Harry’s war with the press is back in court. But this time it’s different

It may feel like we’re back in familiar territory; The Duke of Sussex is about to make allegations in a London court, claiming newspapers used illegal methods to gather information.

But in many ways, Prince Harry appears to be in a different place in his life. He now seems to prefer reconciling with his family rather than placing blame.

When the trial against the publisher of the Daily Mail begins on Monday, Prince Harry will energetically fight his corner of the press, but he no longer appears to be fighting the rest of the world either.

This is the third major court battle in which Prince Harry has accused newspaper groups of unlawful conduct who appeared as witnesses in this civil case against Associated Newspapers, along with other plaintiffs including Sir Elton John, Liz Hurley and Baroness Lawrence, who campaigned for the murdered Stephen Lawrence.

Daily Mail publishers have dismissed the allegations as “preposterous” and are prepared to strongly defend their journalism.

But Prince Harry’s backstory appears to be different from when he testified against the Mirror group in 2023. Reserve the moment without borders and a year later Harry and Meghan Netflix documentaryBoth are filled with controversial views about the Royal Family.

His successful court battle against the mirror It was big news in itself, as the biggest royal appearance in the witness box in modern times.

He had no problem with the questions, but he was an isolated figure in the courtroom, with no one around except his legal team and security.

But the mood music feels different ahead of his latest trial: He’s now building bridges instead of blowing them up.

In an interview with the BBC last May, he said: Prince Harry talks about wanting to end rift with family“There is no point in fighting anymore, life is too precious,” he said.

And in September, He met his father, King Charles, face to face for the first time in 19 months. This was a sign of improving relations.

There is also a review of his security while he is in the UK, which could resolve another obstacle to Harry’s visits. Next year he will bring the Invictus Games to Birmingham, his biggest UK event since his acrimonious departure in 2020.

Alongside a growing sense of closeness with his family, there is also an unspoken expectation that Harry will keep his head down and avoid explosive interviews for a while, unable to rock the royal boat.

The king will not meet his father during this case, as he wants to stay away from such high-profile legal proceedings. His brother Prince William also has business in Scotland.

Royal commentator Richard Palmer describes it as “Harry’s latest move against the national newspapers he blames for ruining his life.”

“His father and the Royal Family would clearly prefer this trial not to go ahead and they are keeping their distance. They hope Harry does not drag the King or other family members into the evidence.”

“If he says the wrong thing his hopes of reconciliation could be dashed, so I’m sure this will confuse him.”

But he adds: “It’s interesting that, as far as we know, he doesn’t plan on doing any interviews to publicize this case. He’s in a different place now, not that angry, and not willing to make amends with his family.”

Royal commentator Prof Pauline Maclaran also thinks Harry will likely keep a low profile “given his desire to rebuild bridges, he is certainly with his father and given reports that he hopes to see him at the opening of the Invictus Games”.

“He may have learned that less is more when it comes to the royal family.

“So as he continues to pursue his pursuit against Associated Newspapers, I think he will stay out of the limelight,” he adds.

Monday’s hearing may be his last case against the newspapers, but Prince Harry should know it won’t be the easiest hearing for him.

Unlike other newspaper groups, The Mail and Mail on Sunday was never involved in a phone hacking scandal or investigations into illegal payments to public officials more than a decade ago.

The Mail’s editor, Paul Dacre, told the Leveson Press Standards Inquiry in 2012 that he had conducted a “major internal investigation” and was “confident” there had been no phone hacking by his newspapers.

Yes, his journalists used private detectives with databases to legally obtain phone numbers, so they didn’t need to dig through phone books. This ended when one of the inspectors admitted to data protection breaches, he told the inquiry.

Fast forward to October 2022, when suddenly six very high-profile individuals accused Associated Newspapers of not only accessing voicemail messages and using private investigators to “dump” their personal information, but also phone tapping and aggressive surveillance techniques.

Moreover, one of them was Baroness Doreen Lawrence. The Mail strongly supported his campaign to bring son Stephen’s killers to justice in the 1990s.

He has now claimed that a senior reporter tasked investigators with wiretapping and wiretapping to get information for stories.

This was a bombshell in the long history of allegations against the press.

In this hearing, plaintiffs Baroness Lawrence, Prince Harry, actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost Law, Sir Elton John, his husband David Furnish and former Liberal Democrat minister Sir Simon Hughes, who joined the action at a later stage, must prove that their privacy was breached by journalists working for Associated Newspapers.

The first challenge: There is a six-year time limit on privacy invasion claims from the date the incident occurred, and some claims date back decades. To get around this rule, they must show that they did not know they had a potential case until recently.

To achieve this, Associated alleges, friendly journalists published articles on fringe news sites to create artificial “watershed moments” in which victims could be claimed to have “discovered” the truth about what the newspapers were doing. The other side categorically denies this. The judge will decide.

Some of the evidence they hoped to present came from private investigators themselves. Some were paid for information. It’s not a deal breaker in civil courts, but the judge will need to consider whether it undermines the credibility of the evidence.

There were also dramatic behind-the-scenes fights between investigators working for the plaintiffs and the private investigators they hoped to turn into star witnesses.

One of them, Gavin Burrows, appeared to have signed a lengthy statement detailing what he knew about the use of illegal methods, but later claimed his signature was forged. He is expected to give evidence.

Prince Harry’s legal team also hoped to prove the general claim in Associated newspapers that illegal methods were “common or customary”; This was partly because reporters joined from other publications where this was routine and used the same private investigators.

After all, what were the odds that the competitive Mail and Mail on Sunday had not used the illegal techniques widely practiced by the Sun, News of the World, Mirror and Sunday Mirror to obtain information?

But the sensible judge presiding over these often testy hearings is helpless to prevent them from turning into a “public inquiry”. He decided last year that he would not accept these “generic” claims.

In short, the big seven must put forward their claim upon claim. Team Harry begins this trial with one hand tied behind their back.

Unless a solution can be reached as before Lawsuit against News Group NewspapersPrince Harry will pursue his case in the High Court against what he sees as unfair and dishonest excesses of media interference. It’s a cause close to his heart.

Once the case is over, sources close to Harry suggest his priority will be supporting charitable causes and no further lawsuits are currently being filed against the media.

Sign up here to get the latest royal stories and analysis Every week with our Royal Watch newsletter. Those outside the UK can: sign up here.