By Ben Kerrigan and Sheila Mckenzie-
Prince Harry (pictured) has accused the media of unlawfully using phone hacking and various devices to obtain factual information for an article about his private conversation with former girlfriend Chelsea Davy.
In his highly charged high court case drama, Harry said that his ex girlfriend’s request for ‘trial separation’ may have been obtained through phone hacking, telling the High Court that he and Chelsy Davy were “not sharing anything with anyone”, amid a report she had asked for a “trial separation” in November 2007.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
Prince Harry and Chelsy Davy dated on and off between 2004 and 2010.
He told the court he once found a tracking device on the car of his ex-girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, directly alleging it was placed there by a private investigator, Mike Behr
Earlier, the court discussed a 2007 story about Davy, headlined “Down in the dumped”
“Given I was likely to have exchanged voicemails with Chelsy discussing the difficulties in our relationship… I now find this very suspicious,” he say
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
The duke is convinced the information in the press was obtained through phone hacking, as he insisted nobody including the Palace were aware of the intimate details between him and any of his girlfriends in the past.
The article raised for questioning was one by the Daily Mirror which said Ms Davy “reportedly asked for a trial separation in an emotional phone call”.
“I believe that that could be obtained through a voicemail,” Harry told the court, but adding he would be “speculating” when asked if he remembered if either he or Ms Davy had left such a message.
Andrew Green KC, heading the interrogation of the Prince for MGN, said information in the story had been previously reported by other media outlets.
The duke said quotes in the article “are attributed to friends”, adding: “By this point myself and Chelsy were not sharing anything with anyone.”
Prince Harry today told the High Court that phone hacking has bene done on an industrial scale across at least three of the papers, admitting he would feel “some injustice” if his claim against MGN is unsuccessful.
The duke of sussex admitted under cross examination that he would be disappointed if his claim was unsuccessful given his strong conviction that private conversations nobody could possibly have known ended up in the papers.
The Mirror which has unfortunately admitted to hacking in the past and paid out huge amounts in damages says the prince in this case hadn’t a shred of evidence to support his claims.
Green says there is not a single item of call data at any time between Harry’s phone and any Mirror Group journalist.
“Do you think the absence of call data suggests you were not hacked by any MGN journalist?” Green asks.
“Absolutely not,” Harry said.
“If the court finds that you were not hacked by MGN would you be relieved or disappointed?” Green asks..
“You want to have been phone hacked?” Green asks.
“Nobody wants to be phone hacked,” Harry replies.
Later in the trial Prince Harry rejected the lawyer’s claim his phone hacking allegations are ‘total speculation’
MGN’s barrister questioned Harry about a September 2007 People article claiming the couple’s relationship was “in crisis after a string of bitter bust-ups”.
Harry told the court that the “whole article itself is suspicious”, adding: “I never discussed with the Palace any details of my relationship with my girlfriend”.
Mr Green asked the duke if he was alleging that information in the story came from phone hacking, to which he said: “Yes”, adding: “I say that everything that has been attributed to a Palace source … was obtained unlawfully. The Palace wouldn’t know this information.”
The duke rejected Mr Green’s suggestions that a “well-connected source was perfectly prepared” to provide information to the article’s author,.
Making reference to a December 2007 article about Prince Harry dropping Chelsy Davy off after she spent the night at Kensington Palace, which included a paparazzi photograph of her, Andrew Green KC suggested that was something “anyone could have observed”.
The barrister said there were often photographers outside the palace, to which Harry said: “They were only there for pretty much emergencies or big moments of the royal family – weddings, engagements, hospital visits.”
Mr Green said: “There were there on this occasion”, to which Harry replied: “That is why it’s suspicious, my lord.”
Prince Harry and Chelsy Davy dated on and off for six years but alleges press hacked their calls
Suspicious
The duke added: “This to me is incredibly suspicious as I say. She spent the night with me, I was dropping her off as close to Kensington High Street as I could get without being seen. To know that a photographer was there for us, waiting, was highly suspicious.”
Prince Harry later told the court that an article by the Sunday Mirror following his break up with Chelsy Davy was a bit mean. He suggested the press were celebrating the break up. MGN’s barrister Andrew Green KC turned his questioning to a November 2007 Sunday Mirror article entitled “Hooray Harry’s dumped”.
The story reported that the duke went to west London nightclub Amika and “drowned his sorrows” over the split, with Harry complaining over its alleged use of his private information.
The Duke told the court the article headline “does seem to suggest that people are celebrating”, adding it “is a little bit mean”.
However, Mr Green contended the duke’s perspective, arguing that the headline was actually a reference to a friend who had become “tired of his hooray lifestyle”, adding: “It’s not celebrating the demise of your relationship.
Prince Harry appeared lost for words when responding to a question his barrister asked him about the toll the press interest in his life has taken.
Harry falls silent, his head drops. He appears to be fighting back tears.
“It’s a lot,” he said in a cracked voice.
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar