Prince Harry Allegedly Sought a Secret Settlement in His Phone Hacking Case, but It Failed
Behind-the-scenes talks reportedly took place before Prince Harry's privacy lawsuit reached its dramatic conclusion.
Prince Harry's trip to the UK has attracted attention for more than just his Invictus Games commitments. First, the Duke was denied accommodation at Buckhigham Palace, citing a late response to the invitation set out by King Charles. Then, on the first day of his engagements, he learned that he and six others had lost their privacy lawsuit against the publisher of the Daily Mail. Following the verdict, the Prince strongly reacted by labeling the court's decision as a 'whitewash.' Now, however, new details have emerged suggesting that he and six other co-claimants, including figures like Sir Elton John and Sadie Frost, attempted to negotiate a settlement with Associated Newspapers before their High Court privacy trial.
According to The Times, the group engaged a retired senior police detective to facilitate discussions with the publisher before Harry's testimony. The group included Baroness Lawrence, Sir Elton John, Liz Hurley, Sadie Frost, and former MP Sir Simon Hughes, making their initial contact last December. Associated Newspapers declined to participate in the settlement talks, with the claimants now facing legal costs up to $66 million (£50 million) due to their recent loss.
It has been reported that ANL's stance to terminate the back-channel negotiations led to the scheduled trial proceeding after nearly three months. Justice Nicklin's ruling, detailed over 400 pages, concluded that the claimants could not prove any misconduct by the publisher's journalists regarding allegations of phone hacking and bugging. He stated, "In substance, the claimants' case invites the court to conclude that, because the information was private and because Associated cannot positively explain how it was sourced, the article must have been unlawfully sourced. That is not a permissible approach."
Senior journalists at the publisher praised the court's ruling as vindication of their decision to contest claims. Paul Dacre, former editor of the Daily Mail, celebrated the judgment as "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." In response, Harry and Baroness Lawrence condemned the ruling as a "complete and obvious whitewash." If the publisher had settled with the claimants last December, then it would have spared the Duke from testifying in court.
ANL noted in its public statement that this case, viewed as a politically charged effort to silence the press, ultimately exonerated the reputations of the journalists involved. The publication blasted the Duke as well as six others for "wasting" $66 million, noting, "Associated Newspapers thanks Mr. Justice Nicklin for the patience and wisdom he has displayed throughout this misguided legal action, which has wasted so much valuable court time and more than £50 million in legal costs."
