Prince Harry-Daily Mail latest: Duke hits out at ‘whitewash’ after losing court battle against Associated Newspapers

Prince Harry-Daily Mail latest: Duke hits out at ‘whitewash’ after losing court battle against Associated Newspapers The Duke of Sussex had accused Associated Newspapers Limited of voicemail interception and ‘blagging’ private information - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments Prince Harry has hit out at the “complete and obvious whitewash” after losing his high-stakes legal battle against the Daily Mail publisher. A joint statement with Baroness Doreen hours after the court ruling added that the “lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted.” The judgment handed down on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Justice Nicklin ruled all articles published by Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) had not been based on unlawful information gathering. The Duke of Sussex alleged 14 articles published by the newspaper between 2001 and 2013, were based on information gained through unlawful methods. He brought the claim alongside six other high-profile figures, including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence. They accused the newspaper of phone hacking, landline tapping and using private investigators to ‘blag’ information such as medical records. Giving evidence last year, Harry became emotional as he said Associated Newspapers Limited had made his wife Meghan Markle’s life “a misery”. ICYMI: Sir Simon Hughes says ruling is 'very disappointing' Sir Simon Hughes, who lost his claim against Associated Newspapers (ANL) over claims of unlawful information gathering, said in a statement following Tuesday’s ruling: “The judgment in the case against ANL is naturally very disappointing for me, and I am sure for all other claimants. “I shall take time to consider the lengthy judgment in detail and plan to make no further comment in the near future.” Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars The Duke of Sussex and six other prominent public figures have lost a major court case accusing the publisher of the Daily Mail of unlawful information gathering. In a 436-page judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Nicklin dismissed all claims brought against ANL, which related to 57 stories – most of which were published between 1997 and 2015. The judge said that none of the group had proven their allegations of unlawful information gathering. The burden of proof is lower in the civil courts and claims must be proven on the balance of probability to be successful. Read the full article here: Daily Mail v Prince Harry: The failed claims brought by the duke and other stars ICYMI: Dacre says claims were 'conspiracy to destroy a paper' Paul Dacre has labelled the claims brought by Prince Harry and others a “conspiracy to destroy a paper”. In a statement issued after the judgment was handed down, Mr Dacre said: “Today’s verdict is not just a victory for Associated’s magnificent journalists – several of whom have had a terrible toll imposed on their health and lives – but a free press generally. “Make no mistake. This was a conspiracy, supported by Hacked Off, to destroy a paper. “Financed by the orgy-loving, racist Max Mosley and involving the actor Hugh Grant, it was also a sinister bid to resuscitate Leveson Two and impose statutory regulation on the press which, even now, is rearing its ugly head in Labour’s Media Green Paper. “Some of the allegations made by Harry’s lawyers against the Mail involved Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein. “They were rejected by the Court. But remember it was the power of the Mail’s journalism that, not once, but twice, resulted in Mandelson being sacked as a minister. “And it was the Mail on Sunday’s exclusive picture of Prince Andrew, with his arm around 17-year-old Virginia Giuffre in Ghislaine Maxwell’s home, that, ultimately, resulted in justice for Epstein’s underage victims. “Such justice only happened, as with Stephen Lawrence, because of the actions of a free press.” What happens next for Prince Harry and other claimants? Prince Harry and six other claimants have lost their case against Associated Newspapers (AN) this afternoon. AN have said the victory is a “magnificent vindication of the Daily Mail’s journalism”. The group has also indicated it will seek to recoup legal costs, which it said total more than £50 million, from the claimants. Its claim for these costs is likely to be heard at the next hearing, which is expected to last two days from July 29. Harry hails Invictus Games’ belief in ‘unconquered human spirit’ The Duke of Sussex hailed his Invictus Games’ belief in the “unconquered human spirit”, just moments after a High Court judge dismissed his claim against the Daily Mail’s publishers over alleged unlawful information gathering. Despite the loss, Harry appeared relaxed and even joked about the heatwave, telling Invictus Games conference delegates that the room they were in was one of the “few” in the UK with air conditioning, “so I can understand why every seat is full”. Harry had arrived at Chatham House in London about an hour before the highly anticipated judgment was released, and appeared businesslike, briefly turning as he entered the building to wave at rows of cameramen and photographers. After a private 45-minute meeting with a number of UK and foreign ministers for veterans, he took to the stage and told delegates: “Every one of us believes that those who have served their country, and in particular those whose lives have been changed by that service, deserve more than our gratitude. “They deserve opportunity. The chance to redefine one’s purpose and identity. They deserve to truly feel our admiration and respect. And they deserve every chance to build the life they choose beyond military service. “That’s what the Invictus community is all about.” William plays bowls with schoolchildren as Harry makes first visit of UK trip The Prince of Wales played bowls with a group of schoolchildren in west London at the same time his brother, the Duke of Sussex, made his first public outing during his five-day trip to the United Kingdom. William was joined by five Team Wales athletes who are preparing for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow during his visit to The London Welsh School in Hanwell on Tuesday. Meanwhile, his brother Harry was at the 14th Invictus Games Foundation Conversation, just 12 miles away at Chatham House in central London. Read the full article here: William plays bowls with schoolchildren as Harry makes first visit of UK trip Why did Prince Harry sue the Daily Mail publisher? Prince Harry, alongside other prominent public figures including Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish, and campaigner Baroness Doreen Lawrence, alleged that Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) engaged in or commissioned unlawful activities. These allegedly included hiring private investigators to install listening devices in cars, "blagging" private records, and accessing private phone conversations. These claims however have been dismissed by a High Court judge. We take a look at the full timeline leading up to this judgement: Why did Prince Harry sue the Daily Mail publisher? The duke’s legal battle in full What were the claims put forward by Elizabeth Hurley? Elizabeth Hurley's claim related to 15 articles published between 2002 and 2011, through which she alleged ANL "wilfully exploited my stolen information using its arsenal of illegal means". Five of them were about her son Damian Hurley and his late father, film producer Steve Bing. She claimed that private investigators working for the Daily Mail bugged her landline and placed microphones on her home windows to get stories in what she described as a "brutal invasion of privacy". The mother-of-one, best known for starring in the Austin Powers and Bedazzled films, cried several times as she gave evidence in the case. Mr Justice Nicklin said he accepted her evidence, which she gave in a “clear and direct manner”, but added: “As with each of the claimants, she has limited evidence to give on the contentious matters in dispute.” Prince Harry and Baroness Doreen Lawrence hit out at 'whitewash' after High Court defeat The Duke of Sussex and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have said “it is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected” after the High Court dismissed their claims against Daily Mail publisher Associated Newspapers over allegations of unlawful information gathering. The statement added: “This judgment represents a complete reversal of the position which previous judges have taken in relation to the hacking claims successfully brought against both News Group Newspapers and Mirror Group Newspapers, who were represented by, at the time, the judge who made this decision. “Generic findings about various private investigators that were held by the courts in these parallel claims to have carried out unlawful activity at the very same time in relation to similar stories and well-known individuals have been wholly ignored. “The fact that this court has chosen to dismiss them represents an inconsistency which is hard to understand or reconcile with common sense, or the evidence heard in the courtroom itself. “It is a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected. However, the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted. “When the court says there is not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, despite the documents showing otherwise, then one does wonder how justice was ever going to be achieved. “One need not look past when a private investigator the Mail used actually admitted on tape to having unlawfully blagged Baroness Lawrence, or when a journalist recorded the name of the private investigators she used to find out about highly sensitive medical information, that even the Mail was too worried to publish, or when another private investigator emailed one of the journalists with the actual British Airways seat number and ticketing details for a young girl simply visiting her boyfriend, in return for payment. “It feels here like one rule for the newspapers and another for the claimants. “While the claimants presented evidence, Mail journalists simply gave denials and the court chose uncritically to believe them, even in the face of inconsistencies, contradictions and blatant untruths that were obvious to neutral observers in court when compared to the documents. “We presented to the court evidence which we believed was compelling at the time and remains so now. “We would like to thank our legal team for all their hard work and all the witnesses who were brave enough to come forward in the pursuit of justice.” What happens next? ANL has said it will look to recover its costs, adding that the total for the legal action came to more than £50 million. Sir Simon said he will “take time to consider the lengthy judgment in detail” and the others are yet to comment. A further hearing has been set for July 29 and 30 to consider legal costs and any other disputes coming from the judgment. Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments