originated solely from information from a hacked mobile phone. There are other means to acquire information such as from friends, and staff, but Harold denied it was possible that any friends leaked information. The possibility is that they may have told others inadvertently and that was conveyed to other parties. Harold then claims that a ‘source’ may have been made up by the journalist.
Harold claims that some articles were connected to invoices which made them ‘suspicious’. This is not evidence but it is all that Harold can offer.
Many of the articles had been in the public domain already, via PA, other newspapers and some had even been broadcasted on the BBC. Harold claims that this incentivises other journalists to seek new angles and additional information, although that can be said about every single news story in the world.
Are you aware that, in fact, the story of the split, and the reasons for it were broken by the News of the World, the day before the article by the Sunday Mirror? (Green)
I’m not, but that doesn’t surprise me (Harry, who describes the article as suspicious due to the quotes in the article.)
More than one article contained information that Harold had provided in an interview, and from press releases that BP had issued. Therefore, several articles did not come from information obtained illegally.
There is no data available to indicate there has been hacking of Harold’s phone, whereas there is data for others who had been hacked. Harold suggested that burner phones had been used—obviously he’s been watching too many US action dramas.
No journalists have come forward to admit they hacked Harold’s phone.
Claims made that voicemails were intercepted before Harold had received them have been made. This is because the icon on the screen would disappear and Harold claims he didn't know he had received the voicemail. This is not evidence in itself as one can easily dial voicemail by accident and not listen to it and the icon will have disappeared. Harold even admits he may have dialled and listened and forgotten. In those days you had to press to save a message if you listened to it in full, and if you hadn’t, then it would play in full before you had options to play again, save or delete. Therefore if the media had intercepted messages, they would have had to click ‘save’ and the voicemails would have appeared as saved messages on the phone in chronological order.
There was a police investigation into the hacking and the result was that Harold did not seem to have been targeted. Most journalists knew the risks and were not prepared to take them.
When Harold was unable to answer, he said either he didn’t know or that it was a question for his legal team. This was in response to being asked how information from a BP press release can be considered illegal information gathering (a story when Harold was a parade commander at Eton cadets).
There are further claims or rather TOS blames the media for calling him ‘thick’ and ‘dim’ and that he claims this endangered his life as he claimed the public might attack him based on how the media portrayed him! We, the People didn’t need the media to tell us that as we can all see that and decide what he is like for ourselves.
On the topic of destruction of evidence, Green asked TOS why he believed this to be so. TOS claimed that this is what his legal team had told him. Seriously, these messages were over 20 years ago and some were probably deleted last century.
Harold claims that hacked phone messages meant that paps knew he was at the airport to pick up Chelsy, and that it was dangerous as they could have had weapons. It is a faux claim as Heathrow in particular has paparazzi there all of the time and they move between the terminals and are tipped off by airport staff. The airports have high security and his fears are merely a show for this case. Most pap images of the time show TOS arriving late and Chelsy waiting for him.
Harold claims that journalist have ‘blood stained typing fingers’ yet he has submitted perjured statements to the courts before by claiming he had never had contact with the authors of Finding Freedom. Later, emails revealed that he stated that nothing should be traced back to them (TOS and TW) indicating that he was aware of the duplicitous actions, and had directed his staff to contact and act as a middle man for the authors of Finding Freedom.
When asked about the glandular fever story that Harold claims was hacked information, BP had responded to the press and stated that Harold had glandular fever. The information was in the public domain, but it seems that Harold is fuelled with conspiracy thoughts from events that occurred more than 15 years ago.
Another instance is of the chipped thumb bone accident which Harold alleges came from a hacked phone message. The story had already been covered a day earlier and the information had come from a BP spokesperson.
You are accusing journalists of having been involved in criminal activity. Does it strike you as a little unfair as the information came from another article and with the cooperation of the palace? (Green KC)
At the end, Harold says there is ‘hard evidence of suspiciousness’ but cannot show evidence of actual phone hacking, and claims he was hacked over the 15 year period (1996-2011).
Green rests, stating the case is based on speculation and beliefs rather than any physical evidence.
Are you aware of any evidence that gives any indication whatsoever as to the extent to which you were hacked if at all? (Green)
No, that's part of the reason why I'm here my lord. (Harry)
When the cross-examination had finished, his lawyer kindly said he would question him next but would not go through all the 33 articles in question. According to a reporter for The Spectator, the court crowd chortled. The nation is laughing at Harold, who has made himself look more foolish with every word he utters and with every unwise action he makes.
Outside the court, another cartoonist, Kaya Mar held aloft their artwork of the Harkles which gained some chortles on the first day, but has the PR exercise worked? Do the public feel sorry for Harold or even believe what he says? Perhaps he doesn’t care what the British public think (and the majority couldn’t give a jot about him or his invisible family) and only has eyes on the gullible American audience?
He seemed to have some issues over in the US, with the Heritage Oversight Project taking the DHS to court over the possibility that they gave Harold favourable treatment over his visa and immigrant status. That could be considered a breach of the official government guidelines, and the court has given the DHS a week to comply or to seek further court action. The issue is whether TOS declared his use of drugs and if so, did the DHS choose to ignore it on his application?
Harold is keen to define what he considers to be in the public interest or what is of interest to the public, and his definitions vary from that of the masses who are the public. Activities such as drug taking are in the public interest because you can’t have a member of the RF showing up to represent the nation when they are high on drugs. The relationships of those who are close to the throne are also of public interest if we look at Edward VIII (Wallis Simpson) and Andrew (Koo Stark) where dubious relationships as they may have resulted in issue that would be in the line of succession.
What Harold does is in the public interest as he is still listed as a Counsellor of State and is in the line of succession. If he chose to remove himself from both of those positions, then what he does would no longer be in the public interest, so he has that option. It appears that the Sussexes are using the court case to mark their trading name and brand by way of reintroducing the HRH style with the ducal title, and to make as much cash off it as they can.
This case, like all the other legal cases appears to be an attempt to control the media, and to punish those who write critical articles on the Harkles that would jeopardise their brand and earning potential. If Harold only had a suspicion that there was phone hacking, then perhaps he should have hired a private investigator to acquire evidence before retaining the services of a media lawyer?
Either way, BP should clarify if Harold is now permitted to use the HRH style, because if that privilege has been returned, then C3 will not be very popular. He may not care what the People think, but didn’t he say he was to serve to the People? If so, then he should listen to the will of the People.