The legal battle involving Prince Harry and Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), over allegations of phone hacking and unlawful information-gathering, is coming to a critical point, as defence weaknesses are called into question. The Duke of Sussex is amongst over 100 individuals suing the media group for alleged transgressions that occurred between 1991 and 2011.
MGN, which publishes the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, and Sunday People, is vigorously contesting the lawsuit. The company denies any evidence supporting the allegations, insisting that the charges reflect more of a campaign against media intrusion in general, rather than specific instances of wrongdoing by the Mirror.
David Sherborne, Prince Harry’s lawyer, has been forceful in his criticisms of the defendant’s case. He cites the lack of key witnesses, including former Mirror editor Piers Morgan, as a serious blow to MGN’s defence. Sherborne argues that MGN’s failure to summon Morgan and other journalists leave considerable, and possibly fatal, gaps in the defendant’s case. Morgan, who has always denied involvement in the alleged activities, refrained from testifying and confined his commentary to outside the courtroom.
MGN’s defence team responded, contending that calling Morgan to the stand would merely create an unnecessary and disproportionate distraction. They further argued that the accusations against him were irrelevant and could be resolved based on the documentary evidence.
In his closing submissions, Sherborne highlighted that MGN only summoned three journalists during the six-week trial to counter the allegations. This lack of key witness testimonies, he argued, significantly undermines MGN’s case.
Prince Harry, meanwhile, has asserted that the alleged phone hacking took place on an ‘industrial scale’ at MGN’s titles. He suggested that he would feel a sense of injustice if the court did not conclude that he had been a victim.
Despite these strong allegations, MGN’s defence has maintained that the prince is primarily interested in reforming the British press and not in seeking compensation. They suggest that his lawsuit is merely an extension of his ‘campaign to reform the British press’.
The trial is now drawing to a close, with the judge’s decision expected to be delivered at a later date. It remains to be seen whether MGN’s defence will hold up in the absence of key witnesses and whether Prince Harry’s claim will be validated by the court.